Unlike the Eliza programs, this one has taught itself what to say by mining a deep corpus of text, so creates a richer world, and seems to have some sense of memory (correct me if I'm wrong).
Whatever you throw at it, will probably happen
If there were more structure, maybe the sibling comment about imagination would be more on point. e.g. Scribblenauts, a game with an impressive dictionary of things that can be drawn on command and interact with the world, full of possibilities, yet if you're just going at it from a pure solve-the-puzzle perspective you can beat basically everything by spamming "black hole".
I don't really like either kinds of games but I think I understand the appeal...
Not to sound cruel, but, maybe you're missing the fun in imagination?
I do find games with no rules tedious and not fun. The card game Fluxx, for example, I cannot stand.
I love the jankiness of these early ML games/stories/etc. and that's what you're missing.
I'd say a closer analogy would be Calvinball, where you just make it up as you go along.
Furthermore, I was dismayed when I learned (upon first time playing) that "It's easy to get started: there are no rules to read!" actually means "you spend the entire game reading rules!"
I acknowledge that this is not a very social (and somewhat rude) way to play this social game, which is why I typically politely decline to play it.
You can plan strategy. Whether it’s more or less likely to be thwarted I can’t really say. I try to be flexible with a few plans. The main difference is you are more likely to be accidentally thwarted than in other games.
With no sense of linear progression of time or cause and effect (you can say "discover holy grail" on your first turn and you're done), it feels like a stretch to call this a game. It's a game in the same sense as an Ouiji board is a game.
What am I missing?
0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21717515