Star Tripper

I’m definitely being challenged with what even is IF. There is a good half hour setup narrative here, that adheres to conversational IF conventions. I’m not exactly sure what story effect the choices have, but they do allow you to establish the protagonist’s character. After a good amount of light but amusing table setting, the main goal is revealed: make enough money to rescue your relative via space exploration, trade and hustling.

If I were being maximally uncharitable, I would call it Space Grind! That’s way too facile, and actually ends up being wrong. Here comes a digression: sit down kids and let gramps tell ya how it used to be.

Back in the 80’s there were things called Microgames - just bigger than pocket sized boardgames that mixed complicated rule sets with small maps and mini cardboard counters. There was one called Trailblazer whose very small font book was mostly tables and tables of d6 planet randomization: goods produced, goods demanded, and market sensitivity. The game itself was explore, and set up trade routes to make space money. Lord was it a chore to generate a planet on the fly (and maintain its markets!) as players explored empty space. A few years later, the personal computer was powerful enough to offload that work. 35-40 years after that, we have Star Tripper. (I understand there was a relevant Palm Pilot event in between, not in my syllabus.)

The genius of every iteration of this idea is that 1) humans love exploring and 2) humans love the smug feeling they get from buying low and selling high. Just love it! We poured hours into that tiny square of cardboard cackling over our pretend space money and trade routes, shuffling page after page of pretend planet markets looking to eke out a better buy/sell chain. Never mind that it was Grind before we had a word for it. Most especially never mind that once you seemed to establish an optimal route, notwithstanding marginal market variations, the most effective thing to do was just repeat it endlessly. Make that Space Money!

There’s a ton of game theory explanations of micro-endorphins that drive engagement, currently being used to let social media turn us into addled ad-slaves. Watching pretend money grow incrementally higher is one of those tools. Here its used for good! Or at least not evil. Which leaves this reviewer in a weird place: the central mechanism is a grind, no doubt. But while I berated myself repeatedly for submitting to the grind, I couldn’t stop milking that sweet, sweet meat->cube->truffle run I found. It is simultaneously Mechanical and Engaging! Right before the 2hr mark, the game does something ingenious. Because the profitability of some trade runs are so obvious, exploration becomes disincentivized. But what if planets revolt with new trader-unfriendly laws? Or they suspect you are scamming their poor population? Or you run afoul of new pretend licensing requirements? The game shuts down your carefully cultivated money runs. No choice but to explore again! I actually laughed out loud at the audacity of this move, and equally recognized it as crucial.

I shouldn’t close out without a word about the graphical presentation. It is attractive, slick and functional, making maximum use of icons, data organization and snarky glue dialogue. There is also generous sound effects integrated which are funny the first few times, but after an hour or so, have run their amusement course. The user interface though, there was friction there. You repeatedly have to click through select-enter sequences to do anything. Meaning it is 10+ clicks to get to a market, 6+ to make transactions, then another 10+ to get to the next when you are trying to accomplish maybe 4 things. Something as simple as single click selects would cut that in half, and often save you intrusive scrolling to boot. Ability to define trade route macros and “sell all” options would make that even smoother.

Scoring this is all kinds of baffling. Do I give the game credit for exploiting human brain vulnerabilities? Penalize it? Do I somehow tease out the narrative portion which feels like endcaps to a massive trading game? Isolate the procedural generation aspects which are kinda impressive? I guess I just have to grade it on what it is, right? Both Mechanical and Engaging; its technical presentation both intrusive and very attractive.


Played: 10/23/22
Playtime: 2hr, 2 ship upgrades
Artistic/Technical rankings: Mechanical+Engaging/Intrusive+Seamless
Would Play Again? My logic says no, but my endorphin addiction says maybe

Artistic scale: Bouncy, Mechanical, Sparks of Joy, Engaging, Transcendent
Technical scale: Unplayable, Intrusive, Notable (Bugginess), Mostly Seamless, Seamless