|
|
|
|
|
by kenjackson
1092 days ago
|
|
Is natural language simply mean using words? Is SQL natural language? I think what makes it a natural language is that it follows natural language rules, which Infocomm games surely did not. Furthermore, Infocomm games used basically 100% precanned responses. It would do the rudimentary things like check if a window was open so if you looked at a wall it might say the window on that wall was open or closed, but that's it. I don't understand how that can make it a natural language interface. > This is a puzzling comment. The UI for Zork has nothing at all to do with Dragon's Lair. In both games there's a set path you follow. You follow those commands you win, if not, you lose. There's no semantically equivalent way to complete the game. I remember spending most of my time with Infocomm games doing things like "look around the field" and it telling me "I don't know the word field" -- and I'm screaming because it just told me I'm in an open field! The door is blocked... blocked with what?! You can't answer me that?! There were a set of commands and objects it wanted you to interact with. That's it. That's not natural language, any more than SQL is. It's a structured language with commands that look like English verbs. |
|
Not to say Infocom included AI. They just used a lot of talent and playtesting to make games that felt more open-ended.