In the End

There is something surreal about this game – something that kept me reading (and sometimes rereading) every line of text. I will say right away that this game is not for those looking for a puzzle or an adventure. In The End doesn’t have a sophisticated conversation system, a complicated puzzle, or deeply interactive NPCs. What it does have, however, is a deep philosophical edge that will really get you thinking.

In The End starts out at the funeral of your friend, as you think upon death and life and where you fit into it all. From there, you must simply do what feels right. The endings which you can reach vary only slightly on the surface, but the feeling you get from them are vastly different. Proceeding through the game is easy and at some point, becomes instinctive.

In The End creates the illusion of a greater world beyond the parameters of the game. When in reality, there is very little depth to the actual environment and few descriptions for examinable objects.

One other thing that I found really interesting: Upon trying to save the game or undo a move, I was presented with “Life doesn’t work that way.” That single phrase adds to the realism of the PC’s situation. He is caught in a moment of life where walking away from the computer screen isn’t an option.

If I was rating this game purely on its emotional impact and philosophical spin, I would give it the full five stars. Rating it as a regular IF game, I would give it three. But, keeping in mind that In The End is really not quite one, nor the other, I will settle for a four.

So, if you have five minutes to play a short, meaningful game, then open up In The End.

This game was well known a decade or two ago. This is a dark and moody, puzzleless game. You go to a funeral, meet with some NPCS, and experience some moody set pieces.

The interactivity is off; you have to guess a lot what to do, from beginning to end.

This game was ahead of its time in many ways. It doesn't use the compass it was puzzleless 2 years before photopia, and it restricted the parser. It is descriptive and polished.

I first gave In the End a silent two-star review. I dislike it and consider it Not Good, but it's not hideously broken or otherwise defective. But then I gave a two-star review to a game that, given a choice between "like" or "dislike", I "like." So I'm coming back and saying loud and clear: I must put In the End in the one-star bin along with those Actually Terrible games.

Unfair, perhaps, but I'm not the one who came up with this railroad mood piece.

24 years ago, I rolled my eyes so hard I could hear the straining in my head when I realized what the author was trying to get me to guess.

Revisiting it today, I smile a sad wry smile at the ABOUT screen's wish: "In The End" will be, I hope, the first successful "puzzle-less IF", but its success will not completely close the question.

Looking at what has followed, the author gets a rousing "Mission accomplished."

Today I'm softer on the piece (24 years does that) and perhaps it's the countless choice games in similar veins which make it easier to spell out where I think In the End fails.

In a nominally open-ended parser experience, the author can do a lot to set the tone and give guidance and establish goals. And the author can make me desperately bored enough to want to quit. But if you want me to (Spoiler - click to show)conclude that suicide is the only option, I'm gonna need a lot more, and In the End doesn't come close to delivering it.