Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews

To be honest, I gave Deadline Enchanter a brief look and then
concluded I was playing some kind of ill-contrived comedy when I
reached the vivarium. Now that I've read everyone else's opinion, I
decided to play it through.

....I have to say I was honestly impressed. Once you get past the
bizarre and into the surreal...it's a strange mix of narrative and
meta-narrative at work. (And just when I thought I'd never use the
phrase "meta-narrative".) I have to say, the plot twist at the end was
better executed than certain commercial games I can think of
*coughBioShockcough*...once you realize that, yes, there *is* a point
to it all, it just sort of clicks wonderfully.

It's not a Comp-winning entry by any means (Lost Pig or The Chinese
Room would be better contenders, and I should probably get around to
playing Across the Stars now), but it's unique enough to earn a
favorable mention.
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

I was like that this Comp. I found myself giving games an opening
paragraph in which to prove themselves, maybe a few turns if I was
feeling generous, then chucking them.

Now that it's all said and done, I'm going back to take a look at the
ones that got high marks and see just what the hell I missed. Orevore
Courier is next.
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

On Nov 17, 7:39 pm, Emily Short <emsh....RemoveThis@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> While I had mixed feelings about [Deadline Enchanter], I didn't read the same
> intention behind it, particularly not hostility toward the IF
> community.

Neither did I, and (frankly prompted by my love for this game) I did
some more reading on it, and the author has been involved in writing
and playing IF far longer than I initially imagined.

> Was I alone in finding the ending, with the nonstandard command
> prompts, evocative and dreamlike?

I think this game had the most beautifully designed structure of
almost any IF I've ever played. Of course, this is kind of a gimme,
because the structure is absolutely linear.

Has anyone ever done closing credits like this game? Frankly I thought
that simple detail was fantastic. This is probably just me, as I'm a
bit OCD about this kind of stuff, but the banner printed at the
beginning of most IF has always struck me as somewhat unpolished.
Though, isn't it part of the Inform license that this banner be
printed -early- in the game? So where does this put a game like DE?
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

On Nov 17, 7:39 pm, Emily Short <emsh....DeleteThis@mindspring.com> wrote:
> While I had mixed feelings about the game, I didn't read the same
> intention behind it, particularly not hostility toward the IF
> community.

The Historical Grand Dicta on Implementation referred to in the "Chasm
in the Conversation" sounded at first to me like veiled references to
the dread Cabal. On a reread with full knowledge of the situation the
effect is somewhat lessened.

> Of course, possibly I simply didn't see what might have been
> unflattering, but I took these traits to be part of the narrator's
> characterization: an extremely proud, alien character who, even when
> asking for help, simply *cannot* bend enough to treat her helper as an
> equal. (A bit like the elves in Perilous Gard, now I think about it.)

Yeah, that's not what I was keying on. In fact, once I realized why
there was a help topic "Is Safety Ensured If I Follow This
Implementation to the Letter?" I had to stop playing for a few minutes
because I was struck hard enough by the realization that my focus was
entirely derailed.

> Was I alone in finding the ending, with the nonstandard command
> prompts, evocative and dreamlike?

Apparently not, but I first interpreted it as a nonstandard (kitbashed
machine-parse, unlicensed abaci, etc.) game-over screen.

--Michael
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

On Nov 17, 11:55 pm, George Oliver <georgeolive... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone ever done closing credits like this game? Frankly I thought
> that simple detail was fantastic. This is probably just me, as I'm a
> bit OCD about this kind of stuff, but the banner printed at the
> beginning of most IF has always struck me as somewhat unpolished.
> Though, isn't it part of the Inform license that this banner be
> printed -early- in the game? So where does this put a game like DE?

I think it's that it needs to be printed *somewhere*, and *preferably*
early. Although it played with the output a little bit, I considered
it to have made up for this by cuing the player to type VERSION early
on. I agree that it was a nice effect. I'm reminded of a film in
which the title card doesn't appear until the very end, as well, but
for the life of me I can't remember which film that was.

That said, I've always sort of liked the banner, and appreciate it
when the author uses it as a title card of sorts, splitting the setup
from the main action.

--Michael
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

On Nov 18, 12:27 am, Andreas Davour <ante....RemoveThis@updateLIKE.uu.HELLse>
wrote:
> You really do take every game serious and try to rationalize oddness as
> intentional?

Actually, I *did* chuck this one: I got stuck, couldn't get myself
unstuck (though I now see it was for a stupid reason), found the
implementation sub-par, and quit. The score I submitted was based on
that experience. Then, later, other people encouraged me to finish it,
saying there was more to find. So I did, and I'm glad I did.

But I wish the piece had been a smooth enough experience that I hadn't
chucked it the first time around.

A couple of others I quit early and never came back to either.
Immortal, Beneath, Eduard the Seminarist, and Reconciling Mother all
lost me pretty early, due to unclear goals, bad writing, poor
implementation, or all three.
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews 

Emily Short <emshort.TakeThisOut@mindspring.com> writes:

> On Nov 18, 12:27 am, Andreas Davour <ante....TakeThisOut@updateLIKE.uu.HELLse>
> wrote:
>> You really do take every game serious and try to rationalize oddness as
>> intentional?
>
> Actually, I *did* chuck this one: I got stuck, couldn't get myself
> unstuck (though I now see it was for a stupid reason), found the
> implementation sub-par, and quit. The score I submitted was based on
> that experience. Then, later, other people encouraged me to finish it,
> saying there was more to find. So I did, and I'm glad I did.
>
> But I wish the piece had been a smooth enough experience that I hadn't
> chucked it the first time around.
>
> A couple of others I quit early and never came back to either.
> Immortal, Beneath, Eduard the Seminarist, and Reconciling Mother all
> lost me pretty early, due to unclear goals, bad writing, poor
> implementation, or all three.

Then I isn't such a bad person, since that was my impression of those
games as well.

I am planning on returning to some games, and since so many reviews I've
read was very positive to Act of Murder I'm thinking on giving it
another chance. I think I'd like to actually finish the philosophical
quest as well, since I was in the midst of fun stuff when the two hour
bell rang.

/Andreas

--
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
 >> Stay informed about: Michael Martin's IFComp 2007 reviews