King of Xanadu - MACHINES UNDERNEATH
I’ve had to have a bit of a think about this game. On the one hand, some of the writing is very nice indeed. It manages the tricky job of being both evocative and descriptive without straying into purple prose.
On the other, I’m left a little frustrated. Ultimately, I think I understand what the game is reaching for. As the titular king, we think we have ultimate power. In fact, to the point that we believe the sun is showing disloyalty, but “at least the moon remains obedient”. The narrative does a neat job of showing us that this is not, in fact, the case. As plague descends on the kingdom and the king falls into madness, the kingdom fails, power dies - ultimately leading to a moment of revelation and self-discovery. I see from Mike’s review that the comparison with Shelley’s Ozymandias has already been drawn, so I’ll not type more on that.
So why am I a little frustrated? There’s a tension here between choice, consequence and revelation that’s not, I feel, fully explored. Mainly in that there is no consequence. However thoughtful, capricious, wilful or cruel the King’s commands, the land is beset by plague. As the reader, we are shown the nature of power in the very opening of the game. Ultimately our choices don’t alter the nature of this catastrophe - we’re just watching it unfold. Which is absolutely what the game is going for - applause. But, there’s something there around the impact of choice on how the plague unfolds, on how this leads to a revelation. The end of the game is the choice of revelation. It leaves it up to the reader to interpret the narrative experience as a moment of self-discovery. I wonder.
In general, a narrative will build toward a revelation. In IF, we have the opportunity to enable the reader to dictate the actions of the protagonist and ultimately, affect the outcome and to provide a conclusion that reflects the choices the player has made. Giving them the ‘option’ of which revelation to take away feels like a bit of a cop-out.
I’m tying myself in knots. Would the game have worked with this? Is this in any way representative of what the author is going for? I don’t know - it’s niggling at me, though.
Given that this game has got me thinking about all this (pretty incoherently, I admit) - that’s got to be a good thing, right? This review is obviously outrageously subjective. Others will probably entirely disagree with me. I very much enjoyed this game. As I said at the start, the writing is excellent, the narrative effective. It’s a very good game.
Also. The final line of this piece is absolutely perfect.