Ratings and Reviews by Andrew Schultz

I think one thing it's hard for traditional parser games to do is encourage experimentation--Inform's default rejections are necessarily neutral yet tough to change. "You can't go that way." "You don't see any such thing."

That's not mind control, and more colorful options would annoy people anyway, but it's discouraging--shouldn't you have known beforehand not to X, or not to fiddle with Y?

Living Will's goal is unstated--maximize your money or, perhaps, your happiness, as one of four people close (or who can claim to be close) to ER Millhouse, a magnate who's made in the Congo with his company Droxol Vox. Each choice you make adjusts lawyer and medical fees, bequests (e.g. how much wealth you get,) DV's stock price, and even which of the four people you can be.

The first few times you'll undoubtedly stumble, but there are enough different ways to play the game, from too nasty to too generous, that you can--by the time you've run through a couple characters--predict how the third and fourth will do. I didn't dig in as deeply as I could have, but the parallel stories don't seem to change the basic facts of the past. You can change people's motives or how they feel now, but understanding the core story appears to be key in getting the result you want.

I'm a bit disappointed this game didn't do better in IFComp 2012, though I will waffle here and say I can't pick a game I'd boot from the top half, which this missed. I gave it a Miss Congeniality vote, though I also really enjoyed the games I tested. Perhaps the period-specific writing turned people off, but it seems necessary, to euphemize the dying man's actions.

Because of this and other things, LW feels a bit esoteric to start, and though it's clearly completeable in two hours, you need to have your thinking cap on to enjoy it, and you should try several radically different paths through before giving up on it. It's a good use of Undum's strengths, with the scoreboard that each move changes and a cool map of Zaire, too.

And any game where (Spoiler - click to show)unless you're very clever, the lawyers get most of the loot, even/especially when they help you rip off other inheritors, gets bonus points for me.

Twine seems to remove the need to have a map, etc., that more formal text-adventure languages require. This low barrier may lead to a lot of barely-there games, but when it works (as in this game) it -feels- easy and intuitive and has has a high fun-to-text ratio.

You've got only two actual challenges per game, and they're seemingly trivial, which is part of the fun. You have choices like where to throw chocolate sauce at a space pirate or whether to put anchovies or spices on a pizza. These aren't new gags, but they don't have to be. This game combines pizza delivery jokes with some science fiction tropes, and crossovers like this always help keep the old jokes from getting stale. That, plus well paced text (no responses too short or long) make for a successful formula without feeling formulated.

It shouldn't take more than fifteen minutes to get through the whole game, including the amusing "bad" endings, if you're a completist, and it's well proofread and so forth. I even found that the "right" choice (Spoiler - click to show)was mainly trying for the silliest action, because that seemed to be in the game's flow. And it worked.

This game is a bit too short for me to feel comfortable giving it a rating, but there's more than enough there that if you like this sort of thing, you probably will like this game. Given its quality, I'd like to see something more ambitious from this author in Twine, though I also wouldn't complain about several other short games this fun instead.