intfiction.org

So, I know that a lot of games take a really long time to make, and that it can be tedious. I mean, to avoid boring the person playing the game you may have to describe the same thing three times in varying levels of detail without repeating or contradicting yourself.

In other types of games, I see groups of people working together. More than just two. You may have a couple of writers, a couple of programmers, some artists, people doing graphics, etc., and this isn't always major studios. Sometimes groups get together to collaborate for games.

So, what I'm asking is, why are IF collaborations usually just two people? Why not a team of five or six people? Maybe two people work together on plot and puzzles, one person fills in details and descriptions, and a couple people work on the actual programming of the game. You can send the text to be displayed upon examination or various other actions to the programmers.

Basically, the same thing that a writer/programmer duo does, but on a larger scale. Games could either be made more quickly, or much larger games could be made. Not to mention that working on a project is, in my opinion, much more enjoyable when you have other people to talk to and bounce ideas off of.

Also, if you could get an artist in there, a well-placed image once in a while can add impact to important moments in a game, I think. Title scene, when you first approach the haunted house, etc.

I'm guess the absence of development teams is due to the fact that text games aren't typically made for profit. You'd really have to amass a group of people just doing it for the joy of it. Further, being involved in the programming side of it affords the writer of interactive fiction a deeper understanding of how their game works, and avoids them having to implement their vision through intermediaries.

That all said, I've helped produce two prizewinning games through different partnerships, and I'm currently taking part in two collaborative projects, the TMBG Tribute Album, and IF Whisper 5: the benefits of working with others are clear to me, but then so are the downsides. When you work with other people you agree to forfeit full control of the creative vision for the project, and you leave yourself open to different levels of quality and commitment from your co-creators.

It's at least conceivable that a larger collaboration with people having more specialised roles could produce something interesting. I remain open to being convinced.

I think one possible factor is that, in IF, there tends to be just one story, which goes just one way or a few variants of just one way.

With other kinds of computer games, there's often room for multiple storylines, side quests, distinct "levels" with their own character, and so on. More room for a multitude of authorial voices.

I don't think it's the main or deciding factor, but it might be somewhere in the mix.

Personally I'd love a texty game with a real sense of multiple storylines to explore ... and I think a mult-author approach to such a thing would be groovy, provided someone could stand at the middle and herd the cats. I'm no cat-herder myself, but I'd be a willing member of the miaowing herd.

_________________
Games, Fonts, and Font-Toys For Gamers - http://www.cumberlandgames.com

That's one major problem. Larger-scale collaboration would require a lead dev with the established community respect to draw in a talented team, the management skills to keep them committed and productive (on a wholly voluntary basis), the will to impose a coherent vision on a bunch of unruly creatives, the design skills to come up with an appealing and workable concept, and the technical skills to do as much or more actual work than anybody on the team (because this is how volunteer projects inevitably turn out).

Someone that skilled a) is rare, b) has the ability to write more modest games on their own, with considerably less hassle, and c) probably has a demanding day job.

This seems a little chicken-and-eggy to me -- isn't part of the reason that IF games don't have multiple storylines, side quests, etc., that one hobbyist author working alone usually doesn't have time to create all of that stuff? Or at least that's the feeling I get when I contemplate writing something with multiple storylines etc.

I think it's an "adventure game" thing. It was true even in the commercial years of text adventures, and it was then true of graphical adventure games in the 90s ... and in recent years, with the return of graphical adventures (the NDS has featured many excellent new ones), it remains true in modern games, modern games with large teams on their credits list.

But again, I'd be happy to be part of an exception

_________________
Games, Fonts, and Font-Toys For Gamers - http://www.cumberlandgames.com

There is a place for works with a single authorial voice. After all, single author novels are still predominant.

I'm somewhat qualified to answer this question...

The primary requirement to build IF in a team is money. Cold hard cash. If you have cash, you can pay people not to work at a "regular" job and instead work on IF. From there, the floodgates open. If one had cash, they could hire game designers, writers, artists, programmers, managers, and all of the other important parts of any normal product development business.

Given all this, you would be successful at team IF development.

Would this make for a successful company?

No one knows. No one has had the people _and_ the money.

David C.

Did you infer some suggestion to the contrary?

_________________
Games, Fonts, and Font-Toys For Gamers - http://www.cumberlandgames.com

Not really... I know you all know that's true. But matt w's post kind of sounded as if everyone would want to produce works with either distinct authorial voices or parts with distinct characters if only they had more time or a team.

Now as to IF - Alabaster is an example of a story which did have a very big branching story line. Success or not?
Victor is keen to have contributions to Kerkerkruip too, which would be more suitable for those wanting sidequests and characterised levels.