WORLDS APART by Suzanne Britton
Reviewed by Quentin D. Thompson
Sammy Hagar's Verdict:
"And I'm feelin'
No, I don't like what I've been told I'm feelin'
And I'm dealin'
I'm dealin' with these things I'm feelin'
And I'm bleedin'
Like no one else will ever know I'm bleedin'
And I'm seein'
I'm seein' things that don't know what I'm feelin'.....
.......and I don't understand it!......."
Jean Rhys' Verdict:
"I intend to write a book portraying Lashiaran's unfortunate
childhood and the trauma he suffered at the hands of hasidjas. Let it not
be said that I never saw two sides to a tale."
My Verdict:
It's not a masterpiece, but it's a damned good attempt.
Hooboy.
I feel bad writing such a short review of "Worlds Apart" - a game that's
been in the development for three years. To give you an idea of how much
work that involved, my own comp game - which was one of the longest entries -
took just a little over three _months_ to develop. Another longish Comp entry,
Ian Finley's Babel, though much better developed than my game, still took
just about six months, or so said Ian on Usenet a while ago. Three years
on a game - assuming it's not the way I would spend three years, in very
sporadic coding - means a very dedicated and concerted effort on the part
of a serious IF author to create something above the ordinary. The fact that
I could write a similar-sized review of Common Ground doesn't make me feel
any better.
On one hand, I can easily understand people calling this the most significant
IF release for a long time: it's got a complex and well-handled story,
very good NPCs, atmospheric writing, new ways of interacting with characters,
excellent programming, and it even raises one or two "serious" issues. On
the other hand, to some players, the Sammy Hagar quote up on top just about
sums up the game for them. Hmph. Now, if Sammy Hagar can review Worlds Apart
better than I can, perhaps I shouldn't be doing this, but I'll soldier on.
I'll do this in subheadings, though, so that you get the right idea.
Gameplay and Interaction: (9/10)
Worlds Apart is very much a piece of story-IF, meaning simply a piece
of interactive fiction where the plot, narrative and unfolding of events
take predominance over puzzle-solving. That's just fine with me: I like
story-IF as long as there's at least a modicum of interaction, otherwise
the whole thing might as well have been written entirely with PRINT
commands, or as a straight piece of fiction if it comes to that. In this
respect, Worlds Apart probably works best: the story is long and complicated,
and most of it is handled in flashbacks - I'm fond of flashback IF.
Most of the puzzles are fair once you take the time to understand the
'game world', though some of them are a bit counter-intuitive. There's no
gross 'guess-the-verb', though, and a lot of the situations [1] are very well
clued. There's also an excellent hint system, that I used a little less
than I thought I would, and on the whole the game, though long, moves
well enough to hold one's interest.
Participation: (6/10)
A grey area for me. I did keep on going at this game, but it was more
the wish of the player - me, myself, Quentin D. Thompson - to see the
story unfold, than to see the player _character_'s fate resolved. In that
respect a game like Photopia, though it might come across as gimmicky to
some, worked better for me. The game keeps on throwing out broad hints
that the player character's going to accomplish great deeds, but the
story ends abruptly (see Design Decisions) and leaves a sense of, well,
incompleteness. In summary, this game was a 'page-turner', but I didn't
really get into the player character.
Story and Writing: (7/10)
Another grey area. Most of the writing is good, but a bit of it is
over the top. Some of the writing seems to be overplaying its hand,
gilding the lily - heck, you get what I mean. Also, there's a tendency
to do _huge_ text dumps at times, and though some of them are genuinely
worth the interruption, some of them verge on monotony. I accept there
are few ways of getting around text dumps, so I'm not being too hard on it
here. Also, I have very ambivalent feelings about game worlds that are
the private and personal domain (and/or refuge) of their author, but
that's just my own quirk. The story wasn't very original - at times
it seemed to come out of a Japanese sci-fi cartoon - but it flowed
smoothly, and that's enough for me.
Programming: (10/10)
Easily the best aspect of the game. Good parser responsiveness, lots of
innovations to facilitate NPC interaction, no bugs, very little
scenery-not-implemented trouble. The game took maximum points in this
category, which is not something I hand out too often. Version 1 had
one fatal bug (I think it forgot to launch a daemon somewhere) but
Version 1.1 seems free of any such thing.
NPCs: (7/10)
Hooboy again. See, when I see the word 'jester', I expect a few laughs.
Even if the game is supposed to be tragic, a jester is supposed to be
funny. (Anyone remember the joke about Grimaldi the Clown?) And, well,
he didn't even do anything vaguely funny. This is, I admit, a very minor
criticism. Most of the NPCs are very well drawn: Yuri (even though he
wasn't funny), Saal, Kitara and Azaera. A deep bow to Suzanne here for
NOT GIVING HER CHARACTERS UNPRONOUNCEABLE AND IRRITATING NAMES, which is
what made me stop reading "The Silmarillion" after 40 pages or so. Compared
to Tolkien's tongue-twisters, names like Kef, Chayle and Liande were sheer
euphony. That earns this game a point right there. The NPCs are very
responsive, though. Saal, in particular, is an excellent conversationalist -
which is why it's sad that most of what he's leading up to never comes
to fruition in this game.
Sole complaint - and this is a biggie: Lashiaran. I take back all the
cracks I made about Miss Sierra after seeing him in action. Most of the
other characters were two-dimensional - Lashiaran had BAD GUY written all
over his face from just about the beginning, and that was pretty jarring
given how the others worked.
Humour: (No rating)
I agree, IF isn't supposed to be fun all the time, and this was one of
those games. I found no Easter Eggs either, so no comment.
Originality: (8/10)
A game about self-discovery just screeeeams "Delusions" to me, and I wasn't
too surprised when the endgame text cited Delusions as one of the author's
influences. Other influences cited were So Far, Sunset Over Savannah,
A Mind Forever Voyaging, Fear, Losing Your Grip and Tapestry - but I found
the latter unconvincing: Tapestry gave the player the option to choose
his path, while Worlds Apart rushed the player headlong along it. Only one
vaguely Tapestry-like decision occurred in the story (I couldn't "undo" it,
so I assume it was significant), but it was too close to the end to have
much bearing on the actual game as it stands. And I'm not sure how your
choice here can be integrated into the sequel. In my opinion, it's a bad
idea to quote some of the Top Ten Freeware IF Games Of All Times in a
lengthy list, considering that without such a list, the whole game seems
very original, but with one, I tend to jump to conclusions..
Design decisions: (5/10)
1. No unwinnable situations - a very good decision in a game of this
sort and this size. My inventory kept on changing, sometimes for
obscure reasons, but that made sense later on.
2. Linearity. You can't get away from this in story-IF, and besides
I like a linear game as long as it isn't a "Heist" clone.
3. Leaving the story incomplete and advertising a sequel.
I'm sorry, but this was a bad design decision. Raising the player's
hopes and expectations and then saying "Wait until Episode Two!" is
not the way to win friends and influence people.
4. Game hooks. This game relies heavily on emotional impact and the
player's sense of wonder, so I dare say it's not for all tastes.
Science: (9/10)
Mentalic powers formed a huge part of the plot, but were implemented well,
and though they've been done to death in conventional fiction, this is
the first time I've seen it in IF. Also, the word "fugue" was used in
a correct sense - not at all a given with all the pop psychology that
floats around nowadays. Very good indeed.
Social Structure: (7/10)
Well, it's well-detailed - at least, what we see of it - but in the scenes
with Saal there are hints at a higher superstructure that we never learn
about completely. But then, I'm expecting all this stuff in the sequel.
Philosophy: (6/10)
Nothing too weighty (surprisingly, considering that Tapestry is cited
as a major influence), but then I'm not digging too deep; I won't fall
into the trap of applying literary criteria to every work of IF that
comes out. At one or two points the game's author seemed to be
identifying herself with a particular NPC, but I won't delve into
the psychological or philosophical implications thereof. There seemed to be
a faint New Age flavour to the whole thing - the game quotes Enya at one
point, even - but that may be just my prejudices speaking.
Overall Impression:
Worlds Apart was an attempt to write "something like a traditional
novella" in the IF medium, and it was also an attempt to stretch the
boundaries of that medium. It succeeded on both counts, and though I did
find a few weaknesses, the overall impression was of a finished product.
The low score perhaps reflects the fact that I become more exacting as a
game becomes more ambitious.
All things said and done, I respect the author's ambition and efforts,
and the programming was a wow. The fact that this is not a complete game
but Part I of II was, in my opinion, a definite negative, but while I
wouldn't call this the best or most significant work of IF ever, it
certainly can take its place with the games it cited as influences. It
banks heavily - a bit too much, I felt - on emotional involvement and
the player's sense of wonder, and had one rather annoying NPC, but that's
a matter of taste. It's got plenty of meat on its bones, and deserves
credit for making most of its experiments work.
My score for "Worlds Apart": 7 out of 10.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add Your Comments
To the other user submitted reviews!