Gold Machine

The pangs of nostalgia.

This is not your daddy’s Infocom

While it has pained me to say so, 1987 Infocom was a company in decline. I mean this is both artistic and commercial senses. Infocom’s best years in terms of revenue became more and more distant. Leather Goddesses of Phobos, which preceded Hollywood Hijinx, would prove to be their last certified “gold” game.

While I do not wish to disparage anyone’s personal favorite, Infocom would release only one more great, groundbreaking game: 1987’s Plundered Hearts. The rest are not all “bad,” of course, but we must concede that Infocom was no longer a driving force in the evolution of narrative games. Let’s not argue about Beyond Zork today: it will get its own series in due time. Even if one does believe that Beyond Zork represents an important moment in the history of narrative games, the difference between ten out of twelve and eleven out of twelve does not meaningfully change the character of Infocom’s final two years. Playing Infocom games had become a nostalgic experience, a remembrance.

Unlike Infocom, Sierra had diversified, publishing games from other studios, including historic titles like Ultima II: The Revenge of the Enchantress. A shortcoming of Infocom’s leadership was that many members almost certainly did not keep up with the wider world of video games. These were businesspersons and computer science professionals that did not understand the shifting realities of the market. It isn’t even clear how many implementers played computer games.

A shortcoming of Infocom’s board was that, is that many members almost certainly did not understand the wider world of video games.

Infocom’s reliance on the Z-Machine, which once afforded considerable market advantages became limiting as microcomputer diversity diminished. The Z-machine additionally hindered Infocom’s ability to port advanced graphical and audio features across platforms.

The most common narrative regarding the downfall of Infocom centers not only failed business project Cornerstone but also the mistaken priorities of Infocom’s leadership. We will return to that theory at the conclusion of the Gold Machine project, but for now it must be said that Cornerstone or not, a non-trivial number of players were buying games published elsewhere for reasons that Infocom was slow in addressing.

We all like a good parser game. Were that untrue, I wouldn’t have written this essay, and you wouldn’t be reading it! However, a critic must bear in mind that these games were made for a 1980s audience by a 1980s company. The arc of Infocom’s fortunes matters. The interests of customers matter. Bearing these factors in mind, the nostalgic nature of Hollywood Hijinx shines through. Emily Short characterizes it as “solidly entertaining entry in the basic genre of Treasure Hunt in a Relative’s Weird, Puzzle-trapped House.” Elsewhere, Jimmy Maher attempts to put a brave face on things: “…while his game is far from the best of the pack, Hollywood Dave Anderson is one of the vanishingly small number of people on the planet who can hold up an Infocom box with his name on the cover.”

We all like a good parser game. Were that untrue, I wouldn’t have written this essay, and you wouldn’t be reading it!

The worldbuilding (a tribute to b-movies across the decades), the mechanics (widget-centered treasure hunt), and the general background radiation (the Infocom equivalent of The Beatles’s “Get Back”) all recall better days. If this assessment sounds condescending and pat, then I have failed to cast my feelings into words. Hollywood Hijinx is a work that knows what it is, who it is for, and where it comes from. While it is not thematically rich in the way Zork is, it revels in Zork‘s legacy in the way Zork once paid tribute to Adventure.

Further Thoughts

As I mentioned in my introduction to Hollywood Hijinx, it makes sense to discuss it in terms of its historical conditions of production. Yes, Infocom’s diminishing prospects evoke nostalgic pains. We see that in its puzzles, setting, and worldbuilding. The Tinsel World magazine, with its black-and-white photos often feels, rhetorically, like something from an earlier age. A photo of 1980s action hero Buck Palace looks like one of a young Elvis Presley. The entire production, game and feelies both, connotes sentimental cheese from previous decades.

Mechanically, Hollywood Hijinx recalls the untroubled early years of Infocom. Perhaps its most notable example of this mood is an astoundingly large hedge maze of the sort that many players had come to loathe. A previous post discusses its play experience. Here, I draw attention to the fact of its existence. The maze is a throwback, or at least it feels like one. What seems like a “good old fashioned maze” is, in fact, not like Infocom’s older mazes, which usually involved interesting gimmicks rather than exhaustive mapping. Even Zork I‘s maze, which may boast Infocom’s lowest enjoyment-to-effort ratio, had a thief that interfered with our attempts at breadcrumbing through it. Nevertheless, the hedge maze feels like a relic of yesteryear. Whether such impressions are instances of the Mandela effect or not, they represent the subjective experiences of many players.

Regarding Hollywood Dave Anderson

But what of its author, Hollywood Dave Anderson? Jimmy Maher’s treatment of Hollywood Hijinx is, in significant part, about Anderson’s important role in creating and sustaining the corporate culture of Infocom in its best days. Only Steve Meretzky enjoys a similar place in the hearts of critics and historians. Anderson is first mentioned in Infocom’s company newsletter in issue 3.2, where he is credited as a “non-contributing editor.” Issue 3.3 features an article about Infocom’s softball league, which was organized by Anderson.

Among the heroic on the team was “Hollywood” Dave Anderson, product testing supervisor, who found more holes in the opponents’ defense than in the first version of Seastalker. HDA’s dress code (Hawaiian shirts five days a week) determined the team uniform, but his reputation as a swinger also applied to his batting, as he again took the Babe Flathead Award for the second straight season, with five homeruns.

Issue 4.3 contains an interactive fiction “transcript” about softball with Anderson as a “player.”

>WHO AM I?
You are “Hollywood” Dave Anderson, HDA for short, which you’re not. No, you tower over most trolls and second basemen. And, forsooth, you have a not undeserved reputation as a slugger, be it leaning over a bar or leaning over home plate. For the moment it’s the latter: You’re the batter. But this time something goes awry. Maybe it was the too-poor grip on the bat. Maybe it was a too-firm grip on the beer can. You sent a lil’ nubber up along the third base line. First base is northeast of here, and you can see the ice chest to the east.
Ok, Hollywood, what do you want to do now?

Looking back as we do, it must be said: recalling Anderson’s exploits is nostalgic by nature, as it is impossible to separate him from Infocom’s character which was, in many senses, gaming’s Avalon.

Conclusions

Reading back over this series, I find myself feeling sentimental. Could Infocom, in some other timeline, stayed ahead of the market’s curve? Infocom was filled with smart, capable people. What might have they done with Sierra’s board? It is hard to guess, but whatever the truth might be, Infocom had for a time an extraordinary corporate culture and fantastic QA and creative teams. Hollywood Hijinx, perhaps more than another Infocom game, is a reflection of its author’s place within Infocom. It is funny, likable, and filled with the sorts of puzzles that brought so many early players through the door. It is, if this makes sense, Infocom’s most Infocom game.

Hollywood Hijinx, perhaps more than another Infocom game, is a reflection of its author’s place within Infocom.

While this project has granted me many new insights, my general assessments of individual Infocom games have not changed much. My I do not like, for instance, The Witness more than I once did. Sorcerer, Trinity, and Hollywood Hijinx are notable exceptions, as returning to those games did evoke new reactions and feelings in me. In this last case, my assessment is more positive than it once was. It is hard to fault an Infocom game for looking back in 1987, just as we look back, here, today. I like it as a critic more than I do as a player, but puzzle hounds will likely enjoy returning for one more treasure hunt.

A note: Liz Cyr-Jones is credited with creating the initial concept for Hollywood Hijinx.

Next

What happens when Steve Meretzky isn’t there to save a Douglas Adams game from development hell?