DemonApologist's IFComp 2024 Responses

3 | THE DEN

3 | THE DEN
by: Ben Jackson

Progress:

  • I was able to complete this game in around 1h45m, reaching an ending that I found satisfying.

Things I Appreciated:

  • The game did a great job creating stakes where it felt like I was on the verge of failing (i.e., the recharge rate of Father ticking upwards, the main power time ticking downwards) when there was actually ample time for me to do everything I needed to. Even though I had read the game’s assurance that it was essentially impossible to create a no-win scenario, I still felt the tension building and felt pressure to be deliberate about the number of turns that I was using.

  • The game’s interface felt very natural and unimposing. It was easy to navigate between rooms, different characters, and input information like in the decryption game.

  • The puzzles all had very reasonable solutions. While I didn’t necessarily feel challenged by the puzzles, what I appreciated a lot is that sometimes when there was an “obvious” solution, something would go wrong, creating a bit of a twist where you had to do something else. (Retrieving the screwdriver comes to mind: you think you’re just going to solve it with a basic use of a magnet and get swerved by the magnet failing, requiring you to take another route). Similarly, the checkmarks indicate rooms that you don’t need to revisit as you’re done there, which reduces some of the tedium of re-checking locations.

  • The plot/themes unfold in an elegant way. There are various interesting “reveals” that build on each other, and when you realize the overarching theme of what the game is doing, suddenly a lot of the details click into place. I imagine the game is enjoyable to replay as a result, because you would read it with the knowledge of what details to look for. Very cool!

  • The decryption minigame—finally, all the time I’ve wasted playing Wordle has paid off.

Feedback/Recommendations/Questions:

  • It took me a bit to get used to the presentation style at the beginning—I didn’t like that when you clicked to a new scene, several paragraphs appeared at once. My attention was often drawn to the choices at the bottom first rather than the text. For my personal reading style, I would have loved if, on entering a new scene, the text appears one paragraph at a time (with a click through to reveal more until the choices at the end). You wouldn’t want this to happen when returning to a scene you’ve already seen as it would waste time, but I think this would’ve helped me feel immersed in the text at the beginning of the game, where my experience was a bit scattered. I think this is entirely a personal preference thing and to be clear, I locked in to the style pretty quickly as it is. This is just like, if I had to find anything structurally about this game to change, what I would suggest.

  • One thing I didn’t like was that when switching characters, their name would appear and then disappear instantly when mousing over the name (replacing it with the text of the scene). This caught me off guard (mini jump-scare) the first time it happened because my mouse happened to be in a place that auto-triggered this event when I’d just started the game basically. I’d recommend instead a “click anywhere on the screen” type interface since that’s a more active choice by the player rather than easy to trigger accidentally as I did.

What I learned about IF writing/game design:

  • Having experienced a few different types of games now, this feels a bit more “parser-like” than a more straightforward Twine narrative. Like obviously it doesn’t meet the definition of a parser game, but I think what I’m struggling to say is that the room-by-room navigation feels like a distinctly different genre that evokes some of the exploration style of a parser game. It reminds me of point-and-click mystery/puzzle games but text-focused. I thought this was an appealing way of structuring a game.

  • This is another example of how important the user interface is. The side panel should not be undervalued as a space for easing the player experience, so I’ll try to remember that and think about how this game used that space so well.

  • The game stores information that you’ve learned so that when you return to a location with new knowledge, you receive a new version of the scene. I’ve only used Twine in a very basic way for the one/first game that I made for the Single Choice Jam 2024, so I’m looking forward to better understanding the system and how it uses variables, I’m assuming, to create these kinds of effects.

  • There was one interesting moment where I was about to leave with Vee having never visited the VCU room where the game prompted me to consider if I had time to visit it. I thought this was a fascinating choice because part of the interactive element is that the player could just choose not to reveal lore information when solving the puzzles. But the game wants you to see this room because of its significance. There’s a tradeoff where the game shows its hand a bit in prompting you to go here, vs. just allowing you to not learn the information at this location. I thought the way it was presented, while it did tip me off, at least does some legerdemain to frame it more about your choice (do you have enough time?) so that it still feels like you have the agency to ignore it even though, realistically, you won’t. I think this is a lesson in balancing real vs. illusive player agency and the tradeoffs that can happen.

Quote:

  • “If you go now, you will never be able to return.”

Lasting Memorable Moment:

  • Encountering the apple tree in the viral containment unit and suddenly realizing, you know… the implications! (And similarly, the very final screen where the lights go off on the title art.)
9 Likes