Newsgroups: rec.games.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!ira.uka.de!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!bnrgate!bcars267!news
From: Mandatory Spurt <90404939@vax1.dcu.ie>
Subject: Re: Sierra and Interactive Fiction
Message-ID: <1993May7.180642.19850@bnr.ca>
X-Xxdate: Fri, 7 May 93 14:06:12 GMT
Sender: news@bnr.ca (usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 47.107.4.89
Organization: Breach Birth
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d20
Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 18:06:42 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <1se1ft$57f@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Stephen R. Granade,
bz083@cleveland.Freenet.Edu writes:
>To me, this is an excellent example of how graphics should be used in an
>adventure game.  The graphics should be a supplement, not an end unto
>themselves.  Having graphics does not mean that the text can now be
ignored.

I tend to agree with this, however I still think a well written text
adventure with complete location descriptions beats anything with
graphics in it.  A slightly divergent example : Lord of the Rings movie
versus book - I'd guess that everyones' (of those that have read and seen
it) imagination of an orc or a hobbit (not to mention the RingWraiths)
were completely different.  Now if this were made into a text adventure,
your image of these creatures is still intact because the nature of
Tolkien's description can be imitated by a good author - if however, an
artist is asked to represent these graphically (even if just still-life)
your image is destroyed.  My point is that, if graphics are to be
included they should be exactly what the author of the adventure wants,
or else left up entirely to the reader's imagination (i.e. pure text).

The Diceman's apprentice.
