dis-lexia glob

Just a short hi, after a long absence.

Been ill, nothing too serious as it turns out, but it means I was either very worried and/or very tired for about six weeks, a month and a half. This brought my work to the Quick Tour to a halt, which was annoying because I was close to finishing. Eric has been patient. Hopefully I can finish it up in the next two to three weeks and it will be out there for you guys to use. I think Eric has already released some of the demo games he developed for the Quick Tour (at my strong urging, want credit here, heh), so that should have helped.

I started playing the comp games, and luckily hit on a good one for my first one. Think the last time I really played the comp games was 2002. Although I may have played the top winners in a few of the following comps, frankly, I forget. I used to try every year to play MOST of the comp games and do reviews of MOST. Seems unbelievable now that I did that. This year I am aiming for only say eight to ten reviews.

I’d post them here except I haven’t written them yet, heh, and I never do my final scores until I have finished all the games I am going to play. Yes, sometimes I like to adjust one or two up or down slightly in light of the context of the whole comp, to where I thought they should come out.

So far I’ve played one almost very good game, a mystery, (it will probably win or come in the top three), one sort of medieval one that was promising and had some good humor but serious implementation problems and ended up crashing on me (though it did not crash on everyone), one short and totally silly one with repetitious actions, and one that was very well-done historical one but not that exciting and it had too many numbers in it. So deduce from that what you will.

I was going to go on how this comp may show I7 to be either a boon or bane, but, frankly, I haven’t played enough yet to make any judgments on that. And maybe no conclusions can be drawn, because there have been both well-written and poorly implemented games before.

 Watch this space, the Quick Tour will emerge in all its finalized glory someday. Heh.

(Note this article has been changed from first post.) 

Yes, you may now take a peek at the Quick Tour. It is about 3/4 done. In other words, the NPC stuff isn’t there yet, plus it needs some editing. The way Eric and I have done this is that he has sent me summaries of the classes, I have put them into HTML with revisions (my revisions to clarify them in my own mind), also asking him questions to clarify some things. Then when I am done he edits the page. We are now on second pass editing — redrafts being edited. I wrote the Using TADS 3 and The TADS 3 Language and Verbs & Action pages myself, but they have errors and I haven’t done Eric’s edits on those pages yet. There also need to be edits done on most of the other pages — second pass edits.

(When I say errors, I mean factual errors, so beware. I am often writing things incorrectly, because I am a T3 newbie and get things wrong. That is part of why this is working, when I don’t understand something Eric can explain it to me. I figure anything I don’t “get” as a T3 newbie maybe someone else won’t “get.” So clarifying those areas, trying to put them into clear and complete enough language, though briefly, will help others as well.)

I am also going to rewrite the first page, right now it’s a tad too complicated. Okay, version 1.05 does not yet incorporate Eric’s edits for the How to Use and Verbs & Actions pages, so THEY HAVE ERRORS. When you see version 1.06, then How to and Verb errors will have been corrected. Version 1.07 will be when all second pass edits are done. Version 1.08 will likely be when the first page is rewritten, and 1.09 on will be when new things have been added. That the version numbering that I see occurring, roughly.

But, if you’ve bookmarked this blog, or are paying attention, you can take a peek at the TADS 3 Quick Tour now. I won’t be announcing this anywhere else.

Here is what I am wondering.

Do you think this would help you learn TADS 3? (Well, if you know it already do you think it would help someone learn TADS 3?)

And, if you are interested, some actual editing would be nice, such as finding typos, misspellings, and awkward sentences.

Also, if a T3 newbie, where mentally do you get lost? Page by page, where do you get lost? I’d like to target any unclear areas and clarify them.

Bear in mind what I said about errors, edits, and plans to rewrite the first page.

For the first two questions you can answer here.

For any edits, more discussion, and any points that you still find unclear (where you get lost), please email me.

I am very uncomfortable, right now anyway, with posting my email address here. However, go to the IF Art Show Gallery and email the curator. That will do it. 

The quick tour is at:

http://members.aol.com/doepage2/QTour/

I should also say that the map is not progressively colored in yet, that some larger map graphics are going to be replaced, and at least one is going to be added.

We’ve renamed the Game Writer’s Digest to Quick Tour, because that is exactly what it is. So far it is about 1/2 done. It will be a quick overview of the library (mainly, a little on TADS 3 as a language, etc., too). So that one can get a sense of what is in the library before one plows into other material to read-more-about-it. Actually one may get more than a sense of what is in the library, we are making it fairly complete — summary of classes. I foresee it may run to 12-15 pages. But with lots of graphics. I think this will really help people learn TADS 3.

Wish I could finish it sooner, but I have other things to do in my life, surprisingly. This is definitely a joint venture between Eric and I. He sends me class summaries and I plug them into web pages, editing and adding if I think they are unclear. Or unclear to me anyway. Which also necessitates various explanations by Eric to me, since I am still learning T3. Actually I may be still learning T3 for a long time, it is a huge library.

When more is done I will let people know for a preview. Watch this space.

Well, gang, it’s a go. I drafted some preliminary web pages, showed them to Eric Eve, using some of the draft material he sent me, and we have agreed to go forward. Lots and lots of details and mutual editing to work out. Be nice if it got up there right away, but it’s going to take time to make sure things are concise and clear.

Basically this will be a visual dummies guide to the T3 library (well, a little higher level than that, but not a great deal higher.) Something that can be read quickly, but will still cover most of the library in a very logical way. Sort of a prequel to other T3 material.

I foresee it not only being a T3 learning tool, but also a way for more experienced T3ers to remind themselves of just what is in the library. Decide which class/object they may want to use for a particular item in a particular game.

Eric and I think a lot a like about a lot of things, which is going to make this work. I am providing the context and putting HTML stuff together, Eric is providing the technical expertise and better writing J. A lot of clarification of the T3 library, in various ways, may grow out of this. Anyway, we seem to bounce ideas off each other well and it is proceeding forward.

Once there is a draft that both he and I are happy with, I may share the link here. Share it here long before it is officially released. Because the initial pages will only be part of the library — it is going to get added onto as it goes and grows. But early feedback might be helpful and telling.

Not totally decided on this yet, but watch this space. Rather excited about this project. From b.. complaining and all that, I’ve gone to helping. I think people will really like it. And, yes, Virginia, I think it will help a lot of people learn T3 easier and quicker. 

TOO MUCH INFORMATION.

In the T3 dumps, and people assume it’s because the library is large and complex. Well, that is part of it, but mainly it is because there is too much information. I’d like just a brief overview of what is even IN the library, classes/subclasses and their basic properties, methods, strings/message setups, and actions that can be performed on them. All with short explanations. Something really brief. Something that gets me an overview what is even THERE that I might want to use in coding.

The Tour Guide goes into great detail, which, sure, is useable for looking things up later — it makes a great how-to-do-it-look-up-reference. A map gives a rough overview, the Reference Manual is useable for looking things up, but really ONLY ONCE YOU KNOW those particular things are there to be looked up in the first place (it also has no real organization of grouping like classes like the Tour Guide does, which is nice). But nothing but nothing gives a brief overview. This really, really raises the learning curve and I find it a major oversight. I also find it extremely frustrating.

It also means that learning T3 is much, much tougher than it really needs to be.

Yeah, I was going to do one. I was going to call it “Game Writer’s Digest to the T3 Library.” Only, to be truthful right now it would take me too long, because I’d have to dig out the relevant material from too many sources:  the Tour Guide, the Reference Manual (because it doesn’t show templates and the Guide does so it’s not that easy to correlate the two), the Templates Quick Reference and so on. Also because I don’t know T3 that well yet. Although I feel I could do it. I feel I could even start a section now, the first section with the easier rooms and connectors, following the basic organization of the Tour Guide (Eric and I had discussed this). But I simply do not have the time right now. There are other things, real-life things, that I really need to be doing.

So the thing I mentioned before to cut down on the learning curve is not going to happen. At least not now, maybe later. Sorry. I wish I had more time. I really do. Or maybe SOMEONE ELSE will do it. Because it needs truly to be done. It truly does. 

I am working on a shortcut method to learn what is in the T3 library, with Eric Eve’s help. We have been in communication. It will be a sort of tutorial, sort of not tutorial. Since I am still reading all the T3 documents this may seem premature, but I have an idea that may lower people’s learning curve (including mine). I will be drawing from several T3 resources, and I am not sure how long it will take me. However, when it is finalized I will share it. Note that this would not be possible without Eric’s help.

So I will be silent on T3 for a while while I tackle this.

More to come…

 The I7 Manual — An Unofficial Index

I believe in cutting down on learning curves, either with visual aids and/or short cut ways of seeing more complex things — seeing them in a simpler way. For more detail, one must go to something else, but sometimes one just needs to get an overall picture, or have material shuffled in another way to make it more accessible. In light of this approach I offer this…

I was pointed to this by Lucian P. Smith, the I7 Manual — An Official Index.

http://nothings.org/misc/i7index.html

It seems to be out of date, not sure, but it seems to be. But at the top is a downloadable zip that has the program that built the index. I have double-checked and the latest version manual includes a manifest.txt, needed to create a new index. So you can probably create a newer one yourself.

http://www.inform-fiction.org/I7/Download%20-%20Documents.html

Inform 7 for the Fiction Author - Emily Short

Emily Short’s article on things to consider when writing a game. This is intended for the fiction writer new to game design, but is reportedly a very good read for more experienced game designers as well.

http://emshort.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/inform-7-for-the-fiction-author/

I had a nice long post, then accidentally deleted it before saving it, so this will not be as good as the original.

I’ve decided to give up on I7. Oh, yeah, you say. “I thought you decided to give up on T3?” Well, <blush>, yes. I’ve been back and forth, up and down, and all over the town. The thing is, for me, both have a steep learning curve, and before I actually set out to learn rather than just read, I want to be sure which to tackle. Learning will mean actual coding and that takes time. Sometimes a LOT of time.

A WIP I am dusting off and working on requires complex scoping. Scoping meaning having objects in scope for the player character. What I want is an area, several rooms, where the player can see and hear things going on all over the area, but not take, touch, and smell them. Let’s just say for the purposes of this story I need that area to be several rooms, not one.

My WIP is originally written in I6, which I could proceed forward with, or not. Since I don’t have much written yet I could also rewrite it in T2. Or I could rewrite it in I7 or T3. This is partly why I have been bouncing all over the place, whatever will scope the best for me will probably be what I go with. So it’s all open, it could be either old or new Inform or TADs. OTOH, both T3 and I7, for me, have steep learning curves. So stay with the old, or go with the new? I know difficult scoping in I6 is hard and hacky (I know I6 pretty darn well). Not sure about T2, it may not be a lot better (I only know the basics of T2). Or maybe I this is an opportunity to pursue a newer system.

Going with that idea I asked both Emily and Eric how I would code this in I7 and T3 respectively.

It turns out that there is a complex scoping example similar to what I want already in the I7 manual. Emily pointed me to it, Stately Gardens:

http://www.inform-fiction.org/I7/ex245.html#e245

Now, I know I did not prepare myself by reading the manual up to that point, and I know I barely know I7, but when I saw that my brain said quite clearly… 

{  give(me, clean simple code) = that I can read
        + please, please, please!!! } and a lot SHORTER than I7 too;

Because I like my brain (I’d have a hard time getting along without it), I stopped and listened. Okay, brain, I7 is out.

But, let’s face it, I7 was not designed for programmers. That was not its intent – it was designed for non-programmers.  I really admire, and I mean really, that Graham, with Emily’s help, have designed a system that non-programmers can use.  This was something people had asked (and begged) for in raif for years. Writers would eagerly come and discouragedly go, wanting to write games but being unable to code. However, practically everyone thought it could-not-be-done.

It is a master stroke that Graham has apparently accomplished the impossible.

So for non-programmers (and programmers alike)  I7 is brief and easy for the easy stuff, for the short stuff, like laying out a game map, room descriptions, and bare-boned NPCs. If I have sounded bitter (actually I know I have sounded bitter, or disappointed anyway), I must admit that it has stemmed from envy. The idea of laying out a game map with the basics, of fleshing out a game so quickly and easily, appeals greatly. But because of my dyslexia, writing the more complex and longer sentences would be very difficult, as I tend to get phrases in the wrong places. Or get them in places the I7 compiler does not like. Also because words can overwhelm me, I cannot always see the logic underlying them. So I have had to be in the envious corner.

But, still, is it really brief and easy? I7 sentences are really macros that invoke more complex coding under the surface, in the VM. So by forcing programming into a NL interface it makes it so that complicated things in I7 just about have to be wordy. Because in simple declarative English it takes a lot of sentences to say complicated things. Without real conjunctive phrases, abbreviations, and programming conventions like brackets, punctuation, and other things, there is really no way to be brief in such English for complicated things.

Recently, answering Dave C.’s poll on raif, someone said that unfortunately I7 reminded them of unpleasant COBOL, and I knew exactly what he meant. (I had to learn COBOL way back when in college for a CS major.) Wordy, wordy  – COBOL takes a lot of words to say something simple, because everything but everything must be spelled out exactly. It gets very tedious. It gets tedious quickly.

Here is Eric’s response:

DistanceConnector [room1, room2, room3, room4, room5, room6];

It may need a little tweaking, but that is essentially it. Brief, brief, brief. It is with type of thing, frankly, that programming has it all over English and always will. Now, of course, this probably won’t work for non-programmers, not when they have to understand even more code, essentially understand programming, to be able to understand that statement. So it’s not really fair to compare I7 to T3, the design intents are quite different. But for programmers, what a relief!

So, for me, I7 is now out. T3 is back in. Now we shall see about that steep learning curve and if there is any way to lower it down a bit.

I7, on the other hand, has done something radical, something new – it has busted open the rather exclusive IF world composed of programmers and writer/programmers to a larger group, that of just writers. This is exciting as well as challenging. Whether it will work, that non-programming writers can learn to write IF and learn to love writing IF, I think has yet to be proven. But based on the last yearly comp it already seems to be happening.

Hats off to Graham and Emily! It’s a brave new world.

P.S. I will eventually be reading all of the I7 manual and making more comments in the future. I still think the manual would benefit from some diagrams explaining the syntax logic, like it is explained in the BNF, but simpler so a normal person can read it,  and with keyword highlighting.

I said nothing about T3 for a few weeks. Well, I was wrong. I’ve decided to stick to I6 for a current game, because I know how to do some tricky things in I6. But T3 is actually great.

Unfortunately, this may be hard to see because of all the manuals, not having a good, simple tutorial, and such a massive library. I am about 1/4th of the way through the Tour Guide (which I cannot seriously recommend, but if you want to learn T3 it is just about required. More on that later.)

However, T3 has a logic and beauty that programmers, and probably only mainly programmers, will appreciate. The design philosophy though is a tad debatable. Whereas T2 had basically only two library include files, but was extremely customizable by the game writer, T3 has numerous library include files (I have not counted them yet). It is also quite customizable by the game writer. But the overall philosophy is quite different. The parser itself is included in the library (so it can be customizable as well).

The philosophy change, however, goes even deeper than that. Everything but everything (including the kitchen sink) is in the library. The attitude seems to be why make the game writer reinvent the wheel? Let’s do the wheel for him/her. And templates are used which really cut down on coding. In fact, with templates, a T3 game could take as little time to write as an I7 game.  

The problem is, and it IS a problem, sorry, (I am getting negative feedback on the if-mud about carping, but I don’t like being censored), is for the game writer to KNOW something is already in the library. That something in the library already, there for use, maybe straight out of the box, maybe with only a little customizing. So the game writer is in danger, not a serious danger :-), but in danger of creating their own code to duplicate something that already exists.

I can’t speak as to structures yet, what T3 can and cannot do that way, but I think it can do just about anything any game writer would ever want. And I am not sure I will continue learning it – the learning curve is quite steep. But I suspect I will read all the manuals. I suspect I will read all of the I7 manual, as well. I cannot decide between the two systems right now and want to get a better feel for both.

However, I can say that T3 is probably worth the effort that went into it, singly and jointly. Now if someone would just write a good, simple beginner’s manual…

more people would be willing to tackle it.

Doe’s Course of Study to Learn T3 to come later. 

Well, three posts one right after the other. I will try not to be so chatty in the future.

I mentioned the problem with not all examples not being “open” at the same time on the if-mud and found out that the reason why is each html page is actually 3-4 pages. For instance: one page with no examples showing, one page with the first example showing, another page with the first example not showing, but the second example showing. Huh. Some people were intrigued and may or may not work on scripts to combine pages so all examples will show at the same time.

Until then, however, if I was unclear, opening pages in separate tabs works. And using Firefox and an extension to print all open tabs, works. The problem is just that to print the examples one has to keep clicking examples and doing a select print. (Because they will not all “show,” be “open” at the same time.)

So a work around was suggested to me and I suggest it to you. Print the hmtl as html. But download the all text version and print out the examples from that. Still tedious, but I suspect (although I haven’t tried it yet), less tedious. One still has to correlate the examples to the pages, but I suppose the numbering system will make that not TOO MUCH of a chore. Who am I kidding, it’s still a chore.

Better than nothing, I guess. What would be preferable is if the I7 manual be created/reformatted to have all the examples visible at one time from the get-go.