Ratings and Reviews by OtisTDog

I experienced this game in an environment far different from its original release in 1998. More than two and a half decades have stripped it of the mystique that it held after years of pseudo-existence as presumed vaporware, and months of hopeful speculation about the return of commercial IF in the form of Cascade Mountain Publishing, a short-lived endeavor by none other than Michael Berlyn of Infocom fame.

This is a work of truly epic scale in terms of play time, and I admire author G. Kevin Wilson simply for the massive size of the effort put into it. Once and Future is easily two or three times the length of a typical long-form work, requiring substantial time at the keyboard even if one makes frequent use of a walkthrough. It's not just a matter of puzzle solving and navigation across the extensive map, it's also a matter of just plain reading; in SPAG #16 Gunther Schmidl notes that a printout of his transcript was 128 pages of 10 point Times New Roman. This is perhaps the only work of IF I've ever gone through that truly felt like reading a novel, and I'm not alone in that impression; in that same issue of SPAG -- which was dedicated in its entirety to this work -- Magnus Olsson compares Once and Future to the Great American Novel in IF form.

Olsson also notes that Once and Future is "a very American game." Its central preoccupations are with matters that had significant impact on American culture in the latter half of the 20th century. From its opening set in the Viet Nam war to its conclusion at (Spoiler - click to show)the site of the Kennedy assassination, American sensibilities dominate. Good guys are good guys, bad guys are bad guys, and where they meet violence is a foregone conclusion. This Manichean worldview translates easily to the world of Arthurian legend, where the majority of the action takes place, but other aspects of this mix of tropes only go together about as well as oil and water. The mishmash of tropes seems to originate in something personal for Wilson; to me the connections between the various categories seemed tenuous at best. (Spoiler - click to show)It was hard enough to try to reconcile the fairy tale atmosphere invoked by King Arthur with the gritty mood of the game's opening scene in a post-propaganda portrayal of the Viet Nam war, but adding (Spoiler - click to show)a literal demon to tempt Lee Harvey Oswald into being an assassin was ultimately stretching things too far for me.

They say that a cynic is just an idealist minus the hope. Wilson's magnum opus blends idealism and cynicism, leading to jarring tonal shifts in many places. The plot is undeniably escapist from the outset, but the protagonist's happy ending (Spoiler - click to show)(achieved when he escapes from our world into one in which JFK was not assassinated) is muted and not in keeping with a typical Hollywood ending; Wilson does not let idealism win at the end, at least on the individual level. (Spoiler - click to show)It seems that even the good endings are linked to a horrible future in which the protagonist is possibly the last person alive in a ruined world, waiting for the arrival of his past self in a scene that you must play through earlier in the game. The treatment of Snookums, an NPC that was much celebrated in contemporary reviews, is ambivalent in this context. It seems to be very vaguely hinted that her simplemindedness is the result of (Spoiler - click to show)brain damage received when she was drowned for being a witch in the real world, but similar logic does not seem to apply to the harm that the PC received in the process of dying, which leaves the portrayal of her interaction with the PC a little disconcerting.

The work's writing has both highs and lows. There are definitely memorable parts, and portions of the writing and craft on display show skilled shaping of the player's experience at the local level. It's at the macro level that it breaks down; although the work holds together well enough in terms of prose style, the story unfolds itself irregularly in a manner that isn't very satisfying.

As is relatively common in "old school" works, there are various distinct areas, each with its own feel to it. In an interview found in SPAG's dedicated issue, Wilson estimated the work to have 300 rooms, 1300 objects, and 35,000 lines of code (in TADS 2). (By comparison, Scavenger has about 15,000 lines of code, and Uncle Zebulon's Will has about 5500.) When you do the arithmetic, you might be surprised that this averages to about 115 lines of code per room, those lines also being spread across the objects within them. This leads to a rather sparse world, with a mostly empty map of rooms containing only limited description. Similarly, the estimate of 600 topics and 40 NPCs implies an average of around 15 distinct topics each, leading to largely uninteresting ASK/TELL interaction with them.

The attention to programmatic detail and game design is sometimes lacking. For example, the protagonist has a (Spoiler - click to show)suit of armor that, when carried, reasonably prevents entering a lake due to its weight and the possibility of damage. However, it is possible for the the PC to be magically transported into the lake while in possession of that object without negative consequences. To get the maximum score, the player must do some mind-reading, such as somehow deducing that all of the wrong pieces for a certain puzzle (Spoiler - click to show)(the planks in the mole tunnel sequence) must be broken instead of just determining which is best to use. Certain puzzles are just arbitrarily-included logic games that do nothing to support the central theme; this was still relatively common at the time when coding for the work began.

This game is historically notable, but I'm not sure how much the average modern player will appreciate it. Overall, Once and Future seems too late for its own time, and much too late for today. I would advise anyone trying it to keep a walkthrough handy and not to hesitate to make liberal use of it.

I happened across this game while doing some research on the history of the XYZZY Awards; this work received the 2008 XYZZY Award for Best Use of Medium.

This work is a rare example of a game that significantly leverages the multimedia capabilities of Glulx, featuring a splash screen, graphics, music and sound effects. There are some interesting innovations, such as the use of a background image depicting elements of the single room of the game -- a background that blurs when the PC dons a spacesuit. The soundtrack is thematically appropriate to the game world of the 1960s, sounding a bit like experimental music of the era, but it is unfortunately short and repetitive enough to irritate unless turned down in volume. (But don't turn it off or you'll miss the music at the end.)

The plot is part humorous and part serious. An average citizen of the Soviet Union is drafted to oversee a Soviet moon base housing nuclear missiles, intended as a failsafe against nuclear attack. When the Motherland is attacked, the PC sets in motion the counterstrike but soon has second thoughts. The rest of the plot concerns how you choose to resolve the situation, complicated somewhat by the unexpected presence of other interested parties.

Three significant NPCs allow conversation, and this is done via freeform input that seems to use some sort of keyword matching. I've run into this kind of experimental conversation engine a few times, and even games of the 1980s made attempts along this line. As with most experiments of this type, it does not seem like a huge improvement over the ASK/TELL model other than the reduction in required typing, and falls afoul of the usual inability to interpret the context of natural language. There is no disambiguation, and in at least one place there is a requirement to use a two-word phrase that the responses for the individual words don't suggest. Some replaying shows that the game is willing to work with the player somewhat here, guiding one forward if the input includes something relatively close, but it's still pretty finicky overall. The included walkthrough spells out the necessary keywords if one is stuck.

As described in Kake's review, the puzzles seem almost universally unfair by modern standards, mostly by virtue of the game not bothering to inform the player of its expectations. I don't think that I've ever encountered a game that has a smell-based puzzle before, for example, and although there is a single conversation response that offers an indirect clue here, the response to >SMELL doesn't help the player along much.

The game oscillates unexpectedly between the two poles of serious and goofy at several points, but overall it leans toward the goofy side. There was much to like about it, but for the most part those elements (Spoiler - click to show)(such as a robot that looks like a toy duck, or alien mice) are gated by a very old school aesthetic for puzzles which is grounded more in riddles than commonly-accessible logic. A more modern sensibility to puzzle design and interaction would improve this work tremendously.

I would still recommend this work as an interesting example as part of a study of the evolution of the form, or to anyone who craves the input-as-riddle aesthetic. For everyone else, you're probably best served by keeping the walkthrough handy and making liberal use of it.

In its first moves, First Things First comes off as a kind of reverse "my apartment" game -- the protagonist has accidentally locked himself out of his house, and the spare key that he had hidden for just such an emergency isn't there. The modest beginning belies the scale of this work; structurally, it is something of a hybrid between Curses (Spoiler - click to show)(i.e. a quest in pursuit of a small and mundane goal that expands in scope and significance) and A Mind Forever Voyaging (Spoiler - click to show)(in which the action takes place across five time periods for the same location, each separated by a decade).

Per author J. Robinson Wheeler's description, this work, which was ambitious for its era, took about five years to develop. It was begun in 1996 and not released until 2001, then later improved in a 2006 re-release. As far as I can tell, the 2006 v3 re-release is the same as the original except for bug fixes.

As is to be expected in a game this old, gameplay is on the crueler side of the Zarfian scale, without apology. At first I thought it was truly "cruel," but the only verified dead-ends I encountered were of class "nasty," downgraded to at worst "tough" given the ability to >UNDO multiple times in a row. Certain occasions that I thought were dead-ends were not; many critical puzzles have multiple solutions, so it would have been possible to make progress despite appearances. Save games are a good idea due to the game's length if nothing else; although I did use them (or just plain >RESTART) to backtrack several times, I usually did so looking forward to the experience of trying something different.

There are also some significant flaws in terms of bugs and/or puzzle implementation. At least one bug allows a puzzle to be bypassed (Spoiler - click to show)(getting past a hostile dog by putting the things it's guarding onto something else without first picking them up), though there are multiple solutions for that trivial obstacle so gameplay is not really affected. Some of the information and feedback is inconsistent in a way that could be very frustrating, including (Spoiler - click to show)the necessity of putting something into something else that seems much too big to fit as described (Spoiler - click to show)(the cannonball in the drainpipe), the behavior of an oddly anthropomorphized squirrel (Spoiler - click to show)(it shows a very un-lifelike response to a book that is not typical of the game's style), inconsistency in awarding score on a puzzle that requires multiple cycles of an action so that it's not clear that progress is still being made (Spoiler - click to show)(while applying multiple doses of plant fertilizer), descriptions of thrown items that imply a very low likelihood of success for the action that turns out to be the required solution (Spoiler - click to show)(when throwing things at the small window), and a "secret" (i.e. unmarked) conversation keyword prompt at a critical point (Spoiler - click to show)(when confronted by the security guard and asked for a name) in which it is reasonable for the player to expect >SAY to work. These are the most significant of the issues that I encountered, but there are also numerous small errors of the type that are unlikely to be encountered and do not affect significantly gameplay if they are. (Spoiler - click to show)Examples: a disambiguation issue between a key and its copy, the functional presence of environmental features such as the sky in the basement of the office building in the farthest future time zone, incorrect scope resolution for the switch to a secret door such that it can be accessed from the wrong side, buggy implementation of "faceless" doors in the future office, etc.

Beyond definite flaws there are some questionable design choices, such as the fact that the map changes in small but annoying ways as the protagonist explores (Spoiler - click to show)multiple time zones -- many's the time that I entered a string of movement commands to get someplace only to find that it failed halfway. Additionally, there are several red herrings, which are fine as part of an old-school style but which irk a bit in a game with an inventory limit and doubly irk when they seem like they might work to address some of the problems encountered by the PC. Worst of all is something that strikes me as a straight-up dirty trick: (Spoiler - click to show)a locked door that has no key and can simply be unlocked by hand, but which is not described as having any kind of latch mechanism. (That's a terribly mean joke on the player at best, in the vein of +=3, but I have to admit that I laughed when I stumbled across the solution accidentally. Seriously, though -- don't do this.)

NPCs are present and fairly advanced for the era; they definitely present personalities, and two of them are major characters in the story. The ASK/TELL conversation implementation is limited by modern standards, with much of the effort of topic development having been put into certain key conversations that are required. One of the NPCs is designed to serve as the built-in hint system, though I didn't realize this when playing due to my limited interaction with him. Decompilation reveals pieces of an unfinished hint system using a >THINK or >HINT command or similar. This would have been a welcome feature, but the vast possibility space created by the premise seems like it would require a large effort to cover all of the possible variations -- possibly this is why it was abandoned.

Despite the above, there's a certain base cheeriness and sincerity to this game that makes it practically irresistible, plus a puzzle design sensibility that's often quite clever once past the prologue. I was well-motivated to overlook the various issues listed above. Although the game starts out with a goofy and trivial tone, it steadily -- almost imperceptibly -- becomes more serious as you progress. As tone and style shift, it begins to offer more philosophical beats. On top of that, the game keeps redefining the player experience as you progress in interesting ways, going from wacky "my apartment" antics to (Spoiler - click to show)intrepid time explorer adventure to potential romantic comedy to 80s corporate villainy, and then on to a dramatic climax that was definitely not what I was expecting. (Spoiler - click to show)The story's climax, which though memorable is one that offers little in terms of interactivity, reveals to the player that the player character is not the main character of this story.

There are other surprises, too -- places where the game lingers on states of affairs that would probably be culled in something other than a first work. The average author would be expected to trim this type of thing, because it's pure "waste" in terms of play time and programming effort... except it's not. Wynter's review notes an extended sequence in which the protagonist struggles to overcome an obstacle that seems like a legitimate avenue to reach a long-standing goal. It's not possible for the PC to succeed in this vignette, but while you're in it the game provides all of the signals that you're on the right track. Should you happen to encounter that scenario, once you've solved the puzzle you'll be left with a sense of wonder at the way that Wheeler went the extra mile to implement this sequence, part of an apparent commitment to supporting a broad range of potential trajectories through the game's possibility space in a manner that makes any one of them feel natural.

Really, "surprise" is the watchword of this work, and one of its best features. First Things First kept surprising me on the upside as I played it. It felt like the game covered a succession of stories -- almost like the old school "pastiche" approach to puzzle design was instead applied to the narrative. Since the frequent surprises were an essential part of the experience, I think the first time through it is likely to be the best time, and I strongly recommend approaching it with as little knowledge of the plot and puzzles as possible. Despite the possibility of getting stuck, I would also recommend avoiding hints from outside sources -- try the built-in ones by talking to (Spoiler - click to show)the proprietor of the sandwich shop instead, and don't forget to save the game every so often.

After finishing the game, my first thought was that -- over two decades since its original release -- it really cries out for a remake, or at least an update to clean up lingering bugs and sand off the remaining rough edges. Quite intriguingly, author J. Robinson Wheeler recently posted a screenshot suggesting the partial development of a sequel titled No Time to Lose. The serial number shown suggests that it was being developed in 2005, prior to the current release of First Things First, and it would be very interesting to see what Wheeler had in mind about the protagonist's future.

Time travel stories are something of a cottage industry in IF, but this is one of the best ones that I've played. If you enjoy that type of story and are prepared to approach this work with an old school mentality, you'll almost certainly enjoy First Things First. If those conditions don't apply, your mileage may vary, but I'd still encourage any would-be author to check this one out for its unique features -- it's definitely something different in terms of crafting style.