Most people, while writing game reviews, don't have the luxury of jumping ahead 30 years and seeing how a particular piece of software affected the computing landscape. I do have this luxury.
The games of today, at first glance, are not even remotely similar to the games of yesteryear. Space Invaders yielded to Quake and Rogue to Diablo. Are these games fundamentally different from their legacy counterparts? Take a close look and you will find relatively little difference, except for the quality of the graphics engine. Early in the process, game manufacturers discovered that graphics sell. In the early days, black and white games yielded to those with color and then yielded to those with sound. 3-D polygonal rendering is the big kick these days (take a look at Nintendo 64). Are these true enhancements, or just eye candy? I tend to take the stance of the latter. Move, shoot and move, shoot and repeat until your thumbs get sore. What game am I talking about?
It would be foolish of me to point to two of the oldest breakthroughs in game design and say that the gaming industry has stagnated—that is not what I'm trying to say. Now-classics such as Civilization, SimCity, PacMan, Tetris, The Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers sparked their legions of clones but were all individual and profound. But which of these series haven't suffered in some way from graphics mania? (I'd like to make an exception to this point. Mario 64 was actually, in my opinion, a breakthrough in gaming and not just a knock-off of a superior product.)
What games trace the lineage back to Adventure? What games descended from its pinnacle in the non-combat adventure genre?
Following Adventure first and foremost was Zork. There were probably others before Zork, but Zork made a noticeable impact on our consciousness. The original Zork didn't stray far from the original concept; it had a newer and fancier parser than the old caving adventure, resulting in more fluid game play. Later installments by the Infocom crowd took gaming to new heights. Their games had magic, mystery and fun. They pioneered the interactive story and took it much farther than even Adventure. This is not to say that each of their games were classic; many were derivative, but many more were unique.
Eventually, however, Infocom's luster began to wear off. Games increasingly turned to graphical albeit inferior forms of gaming. Sierra On-line took a prominent role with King's Quest and other games. Their storytelling was fantastic, but something was just not right about using the arrow keys to walk up to a tree and typing “look into tree” when you got there. Gradually, they refined that interface further with icons and mouse movement, but the “universal range of motion” feel that you got with the old text adventures was gone. Now your actions were defined by what you could click on, not by what you could imagine. Particularly frustrating for me were the layers of eye candy they added to their games. It looked nice, but was often distracting, especially when you wanted to manipulate and just couldn't figure out how.
Eventually, “point and click” adventure gaming became even more “clicky” with the advent of games without funny icons. In these games, you just click on the screen and the computer figures out what action you want from context. To make matters worse, it wasn't long before gamers discovered a profound secret: when one is stuck, one needs only to click madly around the screen until stumbling on the magic hot-spot that jumps to the next level. Certainly, this is a far cry from the seemingly infinite worlds offered by the early text-adventure games, but is it progress?
Infocom (now owned by Activision) and others would try to break away from this mold with later games, such as Return to Zork, which offered a much more detailed mouse interface. Sadly, however, this is where I became disinterested with the genre of non-combat “adventure” gaming, and I have yet to see whether their more recent titles have matched that level in playability. (I'd love to see a review of Zork: Grand Inquisitor—too bad they don't make it for Linux.)
What made these games so wonderful? It wasn't the graphics, obviously. What made these games special was something more subtle. In addition to generally good writing, the textual format allowed game designers to plug the computer's output directly into the gamer's imagination. Who among us doesn't have splendid memories of “Flood Control Dam III” (Zork), the little white house with the boarded front door (Zork), or the “Hall of the Mountain King” (Adventure)? Graphical games just don't plug into the subconscious in the same way. For me, that made all the difference.
In the game of Adventure, you are an unnamed hero-explorer with a good head on your shoulders and a sturdy back. Your mission is to locate and explore Colossal Cave and bring back the hoards of treasure rumored to be inside. But watch out; magic is afoot in the cave and all may not be as it seems. Scoring is based on how many treasures you find, how much of the cave (if any) you explore, and how many of those treasures you get out of the cave.
The game play is fairly simple. You instruct the game in two-word English phrases (“get lamp”) to do things, and your character does them. The vocabulary of the game is not quite as large as its Infocom descendants, but that is understandable. When you get stuck, you can ask for help (although it may not be forthcoming) and when you die, you can get put back together again. It is all very simple.
On first starting the game, it will probably seem confusing. You've just been plopped down in the middle of a large world with little idea of where to go. A building is nearby—that's obvious. Consider it your base of operations, as you'll need to deliver your hoards of treasure there in order to score the most points. Farther afield is the hidden entrance to the cave, a confusing forest (the game's first mini-maze), and many other sights once you get underground. That is, if you remembered to bring your lamp. Otherwise, it'll be a short trip.
If you're playing this game for the first time, I recommend just exploring for a while and seeing the sights. Once you are comfortable with the interface, you'll probably want to get pen and paper and start drawing maps like a true spelunker. Without some sort of map, you will most likely become lost in the maze-like passageways, halls and crawls of Colossal Cave. If you do get stuck, don't ask me for help. I'm at Witt's End.
Joseph Pranevich (firstname.lastname@example.org) is an avid Linux geek and, while not working for Lycos, enjoys writing (all kinds) and working with a number of open-source projects.
Practical Task Scheduling Deployment
July 20, 2016 12:00 pm CDT
One of the best things about the UNIX environment (aside from being stable and efficient) is the vast array of software tools available to help you do your job. Traditionally, a UNIX tool does only one thing, but does that one thing very well. For example, grep is very easy to use and can search vast amounts of data quickly. The find tool can find a particular file or files based on all kinds of criteria. It's pretty easy to string these tools together to build even more powerful tools, such as a tool that finds all of the .log files in the /home directory and searches each one for a particular entry. This erector-set mentality allows UNIX system administrators to seem to always have the right tool for the job.
Cron traditionally has been considered another such a tool for job scheduling, but is it enough? This webinar considers that very question. The first part builds on a previous Geek Guide, Beyond Cron, and briefly describes how to know when it might be time to consider upgrading your job scheduling infrastructure. The second part presents an actual planning and implementation framework.
Join Linux Journal's Mike Diehl and Pat Cameron of Help Systems.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
- SUSE LLC's SUSE Manager
- My +1 Sword of Productivity
- Murat Yener and Onur Dundar's Expert Android Studio (Wrox)
- Non-Linux FOSS: Caffeine!
- Managing Linux Using Puppet
- Doing for User Space What We Did for Kernel Space
- Tech Tip: Really Simple HTTP Server with Python
- SuperTuxKart 0.9.2 Released
- Parsing an RSS News Feed with a Bash Script
- Google's SwiftShader Released
With all the industry talk about the benefits of Linux on Power and all the performance advantages offered by its open architecture, you may be considering a move in that direction. If you are thinking about analytics, big data and cloud computing, you would be right to evaluate Power. The idea of using commodity x86 hardware and replacing it every three years is an outdated cost model. It doesn’t consider the total cost of ownership, and it doesn’t consider the advantage of real processing power, high-availability and multithreading like a demon.
This ebook takes a look at some of the practical applications of the Linux on Power platform and ways you might bring all the performance power of this open architecture to bear for your organization. There are no smoke and mirrors here—just hard, cold, empirical evidence provided by independent sources. I also consider some innovative ways Linux on Power will be used in the future.Get the Guide