Creatures Such As We

Having played through Mass Effect 3 again recently, I could not help but view "Creatures" as a commentary on that game, and in particular on the discussions revolving around its ending. I did not check if that is even possible, but in any case: "Creatures" covers a lot of game theory relevant to ME 3, like whether players or authors should decide a games ending, how romance should be portrayed in games, the meaning of self-sacrifice, whether games should mirror life or rather provide means of escape, etc.

This is all packed into a well paced story on the PCs moon adventure with the designers of their favorite game, including that game as game within the game.

So why is "Creatures" not five stars for me? I think it lacks a bit on the game side of things. Most choices I really had to think about concerned my opinion on the game theory questions mentioned above. The choices regarding the actual plot seemed a bit bland in comparison, even though the story itself is quite compelling.

That caveat aside, in my opinion anyone even remotely interested in game design (and romance!) should play "Creatures Such As We".

tldr: An enjoyable IF despite a bit of rail-roading.

I love space and seeing this setting made me think of something that could quite actually happen in the near future. It was very enjoyable. Playing as someone in the service industry, and all the ups and downs that go with it, resonated with me. My favorite aspect of the game, however, was the game within a game. Following along with the story in a story was really enjoyable and, if it weren't a Choice of Games game, I would definitely go back and tool around some more.

My least favorite part of the game was when I was given a choice that was no choice. There were a couple, really, but the second time the lack of choice felt more like it was played for laughs. The first time really got under my skin, however: (Spoiler - click to show)When asked how competent the protagonist is in a rather stressful situation, I decided to go with the more optimistic route. I decided that I was prepared to deal with the situation at hand. However, the narrative second-guessed me and then grayed out that option. As there were other options similar to my initial choice, again I chose to see the protagonist as more on the competent side. Again the game second-guessed me. I did this until there was only one option left, the option that the game wanted for me and not the option that I wanted. It was very frustrating to say the least.

IF games already tend to be linear (some more than others) and taking away what little player agency I thought I had left a bitter taste in my mind. I was able to keep playing, but that keeps me from wanting to go back and play a second time to explore other avenues.

I'm not sure how intentional this was as the game in the game seemed to shadow another game: (Spoiler - click to show)The Mass Effect Trilogy, where the ending didn't seem to take into any serious account what the players had done throughout the game.

All in all, I would recommend playing through this game at least once.

I first played Creatures Such As We a few years ago, and I remember that I didn't think much of it back then. But, after playing it more recently, I've come to appreciate it a lot more.

Creatures Such As We is a metafictional (am I using that term correctly?) story about video games that functions as one of the video games it discusses. On one level, you play as a tour guide on the moon, guiding a group of visiting game developers through various touristy activities. On the other level, your character is playing a game-within-a-game, which happens to be developed by the same group of aforementioned game developers. This game-within-a-game had a highly controversial "bad" ending, almost akin to the original ending of Mass Effect 3 (the author denies it as an influence). The player character suddenly has the opportunity to ask the game developers about the ending. Of course, being a Choice of Game, there is romance here: you can pursue a romantic relationship or friendship with one of the game developers, and you might stay in contact even after they leave. There is a bit of stage magic here; the dramatic life-and-death moments always happen to your chosen romance option. The characters themselves are all well-realized and unique, but they feel sort of like tokens, both demographically and for their particular viewpoints.

All of this is all used as a backdrop for a series of philosophical conversations. The author leads us through "meta" discussions like the role of the author vs the viewer, representation in media, and escapism, and more general philosophical discussions on death and life and stuff. I think this worked better for me now than when I first played this because I have more experience with both making and playing interactive fiction, and I can relate to the issues being discussed more. It felt interesting and engaging in a way that "philosophical discussions in video games" usually don't for me.

Then there's the theme of corporate malfeasance. Your employer cares more about good appearances than the well-being of its employees or the safety of its customers. The visitors to the moon base are regularly put into life-threatening situations with little backup or real information. You are overworked without much free time, and it's clear that there are people even worse off. Then there is a subplot where one of the tourists has a flu-like illness that is covered up; it's obvious that this was made in pre-covid times. At the same time, an EA-like giant gaming corporation is seeking to acquire the game developers, who are somewhat ambivalent about the deal (I don't know if you-as-the-tour-guide can change the outcome here).

Overall, I feel like the setting, characters, game-within-a-game, and philosophical discussions all meshed together really well. I appreciated the meta moments where it felt like the game was critiquing itself.