> Answering that adventure games aren't the real world is just restating
> the obvious. The interesting point is _why_ it's different from the
> real world in precisely that way. Is it just for historical reasons -
> the first adventures were treasure hunts and others followed th
> ebeaten track?
Yes I think this is one reason. Many IF writers have tended to follow the
`beaten track' -- look at all the homages to/ripoffs of Adventure/Zork.
But also, isn't another reason that in nearly all IF the player is
(necessarily) the central character. The world revolves around the player's
actions. Whereas in real life each individual is a tiny part of society as a
whole and generally behaves according to the dictates of that society either
through an inherent sense of responsibility to other individual members of
the society (and thus to the society as a whole) or through fear of the
possible outcomes of his acting against these dictates (ie, punishment
inflicted by society upon the individual in retribution for actions
previously committed by the individual against society).
In summary, In RL the well-being of society is central while that of the
individual is peripheral. In IF the individual supplants society, and
society is thrown out the window -- IF provides a playground for selfishness
(or a release for a freed imagination, depending on your point of view).
There, that might help. If only I understood what I've just written... =-)
--Jools jools@arnod.demon.co.uk