You Are Standing

After playing this game I was thinking to myself what I would have done if I had decided to constrain myself to use six different game styles and still tell a very coherent and touching story.

I think I would pick one or two topics that many people can relate to (to avoid having to explain too much in-game) and then iterate on those same subjects throughout the different game styles. For example, one such topic could be trains (well-known and easy to model in game systems) while another, less mechanical topic could be how the characters use train travel to fulfill goals (the human aspect). Then each sub-game would both iterate on how these two topics are treated in the given era's engine of choice, as well as how they might reflect the fictional time of creation (the meta-story).

This example is just to show that I think it would be doable to string together a workable story similar in style to You Are Standing. However, I also feel like it's a pretty daunting task to try. It seems very easy to get stuck wanting to present a beat of the story at a certain point but being limited by the game style/meta-era/fictional engine limitation blocking that beat from really fitting in, and then you'll have to move things around. At least I think I would end up in conundrums like that.

I think You Are Standing really succeeds at using all of these really very different game styles to present a cohesive story specifically because of the changes in style, which I think is very impressive.

The game is also a nice illustration of how text games have changed over the years. I have read the author's book about text games and kind of knew what I should be expecting for the different eras, and wasn't disappointed. I especially liked (Spoiler - click to show)the switch from the late 90's very simulationist "hardcore" game style to suddenly playing what was essentially a Twine game. Really fun!