~8 minute readReturn to Zork Review
Note: This review is based on the IBM VGA version of Return to Zork. I know it's also available for Macintosh, and maybe other computers, but who knows what differences there may be? I haven't completed the game yet, so this (of course) is based only on what I've seen so far. If we're going by what was in the demo, I've seen almost all of the screens which appeared in the IBM demo of the program.
Return to Zork is marketed by Activision (Infocom) and lists for about $80. You can probably get it for much less - I bought it for around $45 from a large computer/electronics store.
Installation
The floppy version of the game comes on 12 3.5" floppies, so (as you can imagine) it takes some time to install. The documentation that comes with the game says it can take 30-60 minutes, and that seems about right. It took about 40 minutes on my 386sx/16. The full game takes up a bit under 24 megabytes. (Stacker, Doublespace, etc. users note: there seems to be some on-board compression. If you are using a compression utility such as Stacker, you should free up about 35 "compressed" megabytes before installing.)
Packaging
Have you ever wanted a printed and bound copy of the "Encyclopedia Frobizzica?" Return to Zork comes (along with the advertising stuff) a copy of the EF along with a letter telling you that you've been selected as an adventurer in a sweepstakes. The "encyclopedia" (abridged version, of course) seems to include mainly information from the later "Zork" games (Beyond Zork and Zork Zero--mostly Zork Zero, I'm afraid) and includes some entries copied verbatim from the encyclopedias found in Sorceror and Zork Zero. The game's copy protection includes entering information from the encyclopedia's appendices.
Also, the game comes with a "program" outlining the actors' and designers' previous achievements (the game includes digitzed shots of many somewhat well-known people). Anyone who's familiar with the theatrical arts will find the program familiar. While this is, of course, irrelevant to the game, I thought it was a nice touch. My wife, who keeps her distance from computer games, also liked it (calling it "cute").
Interacting with the game
The game uses an innovative dynamic point-and-click interface very unlike those which many people may be familiar with. Instead of using a small preset number of verbs (e.g. Sierra or LucasArts), each item in the game can be used in a number of different ways. When you choose to use a particular item, all the possible actions appropriate to that item are presented through an animated array of icons and you select one. For example, early in the game you are given a glass of whiskey. With it, you can choose to drink the the whiskey, pour it out, throw it at a drunk, or make a toast with it. When Bill Volk first described the dynamic interface to me, I didn't think I'd like it very much, but after using it for a little bit, I found it very easy to get used to and nice to use.
One thing which I found to be annoying about the game interface, though, was the fact that it's not always obvious what all of the possible exits to a given room are. In order to find all the exits, you sometimes have to move the cursor all around the screen and note when it turns into an arrow. As an example, there is a lighthouse in the very beginning of the game. Not being familiar with the interface, it took me a *long* time to figure out that I could walk around to the back of the lighthouse. I had the same experience a little later in another part of the game. This isn't much of a issue for mouse users (as long as they're aware of the problem), but it's likely to cause some confusion among folks who don't use a mouse.
Game Play
In general, the game play seems pretty straightforward. Much like any interactive-fiction game, the action comes from exploring the surroundings, finding items, and interacting with programmed characters. You start the game equipped with two items which make this game unique, though. First, you have a tape recorder, which automatically records any conversations you have with the characters you run across (more on interacting with characters below). This is also useful for going back and reviewing for yourself the information you've been given. Second, you have a camera, which you can use to shoot black-and-white photos of almost anything you run across. Both the photos and the recordings can be used within the context of the game and they are very useful to refer back to for yourself.
Interacting with the characters you meet in the game is an interesting twist. During initial encounters with characters, you can opt to act (via body language) in a number of different ways (apologetic, threatening, bored, fascinated, etc.). This affects what the characters tell you. (In most cases, you can talk to a character with one attitude, then go back and use a different one to see what they say differently.) Also, instead of just showing or giving items you've picked up to the characters you run across, you can play back parts of previous conversations with another character (using the tape recorder I mentioned above) to get their comments. Many characters will also comment on the photos you've taken.
All the conversation in the game is (if you use a sound card) digitized speech - a mixed blessing. It's nice to be able to sit back and just listen to get all you need, but some of the speech is a little garbled. You can re-listen to anything you hear with your recorder, but it would have been nice to have a built in "transcript" feature as well. Also, sometimes the characters will repeat themselves and listening to the same thing over and over again gets tedious.
One thing which I don't like about the game (but which seems to be "in vogue" with interactive fiction these days) is that much of the game is very linear. It is divided up into several areas, each of which is linked in a serial manner. You begin game in one location, and once you've finished up what you need to do there, you go on (irreversibly) to another area. Once you're finished there, you go to yet another distinct area, and so on. This tends to limit the player's focus and make the game easier, but it also takes away from the "exploration" feeling which is common in most of the "traditional" interactive fiction games.
Also, you want mazes? They've got mazes. There are multiple mazes in Return to Zork. Fortunately, though, the exits from each room are straight. If you go north from one room, going south from the new room will put you back where you were. In fact, since it's never very obvious how the game corresponds to actual compass directions, a (my interpretation) "compass nymph" appears at the top of your screen in each maze to let you know which direction your facing. It's easier than some, but they're still mazes. You'll also see other types of games built-in, following in the footsteps of Zork Zero. For example, there is a "move the tiles" game which you'll need to solve. Personally, I'd like to see more original puzzles, the these sorts of the things do provide a change of pace.
Let me also just mention that in the "death" vs. "no death" debate, the designers of Return to Zork definately take the former stance. There are lots and lots of ways to die in this game, and not all of them make a lot of sense. Early in the game, for example, just walking somewhere (where, granted, you've been told earlier not to go) makes you die. A little later, walking across a bridge kills you. Somewhat later, opening an incinerator will kill you (though you've no information about the incinerator). When the docs for this game tell you "save your game often," they mean it.
Finally, what the heck does this have to do with GUE (or Quendor, as the second generation calls it)? From what I've seen, the game has absolutely nothing to do with the Great Underground Empire that "old-guard" players (me included) have come to know and love. The packaging harkens back to some of the old Infocom games and Flood Control Dam #3 makes a cameo appearance, but little else. The game isn't really rooted in the same mythos that the previous games with "Zork" in their title were. I feel that this is disappointing, but by the same token, "Beyond Zork", "Zork Zero" and the Enchanter series, while all "GUE" games, all did essentially the same - they had their own mythos without relying too much on what came before.
The Demo
Some time ago, I offered to send the demo via telephone lines to anyone who wanted it and was willing to send it to one of the games archives. One person asked for it (so I sent it to him on my dime), but he never bothered to send it to an archive, choosing to keep it (I suppose) for his own personal use. A few months later, a copy of the demo appeared on the gmd archive. In any event, the demo and the screen shots derived from it have resulted in a lot of discussion about the game, so I thought a comparison was worthwhile.
The main thing that many people noticed about the demo was that the digitized sound was awful on soundblasters. According to Bill Volk at Activision, this was because of different chips being used between old and new Soundblaster cards (though the fix that Bill sent me didn't fix things). In any event, the problem has been fixed with the game's release. The digitized sound (speech) is now very good. I hope that the problems with it in the demo won't (alone) deter anyone from buying the game.
The graphics in the game are of the same quality as those in the demo. Overall, I was impressed with the graphic quality of the game (in VGA). The digitized shots of real people (Activision's "cast of Hollywood Stars") look digitzed, of course, but the quality is nice overall.
These historical, out-of-print articles and literary works have been GNUSTOed onto InvisiClues.org for academic and research purposes.
