Newsgroups: rec.games.int-fiction
Path: nntp.gmd.de!Dortmund.Germany.EU.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!nntp.pinc.com!freenet.victoria.bc.ca!freenet.Victoria.BC.CA!uq775
From: uq775@freenet.Victoria.BC.CA (Roger Carbol)
Subject: Parsers: Too much of a good thing?
Message-ID: <1995Nov6.190546.5974@freenet.victoria.bc.ca>
Sender: news@freenet.victoria.bc.ca (News Manager)
Reply-To: uq775@freenet.Victoria.BC.CA (Roger Carbol)
Organization: The Victoria Freenet Association (VIFA), Victoria, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 19:05:46 GMT
Lines: 25


I think that the old Adventureland parsers of "one verb, one noun"
format were sufficient for the majority of adventures and puzzles.

I mean, sure, it's nice to be able to throw something like "Give
all but the scarlet rutabaga to the king's niece" at a parser and
watch it work, but is it necessary?

Of course, the primary limitation with this form of parser is the
absence of indirect objects.  But most actions will only have one
valid indirect object, or the adventure can be designed so that
there will only be one valid indirect object.  At worst, the player
is prompted for a choice between two or three objects.
 
I think the average game designed would be better off spending 
parser-design times on expanding the number of nouns and verbs
that the parser accepted in a meaningful way.  Of course, with
the number of excellent IF languages out there, this is exactly
what the programmer can do.

My two bits on the whole thing, anyways.


Roger Carbol // uq775@freenet.victoria.bc.ca // send mail

