Go to the game's main page
Review
A short self-referential narrative describing an anomaly, June 13, 2019This game is short but satisfies all of my requirements for 5 stars:
Polish: This game has a custom format with well-designed buttons and overall CSS and layout.
Descriptiveness: There are several characters who are described in exquisite detail (or not, with good reason), and the location and item descriptions were evocative.
Emotional Impact: I could really identify with the researcher and the anomaly. The final description complemented the main narrative in an excellent way.
Interactivity: This game allows quite a few paths, but is self-deprecative. It says: (Spoiler - click to show)This may be a multiple-choice story, but there's no multiple endings. If you pick the wrong options, the story has to pretty much drag you to me so we can have this little chat. You see, fundamentally, this just isn't a good multiple choice story. That's not what it is. It was never supposed to be that. A good multiple choice story has decisions, it has character development, it's got different pathways to get to different goals and most importantly it's got replayability. There just has to be at least one ending where you die. It's a game, and there's a different way to play every time. This is not a game. These are special containment procedures. And these procedures make a very bad game, but they do a very good job of containing me.
Coincidentally, I disagree with the game's self-identification as a bad game and with its overall design philosophy. The material in the spoiler is only one way of doing things.
Replay: I enjoyed this both times I replayed it.
