Infocom’s code-porting tools for Zork and other games have been found | Hacker News Reader

Infocom’s code-porting tools for Zork and other games have been found

arstechnica.com

150 pointsPaulHoule30 comments

Go straight to the source:

https://blog.zarfhome.com/2023/11/infocom-interpreters

Thanks! Recent and related:

Zork Zcode Interpreters Appear Out of Nowhere - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38361247 - Nov 2023 (14 comments)

Infocom-zcode-terps: Historical source code for Infocom's Z-machine interpreters - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38326878 - Nov 2023 (24 comments)

Microsoft consumes Activision; and a plea - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37893794 - Oct 2023 (160 comments)

  >N
  There is a boss blocking your path demanding a C 64 floppy
   There is a serial cable
   There is a DEC 20
 >

Jokes aside they seem to call these games “interactive fiction” now. I did like the infocom games (I had Zork on Apple floppy). I played this one a few years back and was surprised how far they’ve come

Lost pig:

Details:

https://ifdb.org/viewgame?id=mohwfk47yjzii14w

Hey it’s online!

https://pr-if.org/play/lostpig/

They always called them interactive fiction. They used to run ads on NPR

They even ran a contest in their quarterly newspaper where they admitted the name "interactive fiction" was clunky and solicited suggestions. Nothing stuck.

(8-year-old me mailed sooo many comic strips, all quietly rejected… le sigh) http://www.digitpress.com/library/newsletters/newzorktimes/n...

that really brings back the memories of how things 'used to be'.

i like the mail-in coupon for a Relational Database that ran on a PC, and it cost inflation-adjusted $1,400 but you could get it over half off with two games.

You mean they sponsored programming on NPR?

What distinction are you trying to make? That’s “advertising.”

You must not listen to NPR a lot. They go out of their way to not call it advertising. They are listener funded programming. It's okay if you don't get the reference.

Oh, I got the reference. They can call it whatever they want, but it is still advertising, and any distinction to the contrary is pointless and misleading.

Well that's fun, I burnt the farm down though...

Hilarious:

> Do strings like com1:9600,n,8 turn you on? You might be a serial port!

For anyone interested, there is a great book based on the infocom game called The Zork Chronicles by George Alec Effinger. I’m presently working with the rights owner to produce an audio version of the book.

"For anyone interested, there is a great book ..."

There is also a very well made documentary by Jason Scott[1]:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Lamp

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Scott

Is that something you've done before? What is involved in doing that? Sounds interesting.

How would you recommend interested low-vision persons keep abreast of audio version progress?

> Zork running on an Amiga at the Computerspielemuseum in Berlin, Germany.

Did someone press the "green mode" button on that 1084 monitor or did Infocom games really use a greenish color palette on the Amiga?

The minimise button of the GUI is in green too, so I say green mode.

This article is a bit strange. It seems to completely ignore the existence of Frotz [1], which has been around since the 1990’s. You can run any Z machine games you like on Frotz and I’m not aware of any compatibility issues. So I find it puzzling why the opening paragraph of the article would say something like this:

The source code for many of Infocom's foundational text-parsing adventure games, including Zork, has been available since 2019. But that code doesn't do anything for modern computers, nor even computers of the era, when it comes to actually running the games.

[1] https://davidgriffith.gitlab.io/frotz/

It doesn't ignore it; it explicitly says "Lots of work has been done in open source realms to create modern, and improved, versions of these interpreters for pretty much every device imaginable."

That opening sentence may be a bit clumsy, but what it's trying to say is that the games don't run directly on hardware on any of these machines, but instead runs in an interpreter.

Right, but those interpreters have been available for decades. That opening paragraph is an attempt to generate hype based on a false premise. That a sentence tacked on at the end of the second paragraph completely obviates the problem set up by the introduction only underlines the point: this article is much ado about nothing (blogspam) so we’d be better off linking to and discussing the original source.

The details about the original interpreter are what is most interesting for the Hacker News audience, and that’s been buried by that clumsy attempt at sensationalist journalism. For anyone here interested in playing the old games, my original comment gives them the details directly.

The point isn't that interpreters weren't available. It's that the original source wasn't available. The blog post talks about comments and variable names, that's what is valuable here.

But you said the article completely ignores it.

It sound like they found the original compiler/interpreter/toolchain for it.

Frotz seems to be a modern-ish re-implementation?

Yes, that’s all correct. My point is that if you’ve wanted to play Zork or other Infocom games on your modern computer, you’ve been able to do so for decades using Frotz. The article makes it sound like running the games had been impossible until now, which is not true.

The main reason the discovery of the original interpreter source code is interesting has nothing to do with running the games. It’s for historical interest and for anyone looking for some insight into the development process for an early example of a portable virtual machine. Unfortunately, the source code is light on such details.

> The article makes it sound like running the games had been impossible until now, which is not true.

Good luck getting Frotz running on a C64.

Not Frotz, but ozmoo, I could run some Z5 games with patience.

Now, for v8 games, even with a REU they're really slow.

It also confuses the difference between the Z-Machine and the Zork Implementation Language (ZIL). The Z-Machine code is the part that is platform independent. ZIL is a Lisp-like language that Infocom used to write their games, but it just ran on their in-house system (although recently people have recreated the ZIL compiler for hobbyists) -- it was complied into Z-Machine code. But there really isn't a fixed connection between the two. Today, most Z-Machine interactive fiction is written in Inform rather than ZIL. But Z-machine interpreters don't need to know how the Z-Machine code was generated, much as the JVM and .NET systems don't have to know where their code came from.

If you can force yourself to the end of the second paragraph:

Lots of work has been done in open source realms to create modern, and improved, versions of these interpreters for pretty much every device imaginable.

The InfoTaskForce interpreter was one of the earliest 3rd party z machines. That dates to 1987 and was originally developed on the Macintosh but was ported to DOS, Unix, Amiga, Atari, ... Zip (Mark Howell) was also highly influential and ported everywhere. The only definitive date I can find is for it is version 2 (late 1993) but there are usenet references to it in 1992. Frotz was a re-write of zip and dates to 1995 or so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com