Ratings and Reviews by archcorenth

This game is actually fairly well-written and feels like an authentic (if unrisky) sequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark. Unfortunately, there are two things that work together to make this game downright unplayable. The first is a VERY picky parser. As an example, there's a point at which you must lasso a rock shelf to climb up. Well, at least if you've read the manual, you know that lasso is possible verb you can use. But don't try to lasso the shelf and don't try to lasso the rock shelf, make sure to lasso the rock or you're not getting up there. "Rock" in my opinion is a descriptive adjective modifying shelf. I don't know normally interact directly with adjectives in text adventures.

Well, I wouldn't mind so much typing different variations in a game if I'm pretty sure what the answer is if not for the game's other problem which is that you're constantly on a timer and if you enter more than three prompts before what the game wants, you die. At least you can save, but it's just constant saving and trying and loading and trying. It ruins any sense of suspense the writing could drum up.

I was thinking about why the game includes the constant pressure of death at all. Well, Indy is constantly under that threat in the movie, so shouldn't it be in the game? I think that's fair. You should have to move quickly. But maybe there should be lots of options then. If you could quickly grab for one of four or five different options, some of which might get you into a worse, more desperate situation, but not end the game, that might feel like an Indy movie.

I really enjoyed Bob Bates's newest game Thaumistry, so I went back and am playing his old games, some of which I'd played before and some I hadn't. Some of this was familiar and some wasn't. So, I suppose I played this and never finished it. Sadly, I'm finding a slog today much as it must have been back then.

A big part of the problem is that I don't think it's very funny. This is particularly surprising because Thaumistry often made me chuckle or even laugh out loud. Some of the time this game can get me to groan which is better than most of the time which just leaves me irritated. The humor in this game isn't really jokes, it's just references to things. Do you like SNL? Well, here's a Steve Martin character and here's a Gilda Radner character. Do you like Monty Python? Well, here are the Frenchmen from the Quest For the Holy Grail. None of these characters really do anything funny. They just recite variations on the same lines they had in their original incarnation. Is this parody? I don't know. If it doesn't have any point of view on what it's referencing it feels more like plagiarism.... But I don't think anyone would complain.

The story is not very front and center. You're given a quest in the opening scene which requires you to collect various silly items scattered around the fantasy kingdom. It doesn't really develop as you play despite cutscenes playing between each chapter. The chapters are little mini adventures where you must solve some puzzles in order to attain the item. These are absolutely fine and generally logical and well-clued. I have no complaints with the puzzles, which is why I'm giving this game three-stars. But you almost have to ignore the environment to enjoy them. Also, an odd thing about the plot. There's some naughty material on the same level as Spellcasting. (it's also similar to Spellcasting in that the main character is portrayed as a completely loser and yet all the busty women immediately throw themselves at him.) I certainly have no problem with adult material, but it's just strange that Spellcasting was marketed as an adult game (that I can't really imagine anyone older than teenager getting excited by) while this was sold for everybody. It's just curious.

I really enjoyed this first Gateway and I thought this one was much better.

Between playing the two games I read the book, and the stories of the games are different enough I feel like they are different stories just set in the same universe. And if that was the intention, that's a pretty fun way to make a game and maybe more games should be like that.

I'm giving it five stars, but it's not a perfect game. The first game was actually a bit more ambitious by having the big Gateway asteroid to explore between the levels. The closest this comes to that is the Heechee homeworlds. And they are quite fun and interesting to look around in, but they are contained to their portion unlike Gateway in the first game.

The story this time though is much better with a cyclical plot that takes you back to one of the first areas, which is something I always like, and the alien planets more interesting this time, especially the planet with with these crystal snake things that communicate with telepathy and provide the most original puzzles.

I would have liked the NPC's to be more interactive. They are just there to provide info dumps like NPC's in modern games. In a lot of infocom games the NPC's actually did things both to help and hinder and sometimes both as with the Thief in Zork! I'm not sure why designers decided to stop with that. There was some intimation that your character might have romantic feelings for another character, Diana, when they mentioned her again in the final cutscene, and I was like, why? She didn't do anything useful at all and just went away and hid during the climax. Why should care about her?

So, yeah, as I say maybe not as ambitious as it could be, but in many ways it's just what I like to play, and if you think you'd like it you should try it.

Well, I thought the game was fantastic. I started on it somewhat doubtfully. I played a Mystery Science Theater 3000 text adventure based on the game, Detective, on this site earlier and thought it was hilarious and went about looking for more. The second Mystery Science Theater game lampooned a game called Stiffy Makane and that brought me to this.

I wasn't sure I was going to play this for more than five minutes when I started out. The business with references and footnotes felt very awkward and none of them were very interesting, but when I stumbled upon Julia and talk about her nose, I knew I had to play the entire game simply because I read Latin per se illustrata by Orberg. I just love the kinds of things this game lampoons and I like that having sex with characters isn't the reward for completing a puzzle. Most characters just want to have sex with you. Isn't that a better fantasy than in things like Leisure Suit Larry?

I will say that the best material in the game is frontloaded. I quite liked traveling around the Roman world and interacting with celebrities. The section in Judea was actually my favorite--and frankly the false ending there is actually the best ending. After you acquire the banana things slow down a bit. Hell wasn't very interesting to me which was disappointing even though I suppose that bit had the best puzzles. Maybe it's because it was inspired by the Wasteland which I read in school but made no impression on me. Then the Vergil section simply felt unnecessary and not very much interesting happened in it, although I suppose the duck was fun (despite the fact that I've never read Henry Miller so I didn't catch that reference at all, but I guess I put two and two together...?) But then I forgave the game slowing down in those parts because the end was fantastic again, one of the best endings of all games.

So, yeah, I think this is easily one of the best text adventures I've played. Well worth it's high rating. Strong story, lots of jokes, a couple of passages like the one with the barbarian are even passably erotic.