Scorpion's View

How Many Orcs Could Scorpia Zork...?

CGW's Adventure Games Editor Turns Her Seer's Gaze on Return to Zork

Scorpia

A few issues ago (#112, Nov. 93), Charles Ardai wrote a preview of Return to Zork that thoroughly covered the game. Charles and I are on the same wavelength on many points, but our conclusions are not quite the same. I'll take this opportunity to expand upon Charles' preview without retreading the ground that he covered. But first, a bit of history...

Zork was one of the first games I played on my trusty ol' Apple II. I still remember casing the racks at a computer store (they weren't so easy to find back in '81), and walking out with Wizard & The Princess (Sierra), Pyramid of Doom (Scott Adams), Adventure (Microsoft) and Zork. Veteran gamers will note that I seemed to have a gift for picking all the tough ones!

Sierra's Wizard was the odd man out. Even in those days, Sierra was doing graphic adventures. I thought the game was okay, but the pictures didn't thrill me. Pyramid of Doom was a bare-bones, no-frills puzzle showcase -- text was minimal, puzzles were everything.

The last two were different. They were heavily text-oriented, with many long descriptions that evoked detailed mental images of mysterious places. Playing them together, it was pretty obvious that Zork owed a lot to Adventure (sometimes also known as Colossal Cave). In a way, Zork was a much-refined version of Adventure, yet it was also its own game as well. Event after all these years, I have a clearer remembrance of Zork than I do Adventure, and it is still one of my all-time favorite adventures.

So, when Activision announced Return to Zork, I regarded it with a high degree of, let us say, reserve. Okay, let's be up front about here. I was extremely skeptical that anyone (even Infocom in its glory days) could do an all-graphic Zork and pull it off.

My first impression of Activision's game was that this could easily have been called "Zork: The Movie." It is almost entirely visual/aural, with very little in the way of text. True, there are a bunch of important files to read in the Mayor's office, and you have a little notebook that automatically fills in certain sections as you progress through the game, but sights and sounds are the most important things here. Even note-taking has been virtually eliminated by the game's unique camera and tape recorder functions that are used to take pictures of locations and record conversations.

The interface is a little odd, yet probably the best of any so far in an all-graphic game. With they typical graphic adventure interface, you pick an item from your inventory and click it on something else to see what happens. In Return to Zork, when you click an item on something else, a diamond-shaped interface opens showing the range of possible actions.

Of course, it doesn't take long to figure out that in most circumstances, it's easy enough to save the game and just run through all the choices to see if anything important occurs. This is the big drawback of all graphic interfaces, even the clever Return to Zork interface can't get around it entirely. Perhaps no game can. While there were complaints in the old days about text parsers -- and some of the early ones were indeed a bit picky -- they still made you think about what you were doing, what you might be able to do with item X. Modern interfaces limit the number of possible options and thus take some of the imagination out of puzzle-solving.

The Return to Zork interface also suffers from inconsistency. For example, you can light a match while the match box is in your inventory. However, if you want to drink from the thermo, you must first take the thermo out of your inventory. Because of this, there may be times when you may think an action is impossible since the full range of choices isn't shown, making the game unduly difficult. It is also irritating to have to open the inventory, take out the item, use it, then open the inventory to put it back. Objects being used on the player (as opposed to other objects) ought to be usable directly from the inventory screen.

In terms of puzzles, the game exhibits a wide variation, ranging from trivial to clever (winning the Comedy Club prize) to amazingly obscure (picking the locked door of the grocery store). This produces a somewhat uneven game, where you make a little progress, then come to a complete halt, with no idea of what to do next.

Aggravating the situation is the Guardian (no relation to the Origin-al one). Typically, adventure players are supposed to grab any item that isn't nailed down, and if it is, you find a hammer to pry it up. That only works to a certain extent here. There are some situations where, if you pick up something, a message appears that "the path to victory is blocked," after which the Guardian arrives to take away your entire inventory except for the camera, tape recorder, and notebook.

What makes it aggravating is that there is no way to know ahead of time that the object is "untouchable" (at least for the moment). For example, on the ground at Pugney's farm is a box. Taking it will invoke the Guardian. On the other hand, you can help yourself to the statue's shield outside the Temple of Bel Nair, and nothing happens.

Worse by far is the business in the swamp hut of Witch Itah (we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto). She has some bats you need, and you're supposed to show her a certain picture so she'll give them to you (picking them up otherwise brings the Guardian).

However, on your first visit, showing her the picture does nothing (it's standard practice here to show everything to everyone). But on your next visit, showing her the photo evokes the desired response, even if nothing new has happened between visits.

There are also occasions when using the right facial expression at the start of an encounter is vital to obtaining information or items. Clicking on the correct one while "talking" to Pugney allows you to take the box; using the wrong one gets you nowhere. Even worse, sometimes just a click or two is enough, while at others, you have to use the expression continually.

This is particularly important when dealing with the Troll chieftain. If you show him your magic sword, he cringes and whines, but that's as far as you'll ever get with him; he never hands over the necklace you want. The only way to get the necklace is to use one particular expression over and over while he's blabbering on with threats. Using the expression a couple of times will likely get you killed (the expressions show up only at the start of the encounter, and go away quickly if you don't use them).

These logical inconsistencies do nothing for game play, and often leave the player confused and uncertain. In addition, you can easily miss locations if you aren't careful. I had a hard time finding the Vulture Pit, which is just northwest of Pugney's barn. There is no indication you can go in that direction, and if you don't move the cursor over far enough, you'll never see the movement arrow curving that way. Other players have had problems finding the Waif under the bridge for the same reason.

Return to Zork also departs from tradition with the way it handles points. In this, it is more like a Sierra game, where performing certain actions increases your score without doing anything to advance the game itself. It is entirely possible to finish Return to Zork without a perfect score. I have always been mystified as to why such "pointless points" would be put in any adventure. The purpose of a score is to chart your progress through the game, not to motivate you to look for silly actions to do, just to get some points.

Another jarring note is struck by some of the characters portrayals in the game. Given the lavishness of the production, you'd think a little money could have been spent on makeup, so that the Trolls would look like Trolls, the Dwarves like Dwarves, and the Orc (definitely a non-Zork creature) like an Orc. Instead, they all appear distinctly human, which doesn't do a lot for maintaining a fantasy atmosphere.

So, is Return to Zork anything like Zork? Of course not. The original game was all-text and set amidst the ruins of the Great Underground Empire. It evoked the sense of wonder that comes from wandering through the remains of some long-gone and mysterious civilization. It was a place inhabited only by a lumbering Troll and a thief who sometimes filched treasures from you. It was a journey of exploration and puzzle-solving, with no help besides your own wits.

By comparison, Return to Zork is over-populated. People are everywhere, ready (under the proper stimulus) to offer help, advice, and items. There is no true feeling of being underground or isolated from the world as in the original game. Nor is there really any exploration here; it's just a matter of going from one location to another, most of them seeming pretty much alike. The mix of modern day and magic doesn't come off too well, either.

You hardly get any sense at all that Return to Zork has any links to the previous game. There are some off-hand mentions of Zork-related matters, but that certainly isn't sufficient. Aside from the name, you'd never think of this as the Zork universe in the first place, especially not when the "Elvish sword of great antiquity" that hung over the fireplace in the white house is referred to as a "Dwarven sword" (an amazing gaffe!). I would easily trade the useless (and mostly boring) Encyclopedia Frobizzica that comes with the game for tighter puzzle construction, consistent design, and a more logical interface, to name just a few points.

Considered as a game without the Zork label, however, it's not too bad, although we do have to keep in mind the flaws mentioned above. Graphically, it is very pretty. The use of live actors and actresses throughout is well-done for the most part (although I agree entirely with Charles Ardai that the Troll chieftain's bit was "embarrassing"). The use of the camera and tape recorder is an interesting substitute for traditional note-taking.

The game ran cleanly throughout. There were no crashes, no freezes, no problems with graphics of sound. Return to Zork supports the Gravis Ultrasound card, which reproduced all the dialogue flawlessly. Unlike Dark Sun, where I had some difficulties with the effects, all sound was on from start to finish with no problems of any kind.

Overall, Activision might have been better off doing this as an adventure in its own right, rather than trying to capitalize on the success of the early Infocom productions.

With the passing of the original Infocom into history, Sierra took over as top dog in the adventure market, and no one has seriously challenged them since. Activision, with its new approach and graphics, could make some big strides in that direction, but I don't see it happening if they continue trying to recycle the magic from the past.

Looking back at the classics might be a good idea for today's game designers: good puzzle construction, logical development, and creative inspiration are in rich supply on those dusty disks. But the old Infocom has had its day (alas), and the new generation, while building on the past, has to set its sights on the future. A new direction is needed here, and if Activision can find it, they may yet produce adventures worthy of the Infocom label. We'll just have to wait and see if that happens. I certainly hope it does; really good adventures have been rare of late -- as rare as a grue with a sun tan.

---

---

These historical, out-of-print articles and literary works have been GNUSTOed onto InvisiClues.org for academic and research purposes.