i played the game for about 2 hours straight. got pretty tired of it at the point where they were in the gym boxing. Actually that boxing match was a lot more fun than the other parts of the game, but i was getting to the point where i felt everything was taking to long. unfortunately i could not save the screen i was at.
Thinking about the screen shot i did save made me think about the beginning of the game. After the forced killing, i turned myself in 3 times. i didn't even want to continue, i know the point of the game was to try to get away but i felt aweful and couldn't get myself to pretend nothing happened. But i gave in to see what would happen next. Again at his apartment i turned myself in twice and at the park i saved the kid 3 times before i realized i was forced to be selfish and chose my life over his. B. S. what he said about if he had to do it all over again he would have saved the boy and not him. i didn't even get that choice. The whole time i felt that the choices that were given to me weren't really my choices, and what if it was. The obvious answer is that the game would lose its fun but i can't help but think there could be other ways to make this game more interesting other than having one choice to be bad.
As far as the story line goes i do like switching from player to player... sticking with one would be extremely boring. I find it interesting the different characters in this game. The things and materials each character is associated with. The best of course was Tyler and his apartment (posters, chairs, walls) and the music that went with him. It was very funny. interesting stereotype.
Difficulties i faced probably because i have not played the game enough was pressing the color pads like simon says. but eventually i got use to it. i do like the fact that in the autopsy room pushing the bottons gives you hints or extra facts about the murder.
overall my experience playing the game was nott obad. I do like watching movies better and reading more just because i am not getting stuck with the technical parts of moving around and it flows better i guess.
Comments (1)
Ergodic literature is traversing a narrative with "non-trivial" effort. I guess mastering mouse manoeuvres and such requires some effort but is it non-trivial? It seems to me that reading Pynchon requires a lot more non-trivial effort than clicking my way through the Indigo Prophecy. And why should the aim be to make narratives more difficult to traverse? Shouldn't interactivity being making it easier and quicker to experience narratives in a non-trivial way? I can imagnine that Gravity's Rainbow could be transformed from a mind-bending slog (at least for me) into a sheer delight while still getting it's meaning across. Or, then, does it just become the Cliff's notes version? And why should we be wanting to speed things up?
Posted by Andy Cox | November 18, 2007 8:03 PM
Posted on November 18, 2007 20:03