Archived from groups: rec.games.int-fiction (More info?)
Review of Earth and Sky 3: Luminous Horizon
By Paul O'Brian
Awards: 1st Place, IF Comp 2004
In a post on r.a.i.f., I recently proposed a set of criteria for
reviewing or possibly "grading" interactive fiction. These
criteria primarily apply to games that emphasize the "story" aspect
of IF as opposed to basic "adventuring." My agenda is to promote
development and analysis of interactive stories to see if that helps
move IF upward & rightward along the artistic maturity curve. The
standards, consequently, are meant to be the "minimum" for what
comprises a modern, high quality IF story. As an exercise in using
these criteria, I am therefore grading the top 3 games in the IF Comp
to see how they would measure up. This is the first in the series,
which will cover Luminous Horizon, Blue Chairs, and All Things Devours.
I am starting with EAS3:LH not only because it won the IF Comp, but
because Paul is the one who suggested that I start doing reviews of IF
games in that original thread. So here I go.
NOTE TO OTHER POSTERS: Feel free to question both my criteria and my
conclusions. I'm just doing this to see if the approach has value
when applied consistently to multiple games. So fire at will.
Genre: Superhero.
Storyline: Earth (Austin) and Sky (Emily) are brother and sister on a
quest to find their missing parents, who are of a scientific bent.
They get their powers (super strength for Earth; flying, shooting
electric blasts, and creating fog for Sky) from the special suits their
parents invented and left behind when they disappeared. Action takes
place in an isolated "fortress" of the alien enemy who has captured
their parents. This, the 3rd in the series, provides the culminating
story and final solution to the "where are our parents?" dilemma
first posed in the original.
--Criteria 1: Does the game deconstruct the rooms paradigm so
effectively that no map is required to play the game? If not, does the
story itself have elements that actually focus the PC on geography, so
that a map is necessary to the story itself, not just to the gameplay?
If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
EAS3:LH uses basic map directions for movement, but the story is
compact enough that no mapping exercise is required. You have to
remember the layout to manage the final sequence, but it is simple
enough that there is no problem with this. The compact dimensions of
the world map keep you focused on the gameplay and the puzzles instead
of direction finding. Nothing breakthrough, but competent use of the
world map to support the story. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 2: Does the author make game-related choices or
plot-advancing consequences inherent in the majority of actions the
player takes? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
There are several places in the story where your puzzle-solving
requirements can lead to some aimless wandering in search of clues, but
the game map is limited enough that the story thread is maintained.
The game doesn't force you forward, prod you, or give any major
unsolicited advice. However, the clever hint system that plays off the
ability to switch character identities usually keeps you moving.
"Talking to" your sibling gives you excellent hints at various
points. A number of scenes will play themselves out satisfactorily
without much brilliance on your part, as a result. While this is not
consistent throughout the game, and sometimes it may be too forced, I
think it meets the standard this criteria is trying to set. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 3: Does game play and choices made as a result advance the
player to multiple endings, with multiple paths to reach those endings,
in ways that are both supported by and supportive of the main story
trying to be told? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
There is really only one ending you are trying to reach, so this
criteria is difficult for EAS3:LH to meet. I would have liked to see
different paths through the game to get to that ending, but if there
were any significantly different avenues, I didn't find them. (Note
that I don't count "death" or "failure" as separate endings
or separate paths here.) In this type of game, having more than one
way to find/slay/escape the beast would be a plus. Thumbs down.
--Criteria 4: Is the story itself actually worth telling? Does it have
a narrative dynamic that would be worth relating in other media, so
that it is not purely a technical exercise? And is that dynamic
sustained throughout the course of the game so that the player
essentially *knows* the story, even if he/she doesn't fully understand
it or all its implications, on the first playthrough? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
Another difficult criteria for EAS3:LH to meet. Since this story is
serialized, you really don't get the impact of the "quest" Earth
& Sky are on unless you played the previous two games. While the
feelies associated with the game bring you up to date, I'm not sure
it passes the test for a stand alone exercise. I tried to imagine
playing the game without having played the others, and the best I can
come up with is that you might like the game, but you probably
wouldn't be entranced with the story at the point where it picks up
in EAS3:LH. A tough call, however, because the overall EAS story is
pretty decent and well-told. Thumb sideways.
--Criteria 5: Do commands -- including movement commands -- really
support the story, i.e., if you are using compass directions, is the
player using a compass to navigate with at the time? If not, do the
commands truly enhance the mimetic effect being achieved in the game?
Are uncommon commands natural to the story and the responses to
incorrect commands helpful? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
The special commands in EAS3:LH are those controlling Sky's flying
and fogging powers and the ability to switch characters (more on the
character switching below). They suited what was in the game and
indeed were required for effective gameplay. Although the author did
nothing with the basic compass direction movements, the game map was
small enough that they did not become intrusive or burdensome. There
is little need to wander back and forth through the landscape, even
when you're stuck. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 6: Does the author have sufficient control of the pacing,
the narrative, the hints, other authorial mechanisms such as
flashbacks, memories, event intrusion, etc., so that the player can't
ever really get stuck and therefore fail to finish the game? If yes,
thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
Like most games that require puzzles to be solved to move from one part
of the game to the next, EAS3:LH has some problems with pacing.
However, the hint system can get you through most of these without
making you feel like you have stepped out of the game to look at a
cheat sheet. You can become stuck, particularly on the final scene and
the one "family feud" scene, where you can die or fail repeatedly,
but your partner gamely tries to get you through this with his/her
actions and/or hints. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 7: Does the author use timing or turn-related events or
scene-cuts that give the player the appropriate forward momentum
necessary to move from scene to scene and complete the game? If not, is
a slow pace and relatively open player "wandering" reflective of the
story and how it is being told? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
The author uses the device of switching voices to a narrative or
voiceover of the bad guy's conversations with his minion(s) between
significant scenes, which helps you understand what is going on and
effectively connects the scenes together. The scene cuts come as
byproducts of puzzle solving, not intrusively or automatically, but
they feel natural and help the player visualize what's about to
happen in the next phase of the game. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 8: If puzzles are included, are they natural byproducts of
the world model or the interactions of the PC/NPCs? Are the puzzles
absolutely necessary to advance the story being told? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
The puzzles work in the context of the story being told, although they
weren't what I would call "brilliant" puzzles (you don't have
to be crazy smart to solve them). Since the point of this, however, is
that the heroes have super powers, the typical version of a locked door
puzzle can be solved by simply entering "break door." Although E&S
are scientists in training, the game doesn't go out of its way to
require scientific analysis to solve any of the puzzles. That might
actually be a lost opportunity. The biggest complaint about the
puzzles involves the "family feud" scene, where guessing the right
sequence of actions is difficult even when you know what you need to
do, more or less. Eventually, you figure it out though. Overall, a
somewhat limp thumbs up.
--Criteria 9: Does the game take risks in switching viewpoints
(varying the PC view between one or more of the game characters), using
different voice at different times (applying 1st, 2nd, 3rd and/or
stream of consciousness, perhaps all in one game), and/or breaking with
any other standard PC/NPC conventions (look, inventory, x me, etc.)?
Are those risks successful in the context of the game? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
The game succeeds rather brilliantly here, by actually *requiring* that
you switch viewpoints (player's choice as to when) between Earth and
Sky as the game progresses. Some puzzles, in fact, require you to
switch from one to the other in order to finish solving them. Since
you also get a third-person or "listening in" view of the bad guy
and one of his minions in the scene cuts, this is about as robust a way
to meet this criteria as any game out there. Since the hint system is
also implemented as a conversation between the two characters, this
game really shows the way in terms of breaking with the basic
conventions in these areas. Definite thumbs up.
--Criteria 10: Is it well-written, well-told, well-edited,
well-tested? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
EAS3:LH is fairly well-written - believable in its switches between
different voices, consistent in its level and degree of description, no
obvious typos or mangling of English, etc. Since the story arc
actually transcends three games, of which this is the third, it is not
clear to me that the story would be "well-told" if the author
hadn't included a lot of introductory info and feelies. But
certainly there are no major, unintended gaps in story progression.
The game seems to be edited appropriately and the gameplay meets most
of the tests. Only one annoying thing occurs: if one of the E&S kids
has something, the other can't automatically take it from him/her
when it is needed (e.g., >Take new gizmo. reply "That seems to belong
to Austin." Which is annoying, since presumably these two are a
team). But otherwise, well done. Thumbs up.
--Extra Credit Criteria: Does the game break new ground in the story
being told, new genres, new plots, new structures, etc.? Does it avoid
complete cliches (amnesia, underground empires, etc.)? If yes, extra
credit. If no, then no extra credit.
The superhero genre is not new, but is rarely this well-executed.
EAS3:LH makes a place for itself with its nice variations on the theme,
but it doesn't really take any real risks. It avoids clichés, but
doesn't really deserve any extra credit unless you like the way
certain cartoon sound effects (SKREE!) etc., were implemented as
full-color graphics. While this was interesting, without the comic
book pictures to go with the text, it didn't do much for me. Another
trick the author used was for menu selections. Selecting a numerical
menu item had two modes, instant response to one character or the
typical type the number, then hit return. I found the instant response
too jumpy, however, and resorted to the standard mode. No extra credit
awarded.
Total Score:
Thumbs Up: 8 out of 10
Thumbs Sideways: 1 out of 10
Thumbs Down: 1 out of 10
Extra Credit: None.
Net Score 8.5 thumbs up out of 10.
Final Comments:
Since my standards are meant to be the minimum criteria for a modern,
high-quality IF story, this would suggest that EAS3:LH needs a little
more refinement to meet the standard. However, I suspect that if the
scores were given for the whole EAS series, all the basic standards
would've been met. Thus the risk of serializing to this degree,
despite its valid comic book roots, may not be worth it for this story.
Or perhaps this says something more broadly about serializing for IF as
a storytelling medium. If a new episode of EAS came out every month,
like the old comics, then maybe this approach would work better.
Otherwise, it's a very good game in many respects, but it left me
wanting more. I suspect Paul is probably going to integrate the 3 EAS
games into one combined narrative at some point, and, if so, I will
certainly go back and replay it to experience the uninterrupted flow of
the end-to-end EAS story.
PJ
Review of Earth and Sky 3: Luminous Horizon
By Paul O'Brian
Awards: 1st Place, IF Comp 2004
In a post on r.a.i.f., I recently proposed a set of criteria for
reviewing or possibly "grading" interactive fiction. These
criteria primarily apply to games that emphasize the "story" aspect
of IF as opposed to basic "adventuring." My agenda is to promote
development and analysis of interactive stories to see if that helps
move IF upward & rightward along the artistic maturity curve. The
standards, consequently, are meant to be the "minimum" for what
comprises a modern, high quality IF story. As an exercise in using
these criteria, I am therefore grading the top 3 games in the IF Comp
to see how they would measure up. This is the first in the series,
which will cover Luminous Horizon, Blue Chairs, and All Things Devours.
I am starting with EAS3:LH not only because it won the IF Comp, but
because Paul is the one who suggested that I start doing reviews of IF
games in that original thread. So here I go.
NOTE TO OTHER POSTERS: Feel free to question both my criteria and my
conclusions. I'm just doing this to see if the approach has value
when applied consistently to multiple games. So fire at will.
Genre: Superhero.
Storyline: Earth (Austin) and Sky (Emily) are brother and sister on a
quest to find their missing parents, who are of a scientific bent.
They get their powers (super strength for Earth; flying, shooting
electric blasts, and creating fog for Sky) from the special suits their
parents invented and left behind when they disappeared. Action takes
place in an isolated "fortress" of the alien enemy who has captured
their parents. This, the 3rd in the series, provides the culminating
story and final solution to the "where are our parents?" dilemma
first posed in the original.
--Criteria 1: Does the game deconstruct the rooms paradigm so
effectively that no map is required to play the game? If not, does the
story itself have elements that actually focus the PC on geography, so
that a map is necessary to the story itself, not just to the gameplay?
If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
EAS3:LH uses basic map directions for movement, but the story is
compact enough that no mapping exercise is required. You have to
remember the layout to manage the final sequence, but it is simple
enough that there is no problem with this. The compact dimensions of
the world map keep you focused on the gameplay and the puzzles instead
of direction finding. Nothing breakthrough, but competent use of the
world map to support the story. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 2: Does the author make game-related choices or
plot-advancing consequences inherent in the majority of actions the
player takes? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
There are several places in the story where your puzzle-solving
requirements can lead to some aimless wandering in search of clues, but
the game map is limited enough that the story thread is maintained.
The game doesn't force you forward, prod you, or give any major
unsolicited advice. However, the clever hint system that plays off the
ability to switch character identities usually keeps you moving.
"Talking to" your sibling gives you excellent hints at various
points. A number of scenes will play themselves out satisfactorily
without much brilliance on your part, as a result. While this is not
consistent throughout the game, and sometimes it may be too forced, I
think it meets the standard this criteria is trying to set. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 3: Does game play and choices made as a result advance the
player to multiple endings, with multiple paths to reach those endings,
in ways that are both supported by and supportive of the main story
trying to be told? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
There is really only one ending you are trying to reach, so this
criteria is difficult for EAS3:LH to meet. I would have liked to see
different paths through the game to get to that ending, but if there
were any significantly different avenues, I didn't find them. (Note
that I don't count "death" or "failure" as separate endings
or separate paths here.) In this type of game, having more than one
way to find/slay/escape the beast would be a plus. Thumbs down.
--Criteria 4: Is the story itself actually worth telling? Does it have
a narrative dynamic that would be worth relating in other media, so
that it is not purely a technical exercise? And is that dynamic
sustained throughout the course of the game so that the player
essentially *knows* the story, even if he/she doesn't fully understand
it or all its implications, on the first playthrough? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
Another difficult criteria for EAS3:LH to meet. Since this story is
serialized, you really don't get the impact of the "quest" Earth
& Sky are on unless you played the previous two games. While the
feelies associated with the game bring you up to date, I'm not sure
it passes the test for a stand alone exercise. I tried to imagine
playing the game without having played the others, and the best I can
come up with is that you might like the game, but you probably
wouldn't be entranced with the story at the point where it picks up
in EAS3:LH. A tough call, however, because the overall EAS story is
pretty decent and well-told. Thumb sideways.
--Criteria 5: Do commands -- including movement commands -- really
support the story, i.e., if you are using compass directions, is the
player using a compass to navigate with at the time? If not, do the
commands truly enhance the mimetic effect being achieved in the game?
Are uncommon commands natural to the story and the responses to
incorrect commands helpful? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
The special commands in EAS3:LH are those controlling Sky's flying
and fogging powers and the ability to switch characters (more on the
character switching below). They suited what was in the game and
indeed were required for effective gameplay. Although the author did
nothing with the basic compass direction movements, the game map was
small enough that they did not become intrusive or burdensome. There
is little need to wander back and forth through the landscape, even
when you're stuck. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 6: Does the author have sufficient control of the pacing,
the narrative, the hints, other authorial mechanisms such as
flashbacks, memories, event intrusion, etc., so that the player can't
ever really get stuck and therefore fail to finish the game? If yes,
thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
Like most games that require puzzles to be solved to move from one part
of the game to the next, EAS3:LH has some problems with pacing.
However, the hint system can get you through most of these without
making you feel like you have stepped out of the game to look at a
cheat sheet. You can become stuck, particularly on the final scene and
the one "family feud" scene, where you can die or fail repeatedly,
but your partner gamely tries to get you through this with his/her
actions and/or hints. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 7: Does the author use timing or turn-related events or
scene-cuts that give the player the appropriate forward momentum
necessary to move from scene to scene and complete the game? If not, is
a slow pace and relatively open player "wandering" reflective of the
story and how it is being told? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
The author uses the device of switching voices to a narrative or
voiceover of the bad guy's conversations with his minion(s) between
significant scenes, which helps you understand what is going on and
effectively connects the scenes together. The scene cuts come as
byproducts of puzzle solving, not intrusively or automatically, but
they feel natural and help the player visualize what's about to
happen in the next phase of the game. Thumbs up.
--Criteria 8: If puzzles are included, are they natural byproducts of
the world model or the interactions of the PC/NPCs? Are the puzzles
absolutely necessary to advance the story being told? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
The puzzles work in the context of the story being told, although they
weren't what I would call "brilliant" puzzles (you don't have
to be crazy smart to solve them). Since the point of this, however, is
that the heroes have super powers, the typical version of a locked door
puzzle can be solved by simply entering "break door." Although E&S
are scientists in training, the game doesn't go out of its way to
require scientific analysis to solve any of the puzzles. That might
actually be a lost opportunity. The biggest complaint about the
puzzles involves the "family feud" scene, where guessing the right
sequence of actions is difficult even when you know what you need to
do, more or less. Eventually, you figure it out though. Overall, a
somewhat limp thumbs up.
--Criteria 9: Does the game take risks in switching viewpoints
(varying the PC view between one or more of the game characters), using
different voice at different times (applying 1st, 2nd, 3rd and/or
stream of consciousness, perhaps all in one game), and/or breaking with
any other standard PC/NPC conventions (look, inventory, x me, etc.)?
Are those risks successful in the context of the game? If yes, thumbs
up. If no, thumbs down.
The game succeeds rather brilliantly here, by actually *requiring* that
you switch viewpoints (player's choice as to when) between Earth and
Sky as the game progresses. Some puzzles, in fact, require you to
switch from one to the other in order to finish solving them. Since
you also get a third-person or "listening in" view of the bad guy
and one of his minions in the scene cuts, this is about as robust a way
to meet this criteria as any game out there. Since the hint system is
also implemented as a conversation between the two characters, this
game really shows the way in terms of breaking with the basic
conventions in these areas. Definite thumbs up.
--Criteria 10: Is it well-written, well-told, well-edited,
well-tested? If yes, thumbs up. If no, thumbs down.
EAS3:LH is fairly well-written - believable in its switches between
different voices, consistent in its level and degree of description, no
obvious typos or mangling of English, etc. Since the story arc
actually transcends three games, of which this is the third, it is not
clear to me that the story would be "well-told" if the author
hadn't included a lot of introductory info and feelies. But
certainly there are no major, unintended gaps in story progression.
The game seems to be edited appropriately and the gameplay meets most
of the tests. Only one annoying thing occurs: if one of the E&S kids
has something, the other can't automatically take it from him/her
when it is needed (e.g., >Take new gizmo. reply "That seems to belong
to Austin." Which is annoying, since presumably these two are a
team). But otherwise, well done. Thumbs up.
--Extra Credit Criteria: Does the game break new ground in the story
being told, new genres, new plots, new structures, etc.? Does it avoid
complete cliches (amnesia, underground empires, etc.)? If yes, extra
credit. If no, then no extra credit.
The superhero genre is not new, but is rarely this well-executed.
EAS3:LH makes a place for itself with its nice variations on the theme,
but it doesn't really take any real risks. It avoids clichés, but
doesn't really deserve any extra credit unless you like the way
certain cartoon sound effects (SKREE!) etc., were implemented as
full-color graphics. While this was interesting, without the comic
book pictures to go with the text, it didn't do much for me. Another
trick the author used was for menu selections. Selecting a numerical
menu item had two modes, instant response to one character or the
typical type the number, then hit return. I found the instant response
too jumpy, however, and resorted to the standard mode. No extra credit
awarded.
Total Score:
Thumbs Up: 8 out of 10
Thumbs Sideways: 1 out of 10
Thumbs Down: 1 out of 10
Extra Credit: None.
Net Score 8.5 thumbs up out of 10.
Final Comments:
Since my standards are meant to be the minimum criteria for a modern,
high-quality IF story, this would suggest that EAS3:LH needs a little
more refinement to meet the standard. However, I suspect that if the
scores were given for the whole EAS series, all the basic standards
would've been met. Thus the risk of serializing to this degree,
despite its valid comic book roots, may not be worth it for this story.
Or perhaps this says something more broadly about serializing for IF as
a storytelling medium. If a new episode of EAS came out every month,
like the old comics, then maybe this approach would work better.
Otherwise, it's a very good game in many respects, but it left me
wanting more. I suspect Paul is probably going to integrate the 3 EAS
games into one combined narrative at some point, and, if so, I will
certainly go back and replay it to experience the uninterrupted flow of
the end-to-end EAS story.
PJ