| Home | About Me | |
|
|
DELRON
|
The Ascot Reviews
Author: Duncan Bowsman
Date: 2009
ADRIFT 4.0
Reviewed by George Oliver
One thing I've noticed in the few years I've judged IFComp
games is people talking about 'joke entries'. Like, 'is this a joke entry? Maybe
this is just a joke entry but...I'm just going to assume this isn't a joke entry
and...', etcetera. The assumption kind of being that I'm getting conned, and
this isn't serious business, or more to the point that the author didn't put any
effort into their game.
But what's wrong with a joke, especially if all IF games are supposed to be
riddles anyway ? Furthermore, I haven't written any IF myself, but from the
little I've messed around I get the sense that writing something that even just
barely hangs together is significantly more work than I usually think about when
I'm trying to tell a joke. All of this is a long preamble to saying that The
Ascot is not a typical work of IF -- in fact it feels like a joke -- but whether
it's a joke or not I think it's told very well. It demonstrates perfectly my
opinion that the best IF uses the medium to its advantage; just because most IF
doesn't have graphics doesn't mean that the form of an IF is not vitally
important.
The Ascot conveys its form mainly by turning the game into a CYOA with two
choices every turn; in this way it controls the game's pacing (and so how the
shape of its form unfolds) nearly to a tee. Any attempt to diverge from this
constraint will ultimately end in death (brilliantly done). This is a very good
way to present a game, if the writing is terrific, and I enjoyed some of the
writing here a lot -- "I mean, the sight of it is like nine nightmares wrapped
in accidental electrocution... I mean, really shocking". However at other times
the writing was too glib for me and didn't feel quite as vivid or gutsy as I
would have liked, so in the end I wasn't as entertained as I think I could have
been.
Execution: 8. IF doesn't have to be complicated to be done well.
Creativity: 7. A typical IF fantasy, but not done badly.
WTF!?: 7. The unusual format deserves some points here.
Score: 7.3
Reviewed by Victor Gijsbers
That should do the trick, and we can go on to The Ascot.
I expected a game about horse racing, high society, and (perhaps) definite
articles. A spiritual successor to Sting of the Wasp, maybe? Instead, I got an
obscure kind of tie.
And it was cursed.
The Ascot is a CYOA-game of an especially minimalist type: you can only type
"yes" and "no". Your choices have some effect on the narrative, though not
overly much: many lead to premature endings, and most others only change either
your inventory or whether you get a companion. There is, in other words, not
much interactivity.
The story itself is not going to win any XYZZY's, but it is brought with a lot
of enthusiasm. It is a hard heart that can remain wholly critical while we get
to defeat an Eagle Monster by giving it a slush puppy (which is s kind of
poison-coloured iced drink, isn't it?), then have our parents take away all the
treasures we found.
So: enjoyable, not outstanding, perhaps a sign of better things to come.
That said, it seems that Michael Martin discovered something impressive in the
game. Unfortunately, I don't know what he is talking about, but it might be
worth investigating.
Reviewed by Michael Martin
This is a terrible, terrible game, and you should go play
it right now.
This is another CYOA. CYOAs are a lot less interactive than standard IF, so
that's generally a point against it. Not only that, this CYOA is "a Shake 'n Nod
Adventure", which is to say, the only interaction you have with it is to say YES
or NO.
I realized this and figured that the best it could hope for was a 2.
But it turns out that this minimally interactive fiction is nevertheless more
engaging than quite a few freeform IFs. The general mechanic is that the game
begins telling a story, and then it will ask you, "Hey, do you want to do X?" or
an NPC will do something similar. The sheer amount of random things it allows
means that you still feel like you're doing something, even though the choices
may be of no consequence. If anything, the choices of no consequence enhance
what immersion there is.
The writing is mostly going for Generic Wacky, and comes off like a geeky
16-year-old on a serious Pixie Stix rush. It isn't good writing, but you can do
Generic Wacky and fall flat, and this, I found, didn't really do so.
It's got a number of both good and bad endings, and the plot doesn't stall
unless you try really hard to make it do so.
And, of course, the fact that the only inputs it really accepts are YES and NO
means that the usual issues with the ADRIFT parser are entirely nonexistent.
So at that point, I figured that this would be Not A Waste Of Time, but still
not really what we're looking for as a Good IF, so it would be a nice solid 4.
And then, I managed to work out how to get the best ending, which involves
(rot13ed for Even More Spoilery Than Usual) npghnyyl rkcybvgvat cnefre reebef
naq znxvat gurz cybg-fvtavsvpnag. This means that the player formulates an
actual plan, and then executes it, and then it can actually work. All through an
interpreter that only really accepts YES/NO answers.
At that point, I was sufficiently impressed that I had to consider this solidly
a middle-tier game. Its precise score will have to wait until I compare it
against the others.
Well done, Bowman. This isn't really the kind of thing I'm looking for in the
IFComp - it never had a chance at top tier - but it's really quite good for what
it is.
Reviewed by Jenni Polodna (Pissy Little Sausages)
Is he the bowman? Does he got a bow? No, you sad bastard, he is the bowsman, and
he gots all the bows.
The Ascot is billed as a yes/no choose-your-own-adventure. It’s interesting to
think about where the boundaries of interactive fiction hypothetically lie
(especially since what constitutes IF in its purest form is a matter for
debate), and whether or not you consider CYOAs to be IF, it’s easy to think of
them as inferior. The PC’s free will is severely restricted. They contain no
puzzles, no need for experimentation, no opportunities for the player to
experience a blinding flash of insight. Some might include “examine important
thing” in their menus, but even then, there is no sense of being free to explore
a new world.
In exchange for this depth, detail, and moment-to-moment sense of freedom,
though, CYOAs gain freedom of story, the ability for the plot to go anywhere and
do anything at a moment’s notice. Multiple endings in IF are a bonus, but in
CYOAs, they’re standard, along with multiple middles, later-middles, and
right-after-the-beginnings. All the time that would be spent writing
descriptions of chairs and making refrigerators openable is instead spent coming
up with different things that could happen, and since “making something happen”
in CYOA terms goes no deeper than writing that something happened, they could be
absolutely anything, which is sort of awesome in its own way.
You guys don’t want to hear me defend choose-your-own-adventure games, though. I
have been reading my analytics. You guys want me to say “tits” a lot and be
funny and at least one of you wants me to fellate a live lobster, which I’ve
already said isn’t happening because the rubber bands might come off and those
things are pinchy.
Tits. Let’s play a game.
Mostly Spoiler-Free Upshot: Well, you can pretty much ignore all that stuff I
just said, because this game is pretty much on rails. That being said, it shows
every sign of being a first game by someone who could, in the future, make
better ones, and what there was of it was, at least, not broken, so I kind of
hate to shove its head in a locker and take its pants. Also, the CYOA format,
while not utilized to anywhere near its full potential, at least meant that I
wasn’t banging my head against “I have no idea what that word means” and “This
chair has no description” and “I could have implemented that but I didn’t.” So,
y’know, there’s that.
[spoilers begin here]
Oh, man, that green-on-black seems to be standard in the ADRIFT runner. Lemme
see if I can change that quick.
Shit. Apparently not.
You decide to go walking to the convenience store one day when all of a sudden a
man approaches you! You think he looks rather goofy-looking in a sombrero and
lederhosen.
I thought we’d talked about this.
Oh no! The ascot is cursed!
“Good lad! Now, then, if you want the family fortune you must meet with Hilda in
White Park–”
“The park around the corner?” you ask.
“Yes,” says weirdly rich guy. “And you must rendezvous with her at thirty
minutes past twelve–”
“In five minutes?” You’re good at this.
“You’re good at this” as a non sequitur is really pretty funny. (Also, if anyone
asks you if you’ve been to the doctor, the correct response is “Yeah, I’ve been
to the doctor. Doctor Hotdog.“ I learned that from Roy and his whiteboard.)
So far it seems as though these questions have obvious correct answers. Do I
want this free thing? Fuck yeah. Do I want lots of money? Fuck yeah. Should I go
get it? What the fuck do you think?
Looks emptier than your Geocities guestbook.
…how long ago was this written?
“Hey, you found this key with all lettering on it, wanna try reading it?” the
game asks me. I have no idea why this game was done CYOA-style and not as
traditional IF, unless the author just didn’t feel like implementing all those
boring rooms and objects. It kind of feels like playing something with an
integrated walkthrough.
I mean, the sight of it is like nine nightmares wrapped in accidental
electrocution… I mean, really shocking.
This analogy is like Michael Showalter trying to do a parody of Eugene Mirman’s
Secret Agent video, but getting confused about what a parody is, and just doing
the video again only not at all funny. And that analogy was like creamed corn. I
can’t really say anything about other people’s analogies.
Hey, genius. Looks like it’s time to stick that key in the door, know what I
mean?
> no
You went through all that trouble to get the key, the goal is in sight, and
you’re stalling now? Something wrong with you or something?
Nah, I just thought “stick that key in the door” was a euphemism for some weird
sex thing I’d never heard of, and wanted you to go into detail. I collect weird
sex things.
“That ascot!” booms the Eagle Beast. “Who have touched it must die!”
I’m pretty sure you can’t use “who” as the subject of a sentence if it’s part of
a – what are those phrases called, that act as adjectives? “Those who have
touched it must die” would work, though. I mean, you can say “This is Bob, who
is interested in learning more about erectile dysfunction,” but you can’t say
“Who is interested in learning more about erectile dysfunction is coming for
dinner tonight, so cook more ham than you normally would.”
Hmmm, apparently I missed something, because not giving the beast the ascot
resulted in the game asking me again whether I was going to give the beast the
ascot, and doing so gave me a “Sayonara, then, quitter!” and ended the game.
Let’s try this again.
Saying “no” to the free ascot in the beginning ends the game too. Remember all
that shit I was going on about in the RSS buffer about how doing a CYOA frees
you up to write many different branches of a story? If you don’t actually do
that, you’re basically saying you’re too lazy to write your game as traditional
IF, but not lazy enough to not write it at all, which, frankly, I find
confusing.
I have my friend Gertie with me this time. Maybe she’ll know what to do with the
Beast Eagle. Also, it’s weird that the strange rich dude knows only to burst
into the shop when I’ve told Doug the clerk we’re related.
Gertie is being very helpful. Last time, I had to wait until the game told me
I’d noticed something, but this time the game tells me when she’s noticed the
same thing and is telling me about it! This is much more convenient!
Gertie eggs you on. “Head towards the light…” She says that all the time,
though.
There is potentially a lot of funny in this Bowsman character. I hope he’s,
like, seventeen. I belonged to the Zany Random Lederhosen school of comedy when
I was seventeen; it’s just something you have to go through and be done with…
well, actually, the fact that I’m wondering which variation on the theme of
“like getting peed on by R. Kelly” to end this sentence with would indicate that
it never quite goes away.
Hey, why couldn’t I give my stuff from the convenience store to the Eagle Beast
when I was alone? Did I somehow not get it? Oh, man, and she stole my fortune.
What a bitch. And if I don’t bring her, I get et. I wonder if there’s a better
ending?
Reviewed by Jake Wildstrom
Well, mechanically it's not what I usually think of as
IF, since it's essentially CYOA with two choices at each step. I don't predict
this doing really well, simply because, on a technical level, CYOA isn't all
that hard.
But within its technically modest presentation, this is not all bad. It's firmly
in the genre of "unlucky everydude's clothing gets him dragged into a world of
weirdshit". You might think that's too specific to be a genre, but then you
clearly haven't played "Space Aliens Laughed at my Cardigan" or "Invasion of the
Angora-fetish Transvestites". This may be better than both of those, or at least
less distressingly juvenile. Its text is freewheelingly zany, but with enough
restraint that eye-rolling was kept to a minimum, and free of the sort of
technical errors that make me wish for the sweet release of death.
I did manage to run into a misdirected conversation prompt which got me stuck in
an unwinnable loop, but the game is short enough that I could restart and work
around it. Trying to do things differently the second time merely pointed up how
linear the whole thing is: almost none of my decisions have any effect, except
for the immediately losing ones.
The author of "The Ascot" is a competent writer with some good ideas, and a
pretty good sense of storycraft. I can't rate this one highly because its
technical ambitions are so very limited, but I would very much like to see more
by this author, but less linear and less limited in interactivity.
Reviewed by tenjouutena
This is simply a yes/no game. Or ‘Shake’ and ‘Nod’ which delightfully work in the parser as well. This game is written very well, the storytelling is pretty good. This is probably the first game of the competition that I would actually recommend to a friend to play. Maybe Interface, but this game for sure. The game is pretty madcap in it’s approach, all in all. Normal world logic doesn’t really work on the game, but it does maintain it’s own internal logic. Plus the cost of failure is pretty low, as there are only about 2 dozen choices in the whole game. I did enjoy this a lot. It was a good diversion, probably a bit short.
Reviewed by Amanda Lange
I had time for one more today.
This was a good one to play before bed and after doing heavy puzzles because it
turns out there was not much thinking in it at all. There wasn't much to it at
all either, really only about 30 minutes of play here, and that's from playing
it through a few times to get what I think are all the endings.
Cute and silly but not particularly special.
I don't think these are any spoilers so I'm just going to stop the short review
here without a cut or anything.
Reviewed by Shane Fitzgerald-Gale
Aha! A kind of CYOA type thingy. Oh, I remember well those wonderful lazy days
of summer in the first flush of youth clutching my copy of FF’s Deathtrap
Dungeon. I still have it. It has expanded to twice it’s original thickness with
the damp and as an extra little bonus, has developed those lovely crinkly pages
that you just can’t help… er… crinkling!
Gods, this coffee’s good. Always tastes more coffee-like first thing in the
morning. Have you ever noticed that? I have. Maybe it’s because i’ve been denied
my every-ten-minutes-coffee-fix by that other enticing addiction, sleep. I’m
soooooooo up early today. Don’t know that my brains kicked into gear just yet.
It’s probably in terrible shock. I think i even heard the morning chorus. Well
not so much a chorus, more a morning squawk-fest. Crows. You gotta love ‘em
really.
Anyway, lets dive straight in shall we? (i’ve a feeling i may regret this sooner
than i think)
credits
[...] My friend Danny did a lot of the beta-testing.
Hmmmmmm…! Now as credits go, this has a lot going for it. One beta-tester who
happens to be ‘your friend Danny’. For a start, it gets round the problem of
your game not being rated because it wasn’t beta-tested, because as he says –
and quite succinctly too i thought – it was; And by his friend Danny, no less.
how to play
Yep, that’s how we find out ‘how to play’. Well, makes sense. No-one could deny,
it does what it says on the tin – you may need to be British to get that – but
even so, there tend to be conventions for these things.
I’m afraid i had to google the Ascot of the title. It appears to be, a very tall
standing collar with the points turned up over the chin, to be worn with an
Ascot tie.
Ok. I’m clearly someone for whom the words self respect mean little. So, anyway
i’m told i decide to go to the convenience store. Here, i meet a man who for no
obvious reason offers me said Ascot.
Hey, man. Wujalykan ASCOT?
Huh! Wassat? Whaaaaa…? Well, if you’re going to start making up your own words
young fella-me-lad, two can play at that game.
The whole game revolves around me typing either yes or no to the various and
unending questions put to me to move the story on. This is not what i remember
it being like back in my FF days. Ah! Deathtrap Dungeon. It had a big wormy-snakey
type creature curled up on the cover as i remember. Can i talk about that
instead? <wistful sighs>
Surely it wouldn’t have been too much trouble to implement a few genuine choices
instead of just yes and no? The trouble is, the whole story just leads you along
one path anyway, so it’s not even as though it matters much what answer you
give. In fact to test this, i answered everything with random yeses – that can’t
be how that’s spelt – and no’s – is that even right? – and ended up not only
doing no worse than before, but the story trundled along quite happily seemingly
not giving a damn whether i was actually there or not. Now, i’m all for
different implementations and different ways of doing stuff, but i’m pretty sure
IF should be a little more interactive than this. Well, that’s my two penneth
anyway – that’s probably not how you spell ‘penneth’ either – but it’s very
early. That’s all the excuse i can muster at the moment.
You know, i actually feel a bit down after playing that. It’s actually depressed
me a little. I’m sure of it.
You bastard!
You’re getting a zero. Don’t do it again. Now go to your room.
Reviewed by Sam Kabo Ashwell
I confess to not quite knowing what an ascot is, although I had the vague idea
that it's a cravat-like thing primarily worn by the tweedy flaming. (This turned
out to not be entirely accurate).
The game calls itself a Shake'n'Nod Adventure, which is to say that it's a CYOA
with yes/no choices. In some senses it's a reasonable send-up of the original
CYOA books - the underdefined instant best friend, the somewhat poorly-conceived
fantastic that intrudes randomly into everyday life, the inevitable moving of
the action to underground tunnels, the abundance of failure endings. The most
important distinction is that the original CYOA series was very heavily forking,
usually telling entirely different stories. This game has a single plot, and
forces you back onto it or else kills you, so even your pitiful choices seem
redundant. (They're not, always, but you'll feel bullied anyway.)
The writing style is over the top slacker conversational with a side of
obnoxious; the narrator enjoys misinterpreting your instructions, and does its
best to make you feel pushed around and bullied. It's a touch manic, as if
written in an afternoon under the influence of stimulants. As wacky goes, it's
not terrible; it has its own voice, even if it's not a voice that I care for.
I am not sure if this quite counts as a game; it certainly doesn't count as IF.
Reviewed by Jeremy Freese
Your enjoyment of this game will l depend on two things.
1) If it’s your kind of humor.
2) If you can accept that the “parser” in this game only takes YES / NO as
input.
The humor works for me (though, being german, I don’t find lederhosen especially
funny. Those things are just hideous. Also, the over-the-top long “funny” name
thing never worked for me.) The game is different from most CYOA books or
adventures I’ve played in that your choices don’t lead to different paths.
Rather, the make for subtle differences in the ending. There are many
possibilites to win. Even more to lose. All of those were wacky enough (but see
above) that I kept playing. One solution is especially hilarious. (Thanks to
McMartin to pointing it out.) Ascot is a funny, short romp. Is it comp material?
Not lengthwise. The yes/no thing was an interesting choice, but the story lacked
substance as well, making the whole thing feel like an interesting looking treat
– you play around with it, examine it, eat it. It was fun while it lasted.
Reviewed by Christopher Huang
The story was exuberantly silly, which could be irritating but which I found
charming instead: it allowed the game to rise above its yes-no format. I think
that the game would suffer if its silliness were squeezed into the conventional
command-line format, or if the yes-no format were used to tell a more serious
story. And by serious, I mean something that doesn't appeal to my inner
six-year-old.
Figuring out how to get the best ending was perhaps the best "aha!" moment for
me in the entire comp: here was a clever, subtle puzzle which called for the
player to use the game's own supposed limitations against it -- how delightfully
meta, and now the reason for the yes-no limitation became wonderfully clear.
This pulled the game up by a notch or two in my estimation.
On the other hand ... it's still a silly game with not much more than the one
puzzle behind it.
As a breakfast, this would be a blueberry pancake and a warm cup of chocolate
milk.
Reviewed by Ben Dixon
I wonder which of the multiple conflicting versions of Adrift that I have
installed will be required to run this game.
“That ascot!” booms the Eagle Beast. “Who have touched it must die!”
This is an interesting diversion, a choose-your-own-adventure with not much
choice and only the most rudimentary adventuring. (Almost apologetically, it
calls itself “non-interactive fiction.”) In common with conventional IF, you can
take an inventory of your possessions and examine them (though there is no need
to do either) and you can die without warning. There are three acts, and one
true way to the winning ending, although decisions made earlier in the game
influence the later game only to a very limited extent. The tale is narrated in
a kind of studenty jive and the parser is absolutely perfect. Those looking for
a challenge will be unimpressed but this is an entertaining enough way to spend
half an hour.
Reviewed by Conrad Cook
This is a CYOA masquerading as an IF. The writer has a good narrative style.
It’s very informal and joking, and the plot is a bit zany, which lead me to
believe that the author is working through some first-author nerves, and feels
awkward and perhaps shy about saying things he really means.
The form is pretty limiting, even for a CYOA. Most CYOAs give more than two
options per choice, and in _The Ascot_ frequently false choices lead to an
end-game. FWIW, I got into the story, which is a short and silly little tale
about an inheritance that, even within its silliness, isn’t too coherent and
doesn’t make much sense. — One character rushes on-stage to make sure you agree
to something, and rushes off, never to be heard from again. That kind of thing.
I don’t honestly believe this belongs in the IF Comp (nor _Trap Cave_) any more
than hypertext does (a suggestion for next year’s troll). But I can’t really say
that with conviction. This game is far, far better, more lively and entertaining
than _Eruption_, which is what we classically mean by “interactive fiction,” but
which failed to tell a story or have any puzzles, really.
Also, _The Ascot_ is very short, and took very little engineering ability to do.
So, if I were rating the games, I really wouldn’t feel right about rating _The
Ascot_ at, say, a 6 or a 7, on its own merits, when vastly more complex, longer,
and more interesting works I was rating lower for their flaws. And I wouldn’t
want _The Ascot_ to beat out a game like _Grounded In Space_, which I didn’t too
much enjoy and which I ultimately consider to be a flawed game, but which is
nevertheless a substantial entry.
On the other hand, I guess I’m glad I played _Ascot_ — as I say, I was
entertained, which might be the bottom line — and I want to be open to
experimentations around the form — but, c’mon, a yes/no CYOA? Even a yes/no CYOA
with a Terrible Eagle Beast is *still* a yes/no CYOA.
(There’s kind of an attempt to make the y/n form integral to the narrative; but
it doesn’t go past silly meta-commentary.)
Maybe I’d create a new scale, 1-5 for CYOAs, and max _The Ascot_ out at 5. _Trap
Cave_ would be somewhere around 3, more for the engine than the writing, which
was mostly in a language I don’t know.
The Ascot review addendum
My review of The Ascot doesn’t give the game all the credit it deserves. There’s
a way to truly win the game which is cleverly linked to the formal constraints
the game puts on you.
So, this game is considerably better than I thought, and I would say is
competitive with a substantial entry like Grounded In Space.
Reviewed by George Shannon
This is a review of The Ascot by Duncan Bowsman, an Adrift game that is not
terrible entered into the 2009 Interactive Fiction Competition.
I’ve been playing with Twine a bit lately, and it’s really neat. I like the idea
of CYOA in principle. Usually it’s pretty poor; an excuse to lead the player on
a linear trail. I like what Chris Klimas has written with it because the
validity of choices aren’t constrained.
“The Ascot,” unfortunately, has a pretty tight flow for you to follow. And
weirdly, I enjoyed it. There are a lot of places to fail spectacularly, inviting
another play-through (I’m sure its shortness is key
The game strays into monkeycheesezany pretty often, but the simplicity of
interaction at least keeps things moving. It’s hard to complain about a game
that doesn’t really take itself seriously and is pretty lightweight.
Technical: I’m… not sure what to say here. My responses of yes and no were
understood, I’m not sure what more than that you need.
Writing: Surprisingly snappy and fast-paced. There are things happening, are you
keeping up or not? (y/n) I do have a feeling that I would have gotten irritating
had it been any longer. The wackiness was at least exciting, I know a lot of
people hated it, but it was the right length for me. I may just have a higher
tolerance for the stuff.
Fun: A few too many restarts required, and quick reliance on the wacky side of
funny for its solutions, but its shortness and rapid pace keep it pretty fun.
Defining Moment: Towards the end, reaching one numerous goofy bad endings: I
realized, if I had a Slurpie to give the Eagle Beast, I bet brainfreeze is corny
enough to be the answer…
Reviewed by Juhana Leinonen
To me the problem with CYOA is that the range of options that the author can
choose as choices at any point during the game is huge. There’s only a small
subset of all the options players might want to do that can be presented as an
option. (In contrast, IF with a parser allows at least trying anything within
the verb-noun(-second noun) structure, even if the freedom of action is often or
always just an illusion.) This is what often annoys me — I might want to try
doing something, but it’s not offered as a choice. I get the feeling that
there’s something wrong with the game design since there’s no clear reason to
why the thing I want to do isn’t given as a choice.
Then there’s The Ascot. The only choices at any point are YES or NO. The rules
have changed: the set of every conceivable action has been reduced to two, and
both of them are always available for the player to choose. This is like the
CYOA equivalent of haiku poetry. In contrast to “regular” CYOA described above
I’m not wanting anything more because nothing else is included in the
overarching rules of the game.
So, I’m not a big fan of CYOA but I’m a big fan of CYOA haiku. Even better, the
Ascot has the same kind of off the wall humor that I’m quite fond of. How can
you say no when someone asks, “Wujalykan ASCOT?”
Reviewed by Rob Menke
Technical: 4
Puzzles: 2
Story: 7
Too! Many! Exclamation! Points!
Talk to man.
Whoa, easy tiger! You better just stick to just YES or NO, cuz you speak through
an electronic interpreter for reasons unexplained. Don’t want to overload it
now, do ya? It’ll totally explode on you if that happens and, I mean, then where
would you be?
Speechless, that’s where!
And pushing it does make it explode. So the major interaction with the game is
saying either yes or no. This is even worse than a Choose Your Own Adventure™
style of game.
Ah, I get it: “Shake ’n’ Nod Adventure.” You’ll have to excuse me: my new
schedule has left me a bit slow on the uptake.
So, basically every wrong answer I give results in either my death or an
uneventful ending. I can live with that, because the author has graciously
allowed undo in the conclusion.
Pity that the game interaction is so simple. There are some classic lines in
here: Looks emptier than your Geocities guestbook, for instance.
Got the game into a state where it refused to accept any answer but yes. I
wonder if this is a bug.
I think I found the optimal ending (the one that brings Gary Coleman to mind),
but I’m not sure: the walkthru is rather vague about it. I’ve covered most of
the possible paths, so I’m satisfied that I can make an honest evaluation. The
concept is cute, but it suffers from the same perceptual lack of freedom that
conversation mazes have. It’s just too easy for the author to come up with a
linear storyline then force the player on it by merging all divergent paths.
Aside from the bang-you’re-dead endings, I think there are only three or four
true endings in the Eagle Beast’s cave. Sad, really: the Dadastic writing
deserved better game structure.
Reviewed by J. D. Berry
Do you want to read a review of The Ascot? Well, do ya, fimblesnitz?
> uh, maybe?
Really? It’s going to be short and rather negative.
> no
You page down to the next review, hoping for something from Paul O’Brian. To
your dismay, Paul has retired from IF Comp reviewing.
You have sighed.
Choose Your Own Adventure (CYOA) is a misnomer. You’re not really choosing your
own adventure; you’re choosing a few extreme paths that trigger virtual cut
scenes. If the author carries 90% of the load, the player therefore has only 10%
of story ownership—an accountability of individual actions. In turn, the
identification with the PC and his predicament lessens. While nearly all IF is
about creating the illusion of choice, overcoming such blatant transparency
seems almost impossible for a CYOA. You’re choosing the author’s adventure (CTAA).
The best a CTAA could hope for, then, is to be interesting in its own right. The
Ascot wasn’t—for me anyway. It’s decently-written, it’s quirky, it’s
occasionally smirk-inducing. However, like the kid on your school bus telling
raunchy stories with odd jargon, initial amusement quickly fades to annoyance.
Eventually, you wonder if the joke isn’t you actually paying attention.
Reviewed by Dark Star
After some of the frustration with the Adrift games last year, I’m a little
hesitant to try any this year wondering if they’re just going to be a waste of
time. And The Ascot didn’t let me down. The game seems like a strange collection
of ideas from a teenagers mind, mixing the real world with fantasy elements.
It's a Choose Your Own Adventure type of game using yes and no for input, making
it real easy to play, but there’s almost no room for replayability once you find
the golden path.
A CYOA can be pretty good. There’s a series of books from the 80’s that I have,
Endless Quest, and even though the writing is simple they’re fun to read. But
when you break down all the action to just yes and no you really take away a lot
from the genre. On top of that there’s not much to do, there are only three to
four scenes depending on the path you take, and each one only asks you a few
questions.
I scored this game a 5. It does have vibrant writing, but I can't give it a
bonus point, everything seems random and odd with nothing coming together at the
end to make a point. The resolution is as week as the set up. I also ran into a
technical error when I didn’t buy a certain item for the last scene. But I did
like some of the imagery, and it doesn't take long to play, so you might want to
give it a whirl. Just know that there's not a lot there.
Reviewed by MathBrush
I swear I
remember playing this game from years back, but I only finished it in 2015.
It was originally in adrift, but now in Choicescript. You are a young man
(?) offered a cursed ascot, and embroiled in a quest to find a hidden treasure.
This sounds like a big game, but there are less than 15 choices in a typical
playthrough. The only options are yes/no (and, in choicescript, ?).
It
turns out, on multiple playthroughs, that there is more to the game than it
seems, making many people rate this game highly.
Reviews should be considered copyrighted by their
respective authors.
| Any donation would be much appreciated to help keep the site online and growing. | To help make your donation quicker and
easier just click the "Donate" button and you will be taken to the secure Paypal donation page. |
|
| Home | About Me |
