Talk:Adventureland (video game)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Morgan Leigh (talk | contribs) at 02:13, 4 October 2023 (personal attack, misrepresentation, removal of accurate cited information). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Untitled

I've moved this article from Adventureland (VIC-20 game) to Adventureland (computer game). Adventureland was first published for the Radio Shack TRS-80 Model I. The VIC-20 was only one of several computers to which it was ported in the early 80s. Clampton 20:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did it get moved to (video game)? It's not a video game, it doesn't even have video, it's a text game. (computer game) was infinitely more appropriate for this. 76.226.101.4 (talk) 05:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For some lamebrained reason, wikipedia decided one day that there's no such thing as a computer game and they're all video games.69.212.127.147 (talk) 09:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All computer games are video games if they display anything on a 'video' screen. This was the original meaning of video game in the 70's.

"Low importance?"

I find it very difficult to believe that the members of the Wiki Adventure Games Project have chosen to assess this article as of "low importance." This is one of the most seminal and historic adventure games of all time! Its from 1978, for crying out loud, and thus preceeded Zork One: The Great Underground Empire by two years. Unless I am mistaken, and I very much don't think that I am, this was the very first commercially available work of interactive fiction! Possibly even the first commercially available adventure game of any kind (and if not THE first, it was certainly among the first five or so). Colossal Cave Adventure was written several years earlier, but was not commercially released until 1982, it should be noted. This article should, at the very least, be granted Mid-level importance. I mean, come on! KevinOKeeffe (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most likey the people involved in the "project" are of the current breed of Interaction Fiction writers/players. Adams' works are derided by most of these people for being too "simplistic." Today's IF must be artsy-fartsy or it's no good. They don't appreciate what a technical achievement Adventureland was at the time (an adventure game in 16KB!). Nor do they have the technical expertise to realize the merits of its design. Adams was the FIRST to write his games not as standalone programs, but as data objects embedded in an interpreter. He was the first to create and utilize a language specifically designed for the creation of adventure games. Interactive Fiction (IF) authors of today (for the most part) can't appreciate that. Their life has been made easy by smart people like Graham Nelson and Andrew Plotkin already providing the language and tools. They didn't, and probably couldn't create the tools themselves, and probably wouldn't be writing IF. Scott Adams SHOULD be given more credit in the IF world then he is. He is as important to the genre as Crowthers and Woods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.106.35 (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"version" of Colossal Cave?

The article reads, "Adventureland, Adams's first program, is a slightly scaled-down, machine-language version of the “original” Adventure program.[6]"

In what sense is Adventureland a version of Colossal Cave? --Allen (talk) 03:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the sense of reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.152.178 (talk) 03:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I played a little of Adventureland just now, and it doesn't look like a version of Colossal Cave (in the sense of reality, that is). --Allen (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found an online copy of Dragon #42. Mark Herro, in his "The Electric Eye" column, does not distinguish between Crowther's Adventure (the origins of which he misstates) and text adventure games in general. Hence his erroneous statement, plagiarized by this article, that Adams' "first program, ADVENTURELAND, is a slightly scaled-down, machine-language version of the 'original' ADVENTURE program." This was an understandable mistake for Herro, since the field he was covering was so new in 1980, but not for us. I suggest we remove the claim from this article. --Allen (talk) 05:47, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Indrian First I have to say that your comment "As the author of the thesis added it, I suspect this was more about inserting the thesis into this article for publicity than providing a critical citation that only this source could provide" constitutes a personal attack and is nothing but supposition. In fact I noticed that nowhere in the article does it mention that the game is a single player game and so I added that relevant piece of information and a citation for it. We have had this discussion elsewhere before so you know this is a PhD thesis, not a masters thesis, and you know that WP:SELFCITE makes it clear that it is ok for a Wikipedia editor who is an academic author to cite their own work in an article if the source is published and peer reviewed, and you know this work is published and peer reviewed, as you yourself pointed out! So I have to wonder why it is that you have decided to misrepresent that work here and to make an accusation about my motives that is a long way from presuming good intent. I suggest the information and its citation be returned to the article.Morgan Leigh | Talk 02:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]