Imprimatura by Elizabeth Ballou (with Alina Constantin, Anna Link, and Rachel Wang)
First of all, I’m so glad the blurb immediately explains the title: “Imprimatura (It.): the first layer of paint on a canvas.”
This game is going to produce a picture. Colour me intrigued.
The writing is evocative and beautiful (essential for this story), and the soundtrack and effects are perfect too. It’s very warm and gentle (probably partly because of the choices I made).
Sometimes I got the same painting description twice in a row, which I think is an error. On the other hand, the game explained at the end that even selecting the same paintings in a replay will unlock different memories. So maybe not.
It was fascinating, well-written, and the final result was interesting as well as giving me the option to go back and change things, which I liked. I didn’t like that the emotional choice of the final painting always partly obscured the image, but that’s an artistic choice I think. The layering along the way is incredible.
It’s an extremely replayable game. There are over 100 versions of the final painting and much much more to discover along the way.
“Quest for the Teacup of Minor Sentimental Value” by Damon L. Wakes
I’m surprised but pleased by the basic visuals and animation. They’re sweet. I don’t think they’re a custom thing; I think Inform or something can do things like that. But I could be wrong. And they’re not something I’ve played before, so they have novelty value for me. If every game had them, they’d be annoying.
I quickly reached the bad ending, which was just fine by me. The game is very merciful and simple, so it’s easy to explore here and there without feeling any pressure.
I laughed out loud at the line, “I keep forgetting there are only two other people in this village.” A perfect joke for the IF Comp, where a significant number of judges are also authors, who scrambled furiously to meet the deadline and probably had to massively cut down their original grand idea along the way.
And laughing even more at, “Sorry I didn’t hear you knock. I was busy alphabetising my potatoes.”
I’ll stop reporting every single line that makes me laugh, because I suspect now there may be a lot of them. (EDIT: There were.)
Pretty sure the maths question is wrong. But maybe I’m missing something.
I reached a REALLY COOL bad ending (and several that were just funny), and eventually reached the good ending.
This is an adorable, funny game that is simple, well executed, and highly enjoyable. Colour me impressed.
Could someone add these to the review spreadsheet? I’m having some concentration issues so I don’t think I’m up to doing it myself.
I plan to play “Doctor Who and the Dalek Super-Brain” and “Birding in Pope Lick Park”. And one other (haven’t decided which one yet, but another short choice-based one).
I would have played “Unreal People” but I can’t stomach the use of AI, even just for a cover. All AI art is theft from artists, who deserve to be paid.
Is that the one about the probability of three points on a sphere lying in a hemisphere? The game is correct that it is 100%. Take two points, and a draw a line between them: this is a grand circle that divides the sphere into two halves. The third point is going to lie in either of those two halves (or on the line itself). Just choose that hemisphere, and you’ve got one that contains all three.
Doctor Who is excellent so I was always tempted by this one (and somewhat concerned about intellectual property law). Inside the game, it says that it is fan-fiction and does not generate any revenue. But the IF comp DOES give out cash prizes, so doesn’t that count as revenue?
I do think the author is safe simply because they’re too small to bother crushing.
Of course, copyright lawyers and daleks both really, really enjoy disintegrating things. And Doctor Who is on Disney+ now, and Disney is famously fond of bringing the full force of the law down to exterminate even the most tiny and innocent of artists.
Hmm.
Anyway, that’s not really my business.
I very much enjoyed pushing the giant red button to start the game.
This is my third surprisingly visual game in a row! The visuals are basic, but enjoyable. However, the general experience is clunky. It feels like the choices I make are merely scrolling up and down a prescribed conversation.
I died horribly (in a genre-appropriate fashion). The death is totally fine (good, even) but this game required much more problem solving skill than I think I possess.
The ability to click on objects in the image to get more detail is very cool, even if I cordially dislike the entire ‘click such-and-such to get more detailed info’ system. Obviously that’s a matter of taste.
Some of the writing is pretty basic, but some bits are good.
. . .
I think this requires me to sometimes remember things, which due to my various mental issues means I can’t properly play the game. So I’ll stop here, and I won’t rate this game either.
Putting the opening of the story on the title is an unusual choice, but fine. It’s also the blurb. Still fine, just unusual.
It’s a perfectly adequate opening.
Pope Lick Park seems to be a real park—so much so that there’s a link to the actual web site on the first page. I really like that. There’s loads more links after that (some informative, and at least one to a comic), which is also cool.
The pics are way too big for my browser, but that’s probably my fault. (Yup; I switched browsers and all is well.)
The accessible text is excellent.
There are some minor typos and a LOT of photos. The bird photos are excellent. The other photos are adequate.
For a little I felt like, “What’s the point of the story?” but clicking on the birds I saw along the way became more and more compelling. I hate repeating text (which I got a little as I wandered around) but the game clearly remembered when I’d been somewhere before, which meant I’d often see new text or even new birds in the same area. That was VERY cool. It really felt quite immersive, in the gentlest possible way. I began to find the scenery photos more compelling too, as it became clearer and clearer that this is, effectively, non-fiction. Everything here is real.
Okay, I’m finished my play-through and I’m totally converted. This is a great story that grows more fascinating as you stroll through it. And yes, it’s incredibly educational and beautiful too.
After a while, the poetic qualities grow stronger. It’s hard to know what the plot is, and sections seem disjointed. I’m not sure what my choices are doing most of the time.
…
Wow, that was WEIRD.
I think I sort of understood the plot in the end, and a lot of my confusion was due to the deliberately mysterious writing. I’m not sure it worked, not quite. But the writing suggests this author will appeal to some people, and has plenty of talent.
The opening confuses me even more, as it sounds educational. However, it’s very interesting, talking about a different version of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Which also doesn’t seem to relate to any of the information about this game I’ve been given so far. Is it comedy? Horror? Realistic? Fantasy? I can’t answer any of those questions, when normally I’d be able to answer them from the image OR the blurb OR the title OR the opening paragraph.
But there’s no typos and there’s some psychology, so I’m interested.
Okay! That was a kind of prologue, ending with a joke. So… comedy? Probably? I can certainly deal with that.
This is delightfully weird.
Here’s an entirely random example. What does it mean? I don’t know. But I’m enjoying the ride.
I enjoyed the ride all the way to the end, and was impressed when the game fed various choices back to me in a cohesive description. I’m not sure I’d recommend this game, but maybe I would?
I have to let it percolate for a while. The writing is interesting and solid throughout, so I suspect it’ll rate highly with me. I’m biased like that.
