Type Or Click?

[Tawmis]

So DPX's post over in the CONQUEST thread made me think of this... (I probably asked before... My memory is pretty much non existent at times!)

But what's your preference for Sierra games? Take the video quality completely out of the equation. Do you prefer typing in the games or do you prefer the point and click interface?

And why?

[DeadPoolX]

I suppose I prefer the point-and-click interface for its simplicity and ease of use (i.e. you don't have to type in the EXACT word or phrase the game wants). However, the text parser did allow for some interesting and often funny situations. You could type all sorts of weird stuff and the game would usually respond.

I absolutely hated the original text parser interface used in AGI games. You had to respond really fast since the action continued while you were typing. More often than not, you had to know what was coming before you knew it was there. In other words, you had to die once, know what was going to happen and be ready ahead of time.

[BBP]

I'm not a native speaker, and even though my English is pretty good (watched way too much tv as a kid), in typing games I find it terribly hard to think of the right words.

But typing, on the other hand, is what made LSL7 so much more fun! I mean, type "fashion" in Other... when talking to Jamie Lee.
And I really like the keyboard interface of Grim Fandango, even if it's a little hard to learn.
Plus I had RSI once, which never really disappears, and if you play a game you do tend to forget to pay attention to your body signals... Many games can get a little too mouse intensive, like GK3 when you swivel the camera a lot. (well... you know... that's so much fun!)

(Worst offender in the Adventure category of Too Much Mouse I've encountered yet is Fort Boyard: The Challenge. It has several balance mazes, sliders, pixel hunts, something called "crossbow" where you have to spin your mouse in circles for a minute, and something called "alchemist" where you have to alternately hold the left and right buttons in a rhythmic pattern.)

[Collector]

The main thing that I dislike about the text parser is that unless you use a noun/verb that the programmer thought of, it will not accept it. I hate being distracted form the game by the guessing game of what did they decide to call "blank". Then if the message you get is "You cannot do that yet" or "You are not close enough", but the real problem is that the words you used are not in the game's vocabulary, you don't know if you are not in the right spot, don't have the right inventory item or not using the right word. I guess that I wouldn't mind the text parser so much if the vocabulary was extensive enough and the game's messages let you know exactly what kind of "error" you had.

[AndreaDraco]

Definitely prefer the point-and-click interface. And I love Sierra's many different icons in games such as Sins of the Fathers. There are, of course, merits to the typing too but, as BBP said, being a non-native speaker, I sometimes found really hard to guess the right wording (an example being, in KQ1, what you have to write when you're near the well - it was so damn hard!).

[Tawmis]

For the non native speakers... would it help you select type if the games came in your native language? Or would you still prefer point and click?

[Jules]

DPX has said mostly what was on my mind with the exception of annoyances of the text parser. Even though it was a pain trying over and over again, if you didn't type fast enough, or wasn't ready for the next screen, it made you love those games because of the constant replays, and trial and error. When the game was completed, you felt that much prouder. What kind of glory would you get by defeating a simple game? All the sweat and tears made the game worth playing over and over again. You have the same aspect in some earlier point and click games as well but the text parser made it even more difficult.

My choice: point and click

[Fender_178]

Even though I like both the parser and the point and click interfaces. I do prefer the point and click interfaces because you dont have to figure out what to type in those annoying time consuming and frustrating situations where you are trying to type a command in the game wants one way and you type it in this way and it gives you a generic error. Or in a game such as KQ3 during the spells and you misspell something and you goof up the spell because of it the point and click interface you dont have to know how to spell. The point and click interface you dont have to think about what to type but what to do.

The one thing that I dont like about the point and click interface that you cant type anything funny and get funny responses like you can with the parser interface.

[Tawmis]

It's very interesting that so far, I pretty much stand alone with the typing as a preference.

Perhaps because my experience is pretty much limited to Sierra games - but I can't recall where in the old AGI games (off the top of my head) where having something ready to type or else you died.

I think the most "intense" thing that is even remotely close to this would be in Space Quest 3. When you're on the conveyor belt headed towards the grinder. There's only a little space between you and that grinder - but the action stops every time you begin to type. (But that was intense! Because if you kept getting it wrong it inched you closer and closer to that dreaded grinder!)

The only time I can really think where you had to type something while an action was happening that might result in your death - was when you would step into the river or ocean (like in King's Quest 1, 2, and 4) - and you had to type "swim" - but that was pretty obvious.

I can't recall anything, where you walked onto a screen and had to rapidly type "block dragon's breath with golden shield" or be instantly fried.

I think I enjoyed the text much more because the sentences you needed to type were typically very simple. "Put rock in sock" or "use sock as sling" or something to that effect. It never required anything overly complex. Usually VERB+ITEM+ACTION was all it was ever really looking for. (There's, naturally, a few exceptions, like in the airplane in LSL2, but that's an admitted glitch because of some kind of space issue).

I think my dislike of the point and click comes from the fact that the first one I recall playing was King's Quest V. I loved the graphics back then. A huge improvement over KQ4, naturally. The opening scene was nothing short of amazing. But once the actual game started, I found myself looking at the screen and trying to figure things out. And when I couldn't - I'd click all over the screen (or used everything in my inventory all over the screen) until the character reacted to something. I think once it went to type and click it became too ... easy.

I do think that games like GABRIEL KNIGHT 2 and PHANTASMAGORIA needed the point and click. It added to the realism of being able to click on items and control the character in the movie.

But over all, I have always preferred the typing games. Not to mention, being hooked on Sierra games way back in the day, was undoubtedly one of the MAIN reasons I have the rapid typing speed I have now. Amazing how often typing things like "put rock in sock", "use sock as sling", "search body", "get keycard" make me VERY familiar with the keyboard!

[dotkel50]

I can't type worth a damn...I have to look at the keyboard when i'm typing, so point and click is my preference. I went to a very small high school so we didn't learn typing if we were in the college prep course....i don't know why, it would have come in handy in college. I still can't type after all these many years.

[Datadog]

Still prefer point-n-click for it's simplicity. Parsers forced you to "guess" too much. I mean, when it comes to something like a cupboard, you'd normally think OPEN. But then a lot of parsers games want you to PUSH, PULL, CLIMB, LOOK UNDER, LOOK ON TOP OF, LOOK BEHIND, and DANCE ON the stupid thing. Granted, the freedom to do all that is nice, but unnecessary when with a HAND click, your character should be competent enough to come up with whatever is relevant to them at the time.

[BBP]

For the non native speakers... would it help you select type if the games came in your native language? Or would you still prefer point and click?

It would help gameplay very much, but in general, playing translated-into-Dutch games is dreadful. Voice-acting often gets very bad, puns can't be translated and are often not replaced, the game atmosphere gets ruined, the English text pokes through the Dutch, etc etc. Don't think it's worth it.

I prefer of all the LSL7 approach because it finds such a great balance. Otherwise I really couldn't make up my mind between classic text adventures and point and click. I don't think the LSL1 remake worked with the point & click, made it much too easy. So much of how well the controls are, depends on the design of the game itself. I don't think picking either of them as favourite is very useful. They have their advantages and their disadvantages and it's up to the designer to pick a system that works best with how the puzzles of his game work. And it's up to the game team to make a proper text parser with a big enough vocabulary, or a point & click interface that is never problematic (as in GK2 when you pick up the coal before you open the oven door).

[Maiandra]

Although I hated having to "guess what the game was thinking" in the typing interface, I liked how it was more natural in dialogue. For example, in QfG2, you could ask about what you wanted when you wanted to ask about it. You didn't have to wait for some kind of trigger to open up the option in the dialogue tree like you did in later games. Plus, I have fond memories of the Infocom text adventures.

Although I find the point and click interface easier to use, I do slightly prefer the text parser for the freedom it allows. After a while I just learned how to think like the text parser. That seems kind of scary when I say it, but it's true.

I also remember trying to use some paper from our dot matrix printer to draw a map of the great underground empire.

[JasefWisener]

I prefer typing as long as the action stops when you begin typing. My typing reflexes just aren't fast enough to type in a time limit.

[DeadPoolX]

Although I hated having to "guess what the game was thinking" in the typing interface, I liked how it was more natural in dialogue. For example, in QfG2, you could ask about what you wanted when you wanted to ask about it. You didn't have to wait for some kind of trigger to open up the option in the dialogue tree like you did in later games. Plus, I have fond memories of the Infocom text adventures.

That's funny you should mention QFG2. The VGA remake has three different interface options: text-parser, point-and-click and a combination of both.

I think that's the absolute best way to handle it. Of course, that requires extra work, but it certainly does allow for more flexibility for the player.

I also remember trying to use some paper from our dot matrix printer to draw a map of the great underground empire.

I think everyone did that (or something similar) in those days. I know I did. My Dad did as well; I clearly remember the maps he made on graph paper.

I'm glad we don't need to do that nowadays. We still can if we want, but there's little reason to do so. Some games, such as Dragon Age, are simply too complex to map out efficiently.

I prefer typing as long as the action stops when you begin typing. My typing reflexes just aren't fast enough to type in a time limit.

I feel the same way, although I do know how to type quite quickly. Maia reminded of one experience (among many) where the "keep-the-action-moving-and-type" method really sucked: the alien in SQ2. If it kissed you, you'd eventually hatch a baby alien and that would kill you. In order to prevent that, you had to type extremely fast.