[HN Gopher] Microsoft makes Zork open-source
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Microsoft makes Zork open-source
        
       Author : tabletcorry
       Score  : 339 points
       Date   : 2025-11-20 18:13 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (opensource.microsoft.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (opensource.microsoft.com)
        
       | dang wrote:
       | (URL changed from https://www.theverge.com/news/824881/zork-open-
       | source-micros..., which points to this)
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | ... right, Activisiom bought Infocom in the 1980 s...
        
         | OhMeadhbh wrote:
         | Yeah. I had to walk down memory lane to try to remember who
         | bought whom as well. I completely forgot that
         | Activision/Blizzard is a subsidiary of Microsoft Gaming these
         | days.
        
       | w4rh4wk5 wrote:
       | Can we get a GPL (or even MIT) release of id Tech 7? Pretty
       | please.
        
         | OhMeadhbh wrote:
         | Dang. I had forgotten Zenimax got scooped up by MSFT Gaming a
         | few years back. It's not an unreasonable request, though I
         | suspect it should be made directly to MSFT Gaming.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | By number of acquired studios, Microsoft is one of the
           | biggest publishers, hence even if XBox the console goes bust,
           | they still have a big weight as Microsoft Game Studios and
           | XBox brand.
        
             | OhMeadhbh wrote:
             | And they're been doing it for a while. They bought Ensemble
             | DECADES ago.
        
       | davidw wrote:
       | Getting a lot of GitHub errors trying to look at the source code.
       | 
       | Still, pretty cool; I remember playing work as a kid.
        
       | jasonjmcghee wrote:
       | Pretty huge milestone, congrats. I can imagine how much time /
       | effort it took to get there!
        
       | mike1o1 wrote:
       | https://github.com/historicalsource/zork1 Direct link to the
       | repository
        
         | tapoxi wrote:
         | Is it just me or is GitHub having errors again? I keep getting
         | 500s.
        
           | gemakelijk wrote:
           | The pages loads for me but I see a "Cannot retrieve latest
           | commit at this time." message.
        
           | tclancy wrote:
           | I got hit as well. It was dark. I was likely to be eaten by a
           | grue.
        
       | AdmiralAsshat wrote:
       | Why does Microsoft own the rights to Zork?
        
         | seritools wrote:
         | Infocom was bought by Activision, ActivisionBlizzard was bought
         | by Microsoft.
        
           | randall wrote:
           | whoa til microsoft owns blizzard.
        
             | entropicdrifter wrote:
             | You're one of today's lucky 10,000. It was huge news at the
             | time. The FTC considered not allowing it and the
             | acquisition got delayed for months while back and forth
             | public debate raged.
        
               | danso wrote:
               | Easy to forget all the big moves that happened recently,
               | especially since there haven't been (afaict) any major
               | changes to service. I forgot the other day that Sony had
               | bought Bungie, though it'd be pretty memorable if Sony
               | announced Destiny 3 as a PS5 timed exclusive.
        
               | tshaddox wrote:
               | Massive media/telecom/tech companies get passed around
               | between other massive media/telecom/tech companies so
               | much that regardless of how much you saw the news at the
               | time, a couple of years later it's tough to remember "Now
               | _who_ is it that owns Warner Bros. currently? AOL? AT &T?
               | Netflix? The sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia?"
        
             | Gormo wrote:
             | And Sierra. It would be amazing if MS released the source
             | code to some of Sierra classic Hi-Res/AGI/SCI games, or the
             | engines themselves.
             | 
             | IIRC, Al Lowe had retained copies of source code from the
             | early Sierra days, and was planning to release some of it
             | publicly a few years ago, but Activision shut him down.
             | Maybe MS would be willing to reconsider that now that
             | they're pursuing historical preservation.
        
               | lencastre wrote:
               | Space Quest IV!!!
        
         | csixty4 wrote:
         | Activision bought Infocom in 1986, and Microsoft purchased
         | Activision in 2023.
        
         | charonn0 wrote:
         | Because they bought Activision, who owned the rights since the
         | 80's.
        
       | katspaugh wrote:
       | So Zork was written in Lisp? It had to be!
       | 
       | ---
       | 
       | <ROUTINE V-ADVENT ()                 <TELL "A hollow voice says
       | \"Fool.\"" CR>>
        
         | agiacalone wrote:
         | MDL, actually, which was derived from LISP.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDL_(programming_language)
        
           | drob518 wrote:
           | I'm curious why they chose MDL rather than Lisp for it. Sure,
           | it would have been ancient MACLISP or whatever, but why not
           | leverage what was already in wide use at MIT at the time?
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | maybe they just made a mini-lisp and called it MDL?
        
               | drob518 wrote:
               | It's very Lispy, but it's not strictly Lisp. Why, for
               | instance, use "<" and ">" to surround various forms but
               | not others? If they were to make a mini-Lisp, I'd expect
               | something more like Gnu Emacs Lisp, something that's
               | obviously a Lisp, but heavily influenced by the Lisps of
               | the day. I've found a few old MDL manuals linked from
               | Wikipedia, but none of them have any sort of "Here's why
               | we created MDL" section that I could find.
        
             | staplung wrote:
             | MDL is _also_ from MIT and supposedly stood for More
             | Datatypes than Lisp. According to wikipedia  "MDL provides
             | several enhancements to classic Lisp. It supports several
             | built-in data types, including lists, strings and arrays,
             | and user-defined data types. It offers multithreaded
             | expression evaluation and coroutines."
             | 
             | Seems that most of it's novelties were eventually added
             | into LISP proper.
        
             | WorldMaker wrote:
             | MDL _is_ what was in wide use at MIT at the time, the
             | PDP-10 era. The M in MDL is sometimes  "MIT" in the various
             | backronyms of what it stood for. (Mostly it was apparently
             | just short for "muddle", a self-deprecating description.)
             | 
             | (Also, to be technically correct, these source files aren't
             | even MDL, they are a further descendant called ZIL [Zork
             | Implementation Language].)
        
         | arnonejoe wrote:
         | I read a while back it's a language called zil based on MDL.
         | 
         | https://the-rosebush.com/2025/07/studies-of-zil-part-2-how-d...
        
         | leoc wrote:
         | From one perspective ADVENT is just SHRDLU turned inside out,
         | after all. (Though of course from another perspective it's a
         | fancier WUMPUS.)
         | 
         | ('ADVENT' is
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossal_Cave_Adventure , for
         | anyone who isn't familar.)
        
           | WillAdams wrote:
           | A nice overview of the source code for that is:
           | 
           | http://literateprogramming.com/adventure.pdf
        
       | ginko wrote:
       | Hasn't the code to Zork been available for ages? For instance:
       | https://github.com/MITDDC/zork
        
         | alt227 wrote:
         | The article states that Microsoft has made a pull request to
         | the existing repos to include the MIT license.
         | 
         | It was public already, what they are doing here is open
         | sourcing the code.
        
         | agiacalone wrote:
         | Yes, but that happens to be the mainframe version. They are a
         | bit different.
        
         | Gormo wrote:
         | This is the source code to the original, non-commercial version
         | of Zork that originated at MIT. Microsoft has now released the
         | source code for the Infocom's commercial release for
         | microcomputers.
        
       | calibas wrote:
       | It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
        
         | esafak wrote:
         | I wonder if _grue_ was taken from Nelson Goodman 's _Fact,
         | Fiction, and Forecast_.
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_riddle_of_induction
        
           | MarkusQ wrote:
           | Yes. Because it is pitch black and therefore you can not
           | determine it's color (plus, the fact that you haven't been
           | eaten by one yet does not justify the conclusion that you
           | won't be). It's also a play on Gardener's "unexpected hanging
           | paradox".
        
           | redundantly wrote:
           | Nyet. Jack Vance created grues in the one of the Dying Earth
           | series books.
        
         | vunderba wrote:
         | Love it. I use a grue reference on 404s to my blog.
         | 
         | https://mordenstar.com/zork
        
         | DonHopkins wrote:
         | If this predicament seems particularly cruel, consider whose
         | fault it could be: not a torch or a match in your inventory.
         | 
         | MC Frontalot - It Is Pitch Dark
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nigRT2KmCE
         | 
         | Featuring Steve Meretzky!
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Meretzky
        
       | bluedino wrote:
       | I've seen a few things called 'Zork source code' in various
       | places over the years (even on a CD that came with a game
       | programming book of some sort), and copies like this:
       | 
       | https://github.com/MITDDC/zork
       | 
       | What's the lineage here?
        
         | CobrastanJorji wrote:
         | Good question, I'm also curious. A quick search shows that
         | there are some differences. The one in this new
         | historicalsources folder has the PLUGH easter egg, but the
         | other one doesn't seem to have it.
         | 
         | But the older version has a "Tomb of the Unknown Implementor,"
         | which this new version seems to lack.
        
         | jsnell wrote:
         | Zork was originally written at MIT for PDP-10s in an obscure
         | Lisp dialect (MDL). The authors then later formed a company to
         | sell the game on micro-computers. To do it, they built a
         | virtual machine optimized for this purpose, a new Lisp dialect
         | (ZIL) that could compile to the virtual machine, and the ported
         | the game over to that new dialect. Even so, they had to split
         | the game into three parts to fit.
         | 
         | The source you're linking to is the original MDL source. This
         | is about the ZIL source for the three games that the original
         | Zork was split into.
        
           | fsckboy wrote:
           | MDL was a dialect of lisp invented by/in part/under Sussman,
           | the originator of Scheme and SICP; what you're calling an
           | obscure dialect was was part of the continuum of a research
           | trajectory, one of a number of experimental languages
           | designed to test out ideas. Sussman got his PhD in 1973 so
           | we're talking about his later work as a student/early work as
           | a postdoc/assistant professor, and Abelson was in the same
           | timeframe, and Guy Steele a half decade junior, and many
           | others in the lab whose names you would also recognize.
        
             | dboreham wrote:
             | Was go to say - MIT, dec-10: probably not obscure.
        
           | ErroneousBosh wrote:
           | This is about the fourth article I've read that mentions Lisp
           | today on here.
           | 
           | Okay, I get it. Lisp is great.
           | 
           | Where should I start? It wasn't like I was planning on doing
           | anything else at work next week...
        
             | mghackerlady wrote:
             | With lisp? Honestly I'd start by installing emacs and
             | messing with elisp. It comes with a beginners guide to
             | elisp with the docs iirc
        
             | CobrastanJorji wrote:
             | You're kind of in luck. For a while, it was trendy (because
             | MIT was doing it) to teach Intro to Programming with Lisps,
             | especially Scheme. Because of this, there are quite a few
             | "learn programming with Lisp" books and resources. The
             | famous "SICP" book was the textbook for the MIT course and
             | all of the examples were Lisp (there's a newer version that
             | uses JavaScript, I think). There are loads of fine online
             | books and guides. Here's a random online book:
             | https://gigamonkeys.com/book/
             | 
             | In no time you'll be putting up "my other car is a cdr"
             | bumper stickers!
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | > In no time you'll be putting up "my other car is a cdr"
               | bumper stickers!
               | 
               | Yeah but then learning Lisp is going to get in the way of
               | welding up new bumper brackets, and the bumper will still
               | be lying in the pile of things beside the shed waiting to
               | be reattached... ;-)
        
             | jsdalton wrote:
             | Start with SICP!
        
             | jasaldivara wrote:
             | I suggest: A Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation
             | 
             | https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/LispBook/book.pdf
        
             | SteveJS wrote:
             | The summer before i took 6.001 i read "The little LISPer".
             | It is a good intro.
             | 
             | This is the version i read:
             | 
             | https://www.abebooks.com/9780023397639/Little-LISPer-
             | Third-E...
        
             | WorldMaker wrote:
             | In Grad School I started with an "AI in Lisp Textbook"
             | (which was still the most common at the time in the late
             | oughts, I hear many have moved to Python since) and
             | searched for a Common Lisp interpreter that felt right. I
             | think I ended up with SBCL [0], but this was obviously a
             | while back so my memory is slippery about it.
             | 
             | (The professor I had for that AI course in Grad School
             | didn't know Lisp and wanted to learn it better, especially
             | because so much of the textbook was in it, so asked us for
             | volunteers to learn it as well and I took that as an
             | excuse/challenge to do every project with a language choice
             | that semester in Common Lisp.)
             | 
             | [0] https://www.sbcl.org/
        
         | fsckboy wrote:
         | i'm not a complete expert on this, but the dates entailed here
         | trigger clear memories.
         | 
         | the date on the Zork archive you linked to is 1977. in 1977
         | there was not really yet a notable software market for personal
         | computers based on microcomputer chips, and software
         | development at MIT in that timeframe would have been on Multics
         | or DEC-10 or 20's and (probably not quite) the dawn of Vax-750s
         | 
         | just a couple years later the names on the archive you linked
         | to went on to found infocom to sell this software ported to
         | personal computers, Apple II 6502's or CPM S-100 bus 8080 and
         | Z80s.
         | 
         | the Colossol Cave Adventure game for the PDP-10 had been
         | released (to other institutions that had PDP-10's) just a
         | couple years before and had caught fire in popularity at
         | universities. These people at MIT took the same idea and
         | reimplemented it with embellishments.
        
         | ndiddy wrote:
         | Zork was originally a public-domain mainframe game called
         | Dungeon developed at MIT. Its authors founded Infocom, split
         | the game into 3 pieces, added more content, and released it for
         | microcomputers as the 3 Zork games. The source code that's been
         | floating around since the 80s is for the original Dungeon game.
         | Between the early 80s and the early 90s, the source was
         | translated from MDL to DEC FORTRAN to Unix f77 to C, so you can
         | find a variety of copies of the source at different steps of
         | that translation process. This is also why the C version
         | doesn't look like idiomatic C code.
         | 
         | When Infocom shut down, one or more of the employees took home
         | backups of the Infocom file server. Various partial releases
         | have been leaked publicly from those backups, including
         | tooling/language documentation and the ZIL source code for
         | every Infocom game. The ZIL source code has been public since
         | 2019. The notable thing that Microsoft is doing here is
         | clearing up the rights to the 3 Zork games (but none of the
         | rest of the Infocom titles).
        
           | anthk wrote:
           | Not PD, but free as a free ber and non-commercial.
        
       | fortran77 wrote:
       | xyzzy
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | Different game.
        
           | fortran77 wrote:
           | plugh
        
       | ayaros wrote:
       | This is great, but I'd rather they make Windows 11 open-source
       | instead.
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | Funnily enough you can easily find the Windows XP source code
         | on GitHub. Not endorsed by Microsoft of course, but they've
         | ignored it sitting on their own service for years, along with
         | ignoring all the modern Windows and Office piracy tools which
         | are also on GitHub. Microsoft works in mysterious ways.
        
           | iddan wrote:
           | Most of the money to be made is by licensing software to
           | organisations that can afford the risk of pirating
           | (practically anything bigger than SMBs: enterprises,
           | governments, armies, etc). The moat of everyone used to your
           | platform worths a lot more. So they just regulate enough so
           | it won't seem like they don't give a shit at all.
        
           | nebula8804 wrote:
           | If AGI ever comes close to fruition I can't wait to just dump
           | this code into some AI, tell it to fix all security bugs and
           | make it work on M Series processors. Would finally achieve a
           | computing environment that would be perfect for me. Until
           | then, I will continue to dream.
        
             | Night_Thastus wrote:
             | If we ever get to the point of having a tool that could do
             | something that complex, we're well past the point of using
             | human-written operating systems or using M-series
             | processors.
             | 
             | Which is to say, very, very, very far away.
        
             | pavlov wrote:
             | Why not use AI to make ReactOS better? Is there something
             | in original Windows XP that ReactOS doesn't want to
             | implement?
        
             | ErroneousBosh wrote:
             | Why not just try and compile it yourself, see what happens?
        
               | chihuahua wrote:
               | One does not simply replicate a Windows build lab at
               | home. (insert Boromir meme)
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | Not with that attitude, old son.
        
           | ErroneousBosh wrote:
           | > along with ignoring all the modern Windows and Office
           | piracy tools which are also on GitHub
           | 
           | You weren't going to buy it anyway. No-one cares about you.
           | Pirate it if you like. Take your warezed copy of Office Home
           | Edition and be blessed, no-one is going to miss your 120
           | bucks.
           | 
           | An organisation with maybe 100,000 users each paying a per-
           | seat licence? Yeah, that's the sale they want. Not your one-
           | off copy.
        
             | johnisgood wrote:
             | Yup, they will care when a huge % of people start doing it.
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | Not really, no.
               | 
               | No-one buys Windows. No-one buys Office. It's a thing
               | that comes bundled with a computer, or that you "acquire"
               | if you need it.
               | 
               | It's only interesting if Barclays are pirating Windows on
               | a massive scale.
               | 
               | Oh shit did I say the name out loud?
        
               | johnisgood wrote:
               | Do companies really not buy licenses?
        
               | ErroneousBosh wrote:
               | Reputable ones do.
        
             | npteljes wrote:
             | They are not this cynical over it, it's part of a plan.
             | What they figure is that they can keep MS the de-facto
             | standard this way. Photoshop worked the same way for very
             | long.
        
           | chihuahua wrote:
           | I think it would be safe for Microsoft to release
           | (intentionally or unintentionally) the source for just about
           | any product. I bet it's incredibly difficult to run a
           | successful build. From talking to someone who used to work on
           | Excel, it took them around 1 day to build Excel from source.
           | And that's if everything goes perfectly and you know exactly
           | what you're doing and are using the build system and setup
           | and configuration that the Excel team has in place.
        
             | ndiddy wrote:
             | People have built working operating systems from both the
             | XP/Server 2003 and NT 4 leaks. Here's someone building
             | Server 2003 on Windows 11:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWZe00v2Rs0
        
       | ChicagoDave wrote:
       | Scott: Do the whole library of Infocom games!
        
       | classichasclass wrote:
       | It's not just Zork: a number of games, including Hitchhiker's,
       | are open source now. https://github.com/historicalsource
        
         | ChicagoDave wrote:
         | yes, but only Zork 1-3 have official licenses
        
         | pm215 wrote:
         | The others don't seem to have the MIT license pullreq added, so
         | they are not open source; the source code is merely available.
         | The repos have a note:
         | 
         | "This collection is meant for education, discussion, and
         | historical work, allowing researchers and students to study how
         | code was made for these interactive fiction games and how the
         | system dealt with input and processing. It is not considered to
         | be under an open license."
         | 
         | This github repo has been up for some years now (this old blog
         | post has some back story:
         | https://blog.zarfhome.com/2019/04/all-of-infocoms-game-sourc...
         | ) -- AFAIK it's the source contents from an old hard drive
         | image from back when Infocom was a company.
         | 
         | (I only checked hitchhikers and starcross, because github is
         | giving a lot of error pages for these right now.)
        
           | ndiddy wrote:
           | Yeah the code was leaked without Activision's permission a
           | few years ago. It's strange to me that Microsoft has taken
           | this opportunity to clear up the rights to Zork 1-3 but not
           | to the rest of the Infocom back catalog. The other games
           | haven't been available for sale since the mid 90s when
           | Activision put out a shovelware CD collection containing
           | every Infocom game except Hitchhiker's and Shogun, so it's
           | not like they have much commercial value.
        
             | skissane wrote:
             | > It's strange to me that Microsoft has taken this
             | opportunity to clear up the rights to Zork 1-3 but not to
             | the rest of the Infocom back catalog.
             | 
             | Likely explanation: their lawyers are worried there may be
             | third party rights or agreements limiting their ability to
             | open source a game - even if that isn't true, lawyers want
             | to see paperwork to convince themselves it isn't true. For
             | Zork, that was comparatively easy because the game's
             | history is well-known, and Activision had a history of
             | releasing sequels. For other games, that may be more
             | difficult - so start with the lowest hanging and highest
             | profile fruit.
        
               | WorldMaker wrote:
               | Yeah, they probably started with what was
               | easiest/oldest/most iconic with the clearest copyright
               | history/ownership record.
               | 
               | In at least one of the above mentioned cases, we do know
               | that the current rights holder and/or most recent
               | licensee appears to be the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/pro
               | grammes/articles/1g84m0sXpnNCv84GpN...
               | 
               | The BBC probably has a say in if that game will be open
               | source. (Their multi-decade effort at making the game
               | free to play and being open about some of their
               | enhancements to it suggests they may be willing to help
               | with that, and Microsoft making the first move with Zork
               | 1/2/3 may help with any interest there.)
        
               | ndiddy wrote:
               | The rights to Hitchhiker's and Shogun reverted to their
               | credited authors (Douglas Adams and James Clavell) after
               | they went out of print. The rest of the Infocom library
               | was created as works for hire entirely by salaried
               | Infocom employees, so the rights went from Infocom to
               | Activision to Microsoft.
        
               | WorldMaker wrote:
               | Right, which is why I assume the BBC has the entire
               | rights today to Hitchhiker's and was gifted them by
               | Douglas Adams' estate, but my searches didn't turn up
               | enough evidence to back that assumption so I didn't
               | include it, but I'm rather sure of it.
        
             | 1313ed01 wrote:
             | I really enjoyed that Activision "shovelware" cd. For a
             | time it made up a large part of my (Linux) game collection.
             | It is not leaving my collection.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | I bought a version for the mac (OSX), which I managed to
               | get moved from 800k floppy to my network drive. The games
               | are still on my NAS today and play just fine. Still fun
               | to play, someday I hope to find time to solve them. I
               | keep the originals so should even be legal.
        
         | Cieric wrote:
         | I'd be careful about that one, there is still no license for
         | it. Zork is notable here since it just got the MIT License
         | applied to it.
        
         | flyinghamster wrote:
         | I'd wonder if Hitchhiker's would have some issues with Douglas
         | Adams' estate, given his involvement.
        
           | WorldMaker wrote:
           | I believe his estate ceded the Infocom game to the BBC who
           | have been keeping the game up (free to play) for more than a
           | decade now: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1g84m0s
           | XpnNCv84GpN...
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | The notable change is that most of those repos have been
         | available not as a open source but "source available" as Fair
         | Use (for Archival Purposes), but the copyright owner (Microsoft
         | today) has now directly applied the MIT License to three of
         | those repos (Zork 1/2/3). Hopefully they will apply it to more
         | of them as Microsoft legal allows, but it's still exciting
         | they've made three repos officially open source under a FLOSS
         | recognized license.
        
       | Aman_Kalwar wrote:
       | Wow, didn't expect this from Microsoft. Amazing to see classic
       | game code being made accessible for learning
        
         | ghssds wrote:
         | This is exactly the kind of thing Microsoft likes to
         | opensource: old, crusty, and obsolete. Let's compare. When ID
         | Software opensourced Doom a few years after it's initial
         | release, there was still some life in it and it spawned a
         | myriad of forks and new developments continuing to this day. An
         | active community formed around it. When Microsoft opensourced
         | MSDOS, an opensource clone had existed for so long it was only
         | of interrest to archeologists and historians. It was as
         | whitered and lifeless as Zork is.
        
         | kgwxd wrote:
         | Funny, I exactly expected a lame PR stunt from Microsoft to
         | distract from the endless string of terrible decisions.
        
         | knowitnone3 wrote:
         | learn what? how to print text to stdout? how to do if else
         | statements or math.random? I'm sure you can rewrite this in a
         | week or in a month from scratch. Next, Microsoft will
         | opensource notepad because there are 0 text editors out there.
         | It is 1960 after all.
        
       | abtinf wrote:
       | The license says it's copyright 2025. How does that work?
       | Shouldn't the copyright be something like 1977?
        
         | QuantumNomad_ wrote:
         | IANAL but copyright is typically the year of first publication.
         | 
         | I could see this being important here in two ways:
         | 
         | 1. If the source code of Zork has not been made available to
         | the public before, then now is the year of publication.
         | 
         | 2. If Zork source code has previously been made available to
         | the public, perhaps the version published here has had changes
         | made, in which case now is the year of publication of this
         | version of the source code.
         | 
         | I assume that when Microsoft opens source code they have a team
         | of lawyers that have solid legal arguments for what the
         | copyright year should be in each case.
         | 
         | Therefore, maybe it's even possible legally that
         | 
         | 3. Even if source code was previously made available, and even
         | if no changes were made in any way since then to any of the
         | included source code or other files, perhaps just the act of
         | using a different license is in its own way part of how
         | copyright applies. Publishing something under a specific
         | license in $CURRENT_YEAR does not retroactively make the
         | license apply before the time at which it was made available
         | under that license and so perhaps an argument could be made
         | that copyright year in a license includes taking that into
         | consideration.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > IANAL but copyright is typically the year of first
           | publication.
           | 
           | Under current copyright law, copyright is effective from the
           | moment the work is first set in fixed form, though I think
           | copyright used to be based on first publication.
           | 
           | Updates creates a new work, for which the copyright date is
           | that of the updated work being completed (which doesn't
           | change that some parts are also part of works copyrighted
           | earlier and which may enter the public domain earlier.)
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | The copyright on the whole collection is 2025 - which is likely
         | just the README or some such thing. Some of the parts are
         | copyright 1977. For works created after 1978 copyright would
         | last from year of first publication + 90 years, but since most
         | of this is written in/before 1977 different laws apply. (I
         | suspect that Activation was careful to ensure they keep their
         | registration up to date, but there is a slight possibility this
         | is all public domain anyway if you want to hire a lawyer to
         | check)
        
       | theoldgreybeard wrote:
       | So derivative works are possible, who will be the first to attach
       | Zork to the OpenAI API?
        
         | simonmales wrote:
         | I love the idea that these can live forever in apt/rpm
         | repositories.
        
         | throwuxiytayq wrote:
         | It seems likely that the entirety of Zork (world state and the
         | possible actions to transform it) is already learned by the
         | model. Which means that there is a grue in there, too. Not
         | good. I'm starting to re-think the doomer argument...
        
         | gaudystead wrote:
         | Perhaps this is a stupid/contentious idea (partly because it
         | somewhat kills the "spirit" of the original games), but there's
         | a little part of me that would be interested in seeing the
         | scene building parts of Zork piped into an image generation
         | service to visualize the landscape that the game describes.
         | 
         | (the grue would obviously just a picture full of black, though
         | some creepy eyes would be a nice touch)
        
       | lloydatkinson wrote:
       | I wonder how long before someone hooks up AI image generation for
       | the scenes with this. It could either be very tastefully done or
       | complete slop. Probably the second option.
        
         | lkramer wrote:
         | In the early days of LLMs I tried it, but it was kinda
         | terrible, and I also realised that the fun of these games, like
         | reading a book, was the imagining of the action. Take that away
         | and they are very simple puzzle games
        
         | SoKamil wrote:
         | > It could either be very tastefully done or complete slop.
         | 
         | It really depends on the creator. A slop is a side effect of
         | the fact that the entry barrier has been much lowered.
         | Previously you at least had to put some effort into learning
         | the craft before showing that to the world.
        
         | foobarian wrote:
         | There was a game I remember from the 80s that had such a (to
         | me) tasteful background of still images to go with the text
         | adventure; Time and Magik trilogy on Atari ST. [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.mobygames.com/game/28812/time-and-magik-the-
         | tril...
        
         | vunderba wrote:
         | There have been a couple attempts at this kind of thing (same
         | with AI generation of images from pages of Choose-Your-Own-
         | Adventure books).
         | 
         | It's more a gimmick than anything particularly useful. Might
         | even distract if the image embellishes from the original
         | description leading players down the wrong path for solving a
         | puzzle.
        
       | dvrp wrote:
       | " When Zork arrived, it didn't just ask players to win; it asked
       | them to imagine"
       | 
       | Sigh... it's all ChatGPT nowadays ain't it.
        
       | sigmonsays wrote:
       | bummer > The code relies on old internal Infocom toolchains
       | (ZILCH compiler, WATFOR, > mainframe environment) that are not
       | open and likely not preserved.
        
         | bernds74 wrote:
         | There's this: https://www.ifwiki.org/ZILF https://zilf.io/
         | 
         | Although I haven't played with it and can't tell you whether it
         | can compile the open source Zork.
        
           | WorldMaker wrote:
           | The blog post itself suggests using ZILF.
           | 
           | I hope some of those other Infocom tools eventually get open
           | sourced for historic curiosity, but ZILF is probably going to
           | remain the modern answer for how to compile these files.
        
       | drob518 wrote:
       | When I was 14 or so, in the early 1980s, a friend and I who had
       | been playing Zork thought it would be fun to design a game
       | ourselves. We actually wrote to Infocom with a proposal that we
       | write a new game for them and they let us use ZIL and the
       | Z-machine to implement it. Surprisingly, they actually wrote back
       | to us and politely declined our offer. In hindsight, while we
       | knew how to program in BASIC and assembly language on our Apple
       | IIs, we would have been lost making a game with ZIL. That's to
       | say that Infocom made the right call. Still, it said something
       | about the company that they treated a couple kids with respect
       | and didn't laugh in our faces. I wish I still had the letter.
        
         | reticulated wrote:
         | My goodness, I could have written this word-for-word. Similar
         | age, same Apple II BASIC and 6502 upbringing (roll sleeves and
         | _call -151_ ) and also wrote to Infocom. We were in the UK so
         | even more surprised to get a reply similar to yours several
         | weeks later. Sadly my letter is also lost to various house
         | moves. Or eaten by a grue.
        
           | drob518 wrote:
           | Ha! They probably assigned an intern to reply to all the kids
           | wanting to help them write the "next one." Too funny! They
           | had class, Infocom did.
        
           | bryanlarsen wrote:
           | Me too, except my letter was to Sierra On-Line and my
           | experience was on TRS-80 6809. Really classy reply asking me
           | to write back when I finished school.
        
             | drob518 wrote:
             | Nice.
        
             | brandall10 wrote:
             | Lovely to hear this about Infocom and SOL. The former was
             | my obsession throughout the mid-late 80s on my Atari 800XL,
             | and then the latter for the next few years after getting a
             | 386SX in '89.
        
             | eej71 wrote:
             | I recall sending a letter to them asking them for
             | information on how they compressed their images for their
             | hi-res adventure games. While they replied, they said it
             | was a trade secret. I was kind of bummed. But being a 12
             | year old kid who barely understood the 6502, it probably
             | would have gone over my head.
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | I wrote them, and after a while I received a letter in my
           | mailbox, with this stamp:                   ---v----v----v
           | ----v----v---         |         _______         |         >
           | One   /       \     G  <         | Lousy /         \    U  |
           | > Point |   ___   |    E  <         |       |  (___)  |
           | |         >       <--)___(-->    P  <         |       / /
           | \ \    o  |         >      / /       \ \   s  <         |
           | |-|---------|-|  t  |         >     | |  \ _ /  | |  a  <
           | |     | | --(_)-- | |  g  |         >     | |  /| |\  | |  e
           | <         |     |-|---|_|---|-|     |         >      \
           | \__/_\__/ /      <         |       _/_______\_       |
           | >      |  f.m.l.c. |      <         |      -------------
           | |         >                         <         |   Donald
           | Woods, Editor  |         >     Spelunker Today     <
           | |                         |
           | ---^----^----^----^----^---
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23114927
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8Z1cKUxD9c
           | 
           | https://crpgadventures.blogspot.com/2016/05/zork-victory-
           | sor...
        
         | chihuahua wrote:
         | In the 1980s, I was interested in text adventure games, and had
         | a kind of book/magazine on the topic of how to write them. In
         | BASIC, obviously (groan) because that's what was easily
         | accessible back then.
         | 
         | I remember figuring out the mechanisms that the book
         | introduced: what kind of rudimentary data structures to use to
         | represent the state of the world, the locations of objects,
         | etc.
         | 
         | I got some simple stuff to work, you could navigate the world,
         | pick up and drop objects, etc. but then my motivation gradually
         | ran out because I didn't have a clearly defined design for the
         | game I was going to build.
         | 
         | I had a few pirated games (C64, Amiga): "Death in the
         | Caribbean", "The Pawn", etc but never had the motivation to
         | stick with them past the first or second puzzle. The puzzles
         | seemed like if the answer didn't arrive via a flash of divine
         | inspiration, there was no way to figure it out based on logical
         | reasoning. Maybe that part of my brain wasn't developed back
         | then.
        
           | drob518 wrote:
           | Nice. Yep, we wrote our own adventure games in BASIC as well.
           | There were a couple problems with that, however. First we
           | weren't able to come up with a sophisticated parser like
           | Infocom had. We ended up with basic "verb object" parsers,
           | ala Scott Adams adventures. Second, we didn't have many rooms
           | as it was difficult to fit it all into memory and we didn't
           | have the sophisticated incremental loading that Infocom did
           | with the Z-machine. Still, it worked.
        
             | WorldMaker wrote:
             | Writing a terrible "verb object" parser in BASIC was
             | certainly a rite of passage for many of us. I recall making
             | more than one. I also recall my best one having rudimentary
             | "verb object preposition subject" support, but that being
             | about my limit at the time in BASIC.
             | 
             | But also I had access to TADS and early Inform (at home)
             | and still wound up building a couple in BASIC (because
             | school computer labs would have that available).
        
         | jmward01 wrote:
         | 'as a kid I....' Man. This brings back memories. I got into the
         | BBS world and started programming in earnest because I wanted
         | to write shells for the MUDs out at the time. A friend and I
         | built some amazing things all in the name of auto-mapping,
         | adding graphics, etc etc. Simple games really help confine a
         | problem to the point that you can grow your curiosity easily
         | with them.
        
       | Eric_WVGG wrote:
       | how could they not title this article GIT FORK ZORK
        
       | TZubiri wrote:
       | There's also Frotz and other Z Machine interpreters, and the
       | actual Zblorb game file. But I guess this would be the source
       | code that compiles to the zblorb.
       | 
       | So this is useful to modify zork, but not much changes if you
       | want to build something around zork, as you will most likely be
       | building something that interfaces at the z machine level.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | Great, I remember a page which stated that it was sad to have
       | free as in freedom ZMachine languages and interpreters (Inform6,
       | Frotz/Fizmo...) but there were very few text adventures under a
       | libre license. So far, the most known ones:
       | 
       | - Spiritwrak
       | 
       | - All Things Devour
       | 
       | - Calypso
       | 
       | - Tristam Island
        
         | Gormo wrote:
         | Perhaps few classic games were released under FOSS licenses,
         | but there are tons of more recent ones on IFDB.
        
           | anthk wrote:
           | I know, I play IF games since 2001 and 2002; and my previous
           | gameplays where with the classical ones for ZX Spectrum (in
           | Spanish) and some freeware games bundled with 'shareware'
           | CD's with Winfrotz and later Frotz/NFrotz. Some GNU user used
           | to have several under libre licenses (even non-ZMachine
           | ones), such as Beyond the Titanic, but he has no working
           | repos any more.
        
       | danso wrote:
       | So how good are the latest coding agents? Like if I asked Gemini
       | 3/Claude/ChatGPT 5.1 to convert it into something that could run
       | from a Python interpreter, how far would they get? (I assume Zork
       | Implementation Language is not well represented in the training
       | corpus)
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | The easiest way to get it to run from a Python interpreter
         | would be to compile the ZIL source to a Z-Machine binary, which
         | you can do with ZILF [1], then use a Z Machine library in
         | Python (such as a pure Python implementation of the Z-Machine
         | [2]) to load/run it.
         | 
         | A coding agent may even be able to suggest that path, as
         | knowledge of at least the existence of both ZILF and Python ZVM
         | should be in training sets.
         | 
         | The more interesting questions would be how much a coding agent
         | could help you write new Zork rooms or similar things _in_ ZIL
         | now that these ZIL source files are MIT licensed. I would also
         | assume ZIL is not well represented, it 's fork of the Lisp
         | family tree (Lisp -> MDL -> ZIL) in generally probably not well
         | represented in open source code bases up to this point. (Some
         | of that may depend on if the agent was trained on some of these
         | historicalsource repos ahead of this open source license
         | change, too.)
         | 
         | [1] https://zilf.io/
         | 
         | [2] https://github.com/sussman/zvm
        
           | anthk wrote:
           | Also if you don't wall to install a whole C# stack on
           | constrained netbook/non supoprted old machine:
           | 
           | https://notabug.org/coderain/zilutils
        
       | MPSimmons wrote:
       | I like playing Zork via docker:
       | https://github.com/clockworksoul/docker-zork1
       | 
       | > docker run -it clockworksoul/zork1
        
         | clockworksoul wrote:
         | Somebody uses it! Yay!
         | 
         | You made my day
        
       | PilotJeff wrote:
       | I would love to see the Apple ][ source code made available for a
       | lot of these classic games. In this case what I really want to
       | see is the Z-Engine or interpreter itself not essentially the
       | data files only.
        
         | zzo38computer wrote:
         | I have seen some of the interpreter source codes, but I don't
         | know if they have been "officially" published. These also
         | include some other things such as test files, and a picture
         | file that I have never seen a decoder for (other than the
         | decoder (and encoder) that I wrote myself).
         | 
         | Many modern implementations do not support permanent shifts in
         | Z versions 3 and above (although all of my own implementations
         | do, and I think all of the official implementations also do,
         | even though Infocom never used that feature (this isn't too
         | surprising since the algorithm they described for deciding when
         | to use permanent shifts is worse than not using them at all; I
         | worked with someone else to make a better algorithm for making
         | this decision)).
         | 
         | Some of the official implementations check the Z version number
         | and some don't; even some that do, do not check if it is a
         | small-endian story file (and the ones that do will only display
         | an error message if it is, and refuse to run it). My own
         | implementations do check for small-endian story files (as well
         | as the Z version number), although some will display an error
         | message and refuse to run it in that case, some actually are
         | able to run both big-endian and small-endian story files (as
         | far as I know, there are no small-endian story files; Infocom
         | never used this feature and no modern compilers support this).
         | 
         | Something else I might mention is that some people say that
         | Infocom used many tricks in the programming, although I have
         | looked at disassembled code in the debugger and found that they
         | could be optimized a lot more (e.g. by using SET->BCOM
         | optimization, and many other things), and the source code for
         | the interpreters also shows some things that could be optimized
         | much better. (Another thing revealed from the source code of
         | the interpreters is a undocumented command-line switch for the
         | DOS version that allows you to specify the name of the story
         | file.)
        
         | ndiddy wrote:
         | The source code for most of Infocom's Z-code interpreters
         | (including the Apple version) is available here:
         | https://github.com/erkyrath/infocom-zcode-terps . Note that
         | this isn't an official licensed release so it's in a legal gray
         | area. It would be nice to see Microsoft bless these with an
         | official license as well.
        
       | raldi wrote:
       | If I'm reading this right, the source code has been available for
       | all the Infocom games in https://github.com/historicalsource for
       | at least six years, but what's changed today is the license?
        
         | VikingCoder wrote:
         | https://github.com/historicalsource/zork1/pull/3
        
       | wg0 wrote:
       | Make AoE open source please. I am sure Microsoft Empire won't
       | crumble.
        
       | RyanOD wrote:
       | This literally gave me goosebumps. It's hard to convey how much
       | Zork (and the rest of the Infocom portfolio) means to me. This
       | was my first entry into gaming on my Commodore 64.
       | 
       | For anyone out there who had anything to do with bringing these
       | games to market, know that you impacted so many lives in a fun,
       | meaningful, heartfelt way.
        
       | VikingCoder wrote:
       | The thing I want is probably very stupid -
       | 
       | I'd like Zork I through III ported to Inform 6...
       | 
       | I don't specifically know why that appeals to me. I guess it's
       | because I'd like to tinker with it and understand it better. And
       | if I were going to write Zork I from scratch today, I'd want to
       | use the most modern tools available. [checks notes] Okay, but not
       | Inform 7. I have an aversion to Inform 7. I want my code to look
       | more like code, and less like an LLM prompt.
        
         | anthk wrote:
         | Ditto here. And, better, translated into Spanish with INFSP6.
         | There is one made from a non-native Spanish speaker and it's
         | really bad. Now a proper Zork translation can be a reality.
         | 
         | Ah, and yes, IF6 ports for Adventure do exist, both in English
         | and Spanish, and the Spanish one it's really great, with even
         | the backstory on creating the game perfectly translated..
        
       | LunaSea wrote:
       | Waiting impatiently for World of Warcraft to be Open Sourced.
        
         | chickensong wrote:
         | Tentatively scheduled for 2051
        
       | VikingCoder wrote:
       | Can ZILF just compile this?
       | 
       | https://zilf.io/
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | That is the exactly the suggested compiler in this blog post.
         | (These repos have been compiled with it for a while. The
         | biggest change in these [Internet Archive-uploaded] repos is an
         | official Microsoft-backed MIT License as opposed to assuming
         | Fair Use for Archival Use prior to now.)
         | 
         | I'm hoping Microsoft may have a chance to open source more of
         | the original Infocom compilers and VMs, even if they would be
         | hard to run on modern machines, in later expansions of these
         | repos.
        
           | VikingCoder wrote:
           | Zilf liked it, but Zapf is flagged by Windows 11 Smart App
           | Control as potentially dangerous to my machine...
           | 
           | And there's no way to turn it off for one app.
           | 
           | And if I turn it off, I can only turn it back on by re-
           | installing Windows.
           | 
           | What the bloody...
           | 
           | So now I want to download and build.
           | 
           | But it's .net 10, so I apparently need VS 2026, which I
           | hadn't bothered to install yet.
           | 
           | Oh my.
        
       | boomboomsubban wrote:
       | When EA recently made Command & Conquer free software, it was
       | clear that the various art assets were not covered under this.
       | 
       | Is there something similar for a text based adventure game? Does
       | the writing count as code?
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | The writing should be assumed to be subject to copyright still
         | even though the code is open source.
         | 
         | In this case it _sounds_ like Microsoft 's Legal has taken the
         | assumption the writing is applicable under the code license and
         | is mostly seeking to enforce _trademarks_ and _brand_ (don 't
         | commercially release something implying it is a Microsoft-
         | approved Zork) more than the writing, per Scott's wording of
         | Microsoft's legal requests here:
         | https://github.com/historicalsource/zork1/pull/3
         | 
         | Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, that's not legal advice, build
         | commercial derivatives at your own risk and with your own
         | lawyer's advice.
        
       | BryantD wrote:
       | The repository is part of https://github.com/historicalsource,
       | which has code for a bunch of Infocom games, although at a quick
       | glance most of them aren't open sourced. Still, very cool
       | resource.
        
       | MrZongle2 wrote:
       | The cynic in me believes that this only took place after numerous
       | meetings during which the question "is there any way we can still
       | make money from this" was repeatedly answered with "no".
        
         | fainpul wrote:
         | My guess is they wanted to create some good publicity for once,
         | to distract from all the shit they get for their AI stunts and
         | Windows fuckups.
        
       | jamesgill wrote:
       | I kinda hate that Microsoft gets to take credit for being
       | magnanimous with yet another product they never created.
       | 
       | The TL;DR: The Zorks were created by several guys at MIT who
       | later formed Infocom. Infocom eventually sold to Activision,
       | Microsoft bought Activision and voila--"Microsoft is open
       | sourcing Zork".
        
         | dsjoerg wrote:
         | They're not taking credit for the product; they're taking
         | credit for _open-sourcing_ it. Which they did.
        
           | jamesgill wrote:
           | Yes, I get it. It's right there in the headline.
        
       | thebeardisred wrote:
       | Easter egg from back in the day - (podman|docker) run -it
       | quay.io/games/zork
        
       | doener wrote:
       | If you ask Claude to simulate Zork you get a text adventure that
       | is loosely based on Zork, but entirely different.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-20 23:00 UTC)