A Collection of Reviews of ADRIFT Games Which People Have Written But They Might Not Necessarily be all Adrift Games that People are Writing Reviews Of
ISSUE 6
EDITED BY ROBERT STREET (EMAIL: adrift.reviews@gmail.com)
PUBLISHED ON 2 OCTOBER 2005
INSIDEADRIFT SUMMER
COMPETITION ENTRIES
Can It All Be
So Simple? – reviewed by Robert Street & David Whyld
Lights,
Camera, Action – reviewed by Robert Street
Must Escape!
– reviewed by David Whyld & Stefan Donati
Regrets –
reviewed by Robert Street
Target –
reviewed by Robert Street & David Whyld
The Adventures
of Space Boy! Volume I – reviewed by Robert Street
Crazy Old Bag
Lady – reviewed by Robert Street
Laboratory
R.A.T.S. – reviewed by Robert Street & David Whyld
The White
Singularity – reviewed by David Whyld & Stefan Donati
The House
Husband – reviewed by Lumin
List of games
reviewed in this issue and previous issues
This
is the sixth issue of the Reviews Exchange, but the first since the relaunch
under a new editor, which is me, Robert Street. I would firstly like to thank
David Whyld for putting in the hard work needed to start this newsletter. I have
enjoyed reading and contributing to the previous issues, and was disappointed
when it was announced that it would be cancelled. Thus, you have here, a new
version of the Reviews Exchange.
There
will be some changes to the Reviews Exchange. I am switching to a quarterly
publishing schedule, as I feel that there are an insufficient number of new
ADRIFT games released for a shorter schedule to be viable in the long run. Gone
as well is the old format of the newsletter, but hopefully you will like this
alternative format. If you have any further ideas on other changes that you
would like to see, please email me your suggestions.
Some
of you may be wondering who this new editor is? Well, if you are a regular on
the ADRIFT forums, you may know me under the username Rafgon. I have released a
number of ADRIFT games; Veteran Knowledge, Frustrated Interviewee
and Must Escape! under the pseudonym of Robert Rafgon. At the time of
writing I have entered an Inform game The Colour Pink into the IF
competition. I don’t have a long history of playing IF, as I’m just young
enough to have missed the Infocom era, but I have tried to make up for it ever
since I discovered IF.
Enough about me. I know that is not why you’re here. First up below is an
article to encourage everyone to participate in future issues. Following
that is the 15 reviews that make up this issue.
Thank
you to David Whyld, Stefan Donati (Shuarian) and Lumin for contributing reviews.
Robert
Street
by Robert Street
At
the Reviews Exchange we are always looking for new people to contribute reviews.
So, why should you, the reader of this newsletter become one of these
contributors? There are lots of good reasons, a few of which I enumerate below:
1)
Authors like
feedback
There is nothing worse for an author of a game to release it, but have nothing
said about the game in reply. Yes, the game may be downloaded by lots of people,
but it is difficult for an author to tell if people really like the game, or if
they are deleting it soon after they start playing. If a game is really good, a
review is a chance to give the author the praise that they deserve and encourage
them to continue writing. If it is really bad, a review is a chance to point out
errors where the author can improve in the future. If, as it is more likely, the
game is somewhere in between, it is a chance to do both. Reviews can make the
author feel that the time spent writing is worthwhile
Any
feedback is good feedback for an author to improve himself or herself for future
games. This means that writing a review can directly benefit you in the future;
by making sure that future games by an author are even more enjoyable. If you
are a game player, then you should provide feedback where possible.
2)
If you are an
author, it will help your own writing
When I
first started reviewing, I had difficulty in determining the reasons behind why
I liked or disliked games. It took me a while before I started to be able to see
what design or story features I thought were done well or badly. This has
actually improved my own writing as well. Anything I don’t like, I make sure
not to feature in any of my own games. Anything I do like, I take inspiration
from. It is far more effective to analyse games for yourself, than just reading
other people’s analysis. Writing a review is a good opportunity to learn from
other game authors.
3)
It can give other people who are thinking about playing a game, a better
idea of whether they should
If
people read a good review of a game, they are more likely to download it and
give it a try. If you play a good game, a review can be a chance to encourage
others to share your opinion. A review can also describe themes or features of a
game. Some will appeal to some players, and some to others. Whatever is said in
the review, readers who have not played the game should have a better idea of
whether they should by the end of the review. As a reviewer, this is your chance
to explain why you think games should or shouldn’t be played by others.
4)
Critical analysis of a game
This
may not apply to all games, but if a game is particularly difficult to
understand, then it may be interesting to provide your analysis on what the game
is really about. The themes from a game or the underlying messages can also be
analysed.
5)
Writing reviews is fun
This
point is simply that writing a review is fun. I have enjoyed writing all the
reviews I have contributed. For me, it is a good break from game writing. It is
a different style, and it allows me to stretch myself in different ways.
After
reading the above points and deciding that you should review a game, your next
question might be, how do you go about doing so? There are lots of different
ways, and each suit different people. I can’t give advice that will definitely
suit you, but I can describe how I go about writing a review. I usually start
off with a simple four paragraph structure that I expand or contract as needed.
The first paragraph describes what the game is about. The second paragraph
describes what I think the game did well. The third paragraph describes what I
think the game did badly. The last paragraph is my overall thoughts on the game.
The above advice may help or not.
You
could also try reading through the past issues of the Reviews Exchange, which
can be downloaded from http://adrift.sitesled.com,
for more ideas on how people have previously written reviews. If you have any
further questions, then direct them to adrift.reviews@gmail.com,
and I will do my best to help.
To
finish, some ADRIFT games that I would like to see reviewed for the next issue
include:
Three
Monkeys, One Cage
To
Hell In A Hamper
Panic
Lara
Croft & The Sun Obelisk (non-adult version)
Second
Chance
Any
new games that are released after this issue is published
If
you write a review send it to adrift.reviews@gmail.com,
and I will publish it in the next issue.
Voting
for the InsideADRIFT Summer Competition in 2005 took place during August, with
the final positions and vote tallies being:
1)
“Target”
by Richard Otter
- 14
2)
“Lights,
Camera, Action” by David Whyld
- 13
3)
“Can It All
Be So Simple?” by TDS
- 10
4)
“Must
Escape!” by Robert Rafgon (Robert Street) -
9
5)
“Regrets”
by David Whyld
- 5
Below
are reviews of all the entries to the competition.
AUTHOR:
THE DOMINANT
SPECIES
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
"Can
It Be All So Simple?" is the first game by TDS (The Dominant Species). It
is a horror game, with the main character being a son from a family who have
fallen upon hard times, and it is not getting better. I will note for this
review that I helped to beta test the game.
"Can
It Be All So Simple?" is a small game, but it is as large as most of the
games in this competition. This game is mainly story-based with only a few
simple puzzles that really just require you to search around the house for
items. Some of these puzzles have multiple solutions, but all the solutions are
fairly similar. I would have preferred slightly more difficult puzzles, but it
probably would have broken up the story more. The setting for the game is the
main character's house, with the locations that you wander through being sparse,
but this fits the game's story. The writing evokes the depression surrounding
the main character, and what has occurred to him and his family recently.
The
story of the game is interesting. However, the twist at the end was fairly
predictable, at least to me, but it was still well done. Of course, that is, if
I got the twist right. This game never fully explains anything, so you can only
guess that your interpretations of the events are right. The vagueness gives a
mysterious feeling to the game, which works with the horror atmosphere. You are
never really sure of anything.
Overall,
this is a good first effort by TDS, which I voted as my favourite game of the
Summer Competition.
SCORE
- 7/10
This
was my personal fave of all the games in the recent ADRIFT Summer Comp 2005, a
decidedly dark horror where very little is as it seems. While not a perfect game
by any means, it was an impressive debut. Of the five games entered in the Comp,
it came a respectable third but I felt it should have done better.
“Can It Be All So Simple?” is a strange game. At times, it's hard to
understand just what's going on, and even after finishing it, I'm still a little
unsure about some aspects of it. It's a very linear game with minimal replay
value, although to understand it all you'll probably need to replay it at least
once. At times, the game seems to almost force the player along a set path, with
the interactive side of things pushed to one side; this is used to make the
storyline tighter and works to a degree, but at the same time the freedom to
explore is what generally attracts people to interactive fiction. An example of
this is used at the beginning when the player awakens in a dark room. The first
four or five commands yield no proper responses; indeed, until the player is
told he can see the bedroom, little can be achieved at all. This isn't a
terrible thing in itself but it's annoying when you've tried certain commands
and gotten nowhere with them, only to try them again a few moves later and
achieve something.
Good points: well written. There's a nice little horror game here, complete with
creepy monsters, things going bump in the middle of the night and weird goings
on. It's also refreshing in a game by a newbie to find that items listed in the
room description can be examined and interacted with just the way they should
be. You need to really try to find the dreaded YOU SEE NO SUCH THING response
displayed.
Bad points: it's… strange. Too strange in parts. The intro is notable more for
its ever-changing colour scheme than for what it's saying. Unfortunately the
colour scheme makes the text somewhat difficult to read – small red text on a
dark background? Hmmm… The intro's also a little pretentious. It contains such
lines as:
"How did the earth come to be?
Did
an invisible hand in the sky form us in seven days?
Did
we slowly evolve as a species through millions of years?
Or
were we all a product of a cosmic explosion in space?"
And:
"I wonder in the end will it all make sense. I wonder
does
killing another person matter when it comes to looking at the big picture.
I
wonder is having prisons really such a good idea."
After that intro, I was expecting a different game than what followed. Or, at
least, a game which bore some kind of semblance to the introduction. But I
didn't see any such thing. If anything, the introduction seemed to be tacked on
for no real reason and had little to do with the game itself.
There are a few flaws in the game but nothing that really ruins it for the
player. I had problems in getting my neighbour, Debbie, to follow me at one
point, until realising that she was following me but just wasn't included in the
room description. There were a few lapses in logic as well: the player
encounters monsters in his parents' bedroom yet his first reaction is to run and
tell the next door neighbour instead of going for the police?
One point definitely in the game's favour is that it dispenses with the built in
ADRIFT end game sequence and includes a custom one instead. Why is this a good
idea? Simply: it gives the player the option of undoing his last command, or
restarting the game or loading from a previous save, without the necessity of
going through the tedious end game sequence that populates almost every other
ADRIFT game. With a simple command, you're back playing the game. Why more
people don't do this sort of thing I'll never know.
“Can It Be All So Simple?” is a very short game. Even taking the time to
wander around every location in the game, pick up items, examine things, etc,
you'll probably be through the entire thing in half an hour. But it's well worth
playing all the same, even if the ending is a bit predictable.
6 out of 10
AUTHOR:
DAVID WHYLD
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
"Lights,
Camera, Action" is much longer than David Whyld's other Summer competition
entry "Regrets". There are a lot of characters, a lot of locations and
a lot of puzzles to solve. This is another David Whyld comedy game, so if you
have played one before, you know roughly what to expect of the writing and
humour. Personally I enjoy these games, but I did find that "Lights,
Camera, Action" had some significant weaknesses. This review is based on
the competition version of the game, so some of these weaknesses may have been
subsequently fixed. “Lights, Camera, Action” is about a director who is
trying to film a movie, but there are a lot of disasters on set that prevent his
progress.
One
of the strongest points of this game is the many distinctive NPCs. They showcase
the humour of the game well. The conversation system uses a number-based option
approach, but there are enough options usually that this does not seem
restrictive. With the game taking place on a movie set, there is a wide variety
of places to go, from Mount Doom to Heaven to the Moon. However, as the studios
are cheap, none of these places are ever as impressive as they first appear.
This is one of the funniest aspects of the game as you examine each location
closer and closer to discover what is really there, rather than what is supposed
to be.
Another
good point is the hint system, with David Whyld deciding to use an alternate
hint system to that normally used in ADRIFT. Each time you type "hint"
in a location one more hint appears on a list that is relevant to that location.
I feel that this is an improvement on the normal system, as the hints produced
are better controlled in their release to the player, but there is one weakness
in that if you forget a hint and type "hint" again, then you can get a
bonus hint that you do not want yet.
The
puzzles in this game are difficult, but achievable. In a way, there is a bit too
much going on to start off with. All the interweaving plots, locations,
characters and random objects that you pick up, can be a little overwhelming and
confusing at first, especially if you can't figure out anything to do with most
of the objects immediately. I needed a few hints to get going, but once I had
narrowed down the objects by a few, I started to make rapid progress in the
game. At least until I hit some very bad bugs.
Midway
through "Lights, Camera, Action", I thought that I was going to give
the game a great review. Unfortunately, mid-game my opinion rapidly headed
downhill due to the number of bugs that made it almost unplayable near the end.
Maybe other players will not have as many problems and I was unlucky, but I
almost abandoned the game in frustration. I don't want to mention every specific
bug here, but I will give a few examples.
Firstly
I managed to put the game in an unwinnable state. Trying not to give away too
many spoilers below. It started off when I took a photo of one character, and a
second character appeared automatically. However, I made the mistake of checking
a hint later, and showed the photo to second character, so he returned to this
location. I then couldn't budge him, as he refused all gifts and no longer
wanted to talk to me. Another annoyance that forced me to restore earlier was
that I showed some evidence to the policeman, and he asked me to find someone,
but I then had no way of telling him that the person was waiting around for the
movie. A final annoyance was in the final scene when two versions of Scene 4
played in succession and my inventory was emptied including the item that I
needed to complete the game.
There
are a few weaknesses in the game design, such as that you have to
"wait" after a scene was done. I don't tend to wait around and thought
that I had to progress the game somewhere else before the people would move.
However, the main issue I had was with the bugs.
Unfortunately
this was a game that I was enjoying, but it just went badly wrong. I don't like
games where I have to keep restoring to earlier game states as I have fallen
prey to a bug. The score below reflects that although parts of the game were
good, I felt annoyed during my gameplay, especially at the missed potential.
SCORE
- 6/10
AUTHOR:
ROBERT
RAFGON (ROBERT STREET)
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
DAVID WHYLD
The original version of “Must Escape!” – an entry in the ADRIFT
Summer Comp 2005 (where it came fourth out of five entries) – was entered in
the ADRIFT Intro Comp. It comprised of just two locations and one fight between
the player and a nameless NPC. As a novelty item, it was harmless enough but I
never really warmed to it. So when I found out it had been enlarged to a full
size game for the Summer Comp, I can't say I was really looking forward to it.
But just as when he took the mini-game “Veteran Experience” and enlarged it
to make the full game “Veteran Knowledge”, the author has added quite a lot
of content to this game, turning it from a novelty into quite an interesting
piece.
In “Must Escape!” you are a saboteur. You've just destroyed a laboratory and
must get out of the building in one piece.
The full version starts at the same place as the original, but whereas the
original finished the moment the fight with the first NPC you encounter is over,
the full version continues after that. You're at loose in an enemy building,
with guards closing in on you, and you need to utilise whatever resources you
can in order to escape.
There are a few failings in logic scattered throughout the game, almost most are
common place in the majority of text adventures. The items needed to progress
through each of the locked doors are, quite conveniently, just lying around
waiting for the player to come along and pick them up; there's a locked cabinet
at one point which the player is able to open with an item he just so happens to
find right beforehand; enemy soldiers are always encountered one at a time, so
there's never any risk of the player being overwhelmed by sheer weight of
numbers. It's also remarkably lucky for the player that all the enemies he faces
while unarmed* are also unarmed.
* You broke into an enemy base and sabotaged it without a weapon to hand? See
what I meant about logic…
Combat makes up a good portion of this game so it's only fair to mention it in
this review. I didn't much care for it in the intro, but here it's much better
handled. Stick figures of the player and the NPC appear on screen, with commands
listed below along the lines of Kick, Punch, Move Left, Turn Right, Shoot, Wait
and so on. Figuring out the commands to use to deal with your enemies is part of
the fun of “Must Escape!” but the combats themselves seem heavily weighted
in favour of the player. You always get to attack first, you always hit, and so
if you've got more health than your enemy there's no chance of you losing.
The final fight varies from the others in that you don't actually need to do any
real fighting. It's just you and a gun, facing an NPC and a gun. Shoot him and
he has a tendency to duck out of the way through an open door so you end up
missing him. Don't shoot him and he shoots you (ending the game rather suddenly,
and rather annoyingly as well as my previous save was quite a few moves further
back). I figured my way past the guard in the end and that was it for “Must
Escape!” My player escaped and, presumably, lived happily ever after.
The full version of this game is certainly more interesting than the intro, but
I can't help feel that it's a bit of a comedown compared to what the author did
when expanding “Veteran Experience” into “Veteran Knowledge”.
5 out of 10
REVIEWER:
STEFAN DONATI (SHUARIAN)
This entry of the Adrift Summer Comp 2005 is written by Robert
Rafgon, and was placed fourth. After the end of the comp, a second version with
some bug fixes has been released, and can be downloaded from the official Adrift
site. My review covers the second version.
The intro of the game is already known from this year’s Intro Comp, and hasn't
changed. The player is some kind of agent who's on his mission inside the enemy
laboratory. But luck isn't on your side this time, and the alarm goes off:
clearly, you must escape. Being inside an enemy base doesn't necessarily make
this any easier, and a fight against a guard happens right after the first
corner. Fighting is done via the Adrift battle system, and is graphically nice
implemented by showing the fighting of the two opponents. While the intro ends
after this fight, the full game does not, of course. The base has several
different areas, which all must be explored in order to escape. What I really
liked is that the map is easily memorised but multilayered nonetheless.
Winning the game basically means solving a few, not very difficult, puzzles;
finding the right keys for the doors and survive and avoid the battles against
the guards. And while I've been sceptically about how well the fighting system
may work in a full version, it turns out it does surprisingly well. The fights
are different, the player has to take care of his health status, and especially
the end sequence gives enough space to move around freely while fighting your
way out.
The writing is good, and describes everything in a short and informative manner.
However, the base feels rather empty, and while this suits some rooms well, it
seems a little bit artificial in others. Speaking about emptiness, the story
comes to mind, unfortunately. There's not much the game tells us about the
player's character, his mission, or the enemy.
Still, the games manages to establish a certain atmosphere which makes it
thrilling to move on, trying to escape from this unfriendly place. There's no
adrenaline involved, though, as the threads of being caught only lingers in the
air but is not very immediate - the game won't let you into certain rooms, and
the guards are not patrolling around. Thus I felt as if the game would patronise
me, and won't allow my detection; I experienced this as a drawback to my overall
impression.
But after all, I enjoyed this game. It is a short agent thriller, and is fun to
play.
AUTHOR:
DAVID WHYLD
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
This
is a short review, but “Regrets” is only a short game. I was surprised to
find a game with a smaller file size than my entry in the competition.
Interestingly in the about section, it says that the game was written for a One
Room comp, and it lives up to this with the action only taking place in one
room. In fact, it isn't even a particularly full room, with only a couple of
pieces of furniture. The aim of this game is that you are exploring the room and
have to figure out how to trigger memories. The writing is fine, and the story
is well done, but there really isn't much to this game.
I
managed to find most of the memories, but I felt that the drawer puzzle was a
little unfair, as the solution did not occur to me until I looked at the
walkthrough. I tried pulling the drawer aggressively or just hitting it, and I
guess I just wouldn't open a drawer in that way. There is an annoying bug at the
end, where the only command that works is south. Whilst I was playing, I
couldn't figure out what to do when all that was being printed out was "The
game has ended." to anything I typed in. The ending was clever though once
I got there.
Overall
Regrets is fun for the short amount of time that it took to play.
SCORE
- 6/10
AUTHOR:
RICHARD
OTTER
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
Clearly I'm getting worse at predicting things. When I played
“Target” – an entry in the ADRIFT Spring Comp 2005 (it was the first game
I played) – I remember thinking "hmmm… this is going to come
last". It actually came first. While there's nothing terrible about the
game, there's nothing particularly great about it either. Or so I thought
anyway. But as it came first, I'm clearly in a minority.
”Target” is a game about a hit man hired to assassinate someone. It starts
with you, the hit man, on the rooftop of a building. You've got a rifle and a
description of your target. All you have to do is find him… and kill him.
That's essentially the game in a nutshell. One nice feature is that the identity
of the hit man you play, as well as the identity of your victim, change each
time you play the game. I discovered this after dying several times and finding
myself with a different target each time. Heck, one time the hit man was even
yours truly! But while identities may change each time, it's still pretty much
the same game. The layout of the rooftop remains the same and as you start with
a description of your victim, it's a simple task to wander about the rooftop,
match up the description and shoot the guy in question. There are no added
complications depending upon which victim you are assigned to kill: it's just a
case of find 'em and shoot 'em.
I played “Target” through three times before figuring out the basics behind
identifying my victim and dealing with him, and disposing of the undercover cop
and the sniper as well, and it seemed like a remarkably short game. Strangely
enough, when I opened it in the Generator, I was surprised to see a whopping
1084 tasks (!), which was about 20 times as many as I expected to see. On the
surface, “Target” seems like a simple game indeed; but a closer look reveals
that there's actually been a considerable amount of work expended on it. Just a
pity I didn't like it more.
Logic doesn't play a large part in this game. My hit man character
wanders around the rooftop of the building with his rifle in hand, yet the tramp
(actually an undercover cop) makes no effort to arrest me until I've actually
gone and shot someone. (For that matter, why is there even a tramp on top of the
building?) The tramp makes several inane comments as I stand there, toting my
rifle, about the rooftop, a neon sign and the like, yet doesn't bother asking me
about said rifle. He provides information about every subject under the sun –
almost literally – but I found his constant comments, every two or three
moves, to be so distracting that before long I was itching to kill him just to
get a bit of peace and quiet.
Yet despite all its failings, “Target” won the ADRIFT Summer Comp 2005 and
proved surprisingly popular with lots of people. I just wish I could see its
appeal myself.
2 out of 10
AUTHOR:
DAVID PARISH
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
I
have to admit that I never got around to playing Version 1 of “The Adventures
of Space Boy! Volume I”, after hearing on the forums that it was a bit buggy.
However, after seeing that an improved Version 2 had been released, I thought it
was time to take a look. My first thought looking at the file size was that this
was probably a large game. However, after playing it, the game is reasonably
large but not too much so, with most of the large file size consisting of
pictures, which often add hints to the puzzle solutions in the game.
The
star of the game is Space Boy who is looking for his Wonder Dog. Apart from this
there isn't much story to this game, so it is a puzzlefest. I don't mind
puzzlefests, but I prefer a clearer motivation as to what my goals are. The
motivation behind actions was not always well done here. I ended up doing stuff
because it was there, more than doing it because I was after a specific goal. It
was only after completing some actions and ending up with the consequent
necessary objects, that it was finally explained why I was doing what I was
doing. The game also seemed to throw in puzzles for the sake of throwing in
puzzles, rather than because they added to the game.
The
puzzle difficulty wasn't actually too bad. I needed a few hints, but I mostly
found that I was on the right track, I just hadn't quite figured it out yet. The
writing is reasonable and the game is friendly, it just isn't that exciting. I
hate to admit this, but I found myself wondering midway through, when was the
game going to be over, which is never a good sign. It wasn't that there was
anything really wrong with the game, it just didn't really interest me. Still, I
shouldn't be too negative here, as I was glad that I did decide to keep playing,
and the setting may interest other players more.
This
game could still have been implemented a bit better, as not every phrasing is
accounted for in the tasks and objects. For example, it took me a while to
figure out that (changed slightly to avoid spoilers) ‘greenpurpleorange’ was
not a synonym of ‘greenpurpleorange tile’. The room descriptions are not
that long, with not many items in each room. This could be increased to add more
atmosphere to the game. A few spelling mistakes also remain in the game. None of
these issues are that serious, but are areas where the author could improve in
the future.
Overall
the game is reasonable, and there is a promise of a sequel at the end, which
wasn't a surprise given that the game has a subtitle of Volume I. Would I be
interested in a sequel? Well, based on this game, I would give it a go.
SCORE
- 5/10
AUTHOR:
SPRITE
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
A
not very serious concept, which pokes fun at the IF convention of picking up any
objects that you see, even if there is no use for them. In fact it makes jokes
about the title character being a computer game player gone bad. Now she just
collects objects for no reason, but still doesn't like dropping anything. The
starting inventory is an amusing collection of useless junk.
Of
course if the joke was only that there was a random picking up of objects, it
wouldn't be enough to sustain a game. So, she actually has to solve puzzles as
well with these objects. Actually, very few of the objects, apart from those
that you start with, are red herrings. Almost all of them are used towards
solving the aim of the game, which is the search for the golden trolley. I was
almost hoping for a few more funny red herrings, but I admit that it would take
a lot more work.
Where
this game is strong is in the humour and writing, with this game being very
funny. The names especially are amusing. Just look at the title of the game for
an example. Unfortunately there are quite a few problems, which blight this
game. There are a number of spelling mistakes, which is something I am always
very fussy about. There are points where the scenery could be a bit better
implemented, especially in the corner shop where there seem to be no objects at
all. A small bug is that the conversation with Ollie does not change after the
task he asked for is completed. The worst bug is obviously a game killing bug
with the newspapers, where no newspaper appears after the task is completed.
This bug appears to be fairly late in the game. It is a pity, as I was enjoying
it before my game playing experience came to an abrupt halt.
Due
to the good writing, I would like to give a higher score to this game, but with
the current level of bugs, I can't. The low score below mainly reflects the game
killing bug, rather than the rest of the game, which I would rate closer to a 6.
Hopefully, the author will fix up some of the remaining problems. If she does, I
look forward to completing the game in the future.
SCORE
- 3/10
AUTHOR:
C. HENSHAW
PLATFORM:
ADRIFT 4.00
REVIEWER:
ROBERT STREET
"Laboratory
R.A.T.S." is a short one room game. There is only one puzzle, and it is not
even really a puzzle. It is just a matter of figuring out the right sequence of
commands. More alternatives should probably have been included to better hint
the player towards these commands. However, it is not difficult to figure out if
you examine the microscope carefully enough.
The
single room is a detailed environment, and it is fun to examine everything to
find out more about all the characters and what they are trying to achieve. Most
of the story is integrated into the descriptions. It is also necessary to
explore closely, as mentioned above to figure out what is necessary in order to
progress. There are fun background conversations between several NPCs, which add
character to the game. The story is well done, but unfortunately the game ends,
just when it is beginning to get really interesting.
As
a brief diversion, which is what this game is aimed for, "Laboratory
R.A.T.S." works well. However, it is very short, and I would have preferred
for the game to keep going from where it ended.
SCORE
- 5/10
One room games, of which “Laboratory R.A.T.S.” is such a
thing, tend to be more puzzled-orientated than other games. Without a large area
to explore, all the gameplay has to take place in a single location and so every
puzzle you are going to encounter is there ready and waiting for you. And I've
never been fond of puzzle games…
”Laboratory R.A.T.S.” involves several scientists at work deep underground
in a laboratory. The idea is to get a microscope a work. Easy? Heck no.
Overall this is one mighty frustrating game. It might only be one room in size,
but it's certainly a more confusing game than some I've played that have
occupied fifty rooms. Doing just about anything is a pain:
> use microscope
The microscope is on