To me a representation or story is: something that is a train like experience; a series of events driven, and pushed through concepts and themes that build to produce some kind of point/elaborate on a specific experience. Furthermore, its crucial to acknowledge the fact this is all FIXED, because attempted, by an author is conveying an EXACT experience.

As for defining simulation: it is an experience based on experimentation to produce certain results, at times the gamer/user doesn’t know their input will produce. An example could then be me playing this game! Or any game for that matter that I truly do not understand. As I try to learn, I attempt different things to see how close they get to me the ultimate goal (at the time or through the longevity of the game). This too leaves the possibility of having many different fates, the one I only “know” is the one I created. For a narrative/story, the event only really changes based on my personal beliefs or life experiences. In conclusion, simulating is a more of an educating practice in comparison to its’ counterpart.

In Zork, I see it as both ways. For it being a representation, one is lead into this game through a manual that sets the scene. The structure of the game is almost as if it is an electronic version of choose your own adventure, or any other interactive text. The game has parameters that force events, because other options are limited due to impassible mountains.

On the contrary there isn’t one exact way to go through this game. One learns to get through this rabbit hole of a game at times, one must remember the actions and events that help the story to progress. It is a goal of the gamer though to do so in the most minimal amount of turns possible.

I KNOW THIS IS A GAME, BUT GOODNESS THE MAZE IS A PERFECT REPRESENTATION OF HOW I FEEL.