Aiken: Very interesting to read your views on Waiting for the Light and you're not a million miles away. The Douglas Adams thing is particularly interesting as it was completely unintentional on my part - spooky.
Ibrahim: It's not really clear what actions are right in each scenario. What seems "right" in the mini-scenario may not be "right" for the adventure as a whole. It might be a bit easier to work out the correct solution if you play the downloadable version instead of the online one as you'll be better able to see the mechanics of it.
Episode 6 of the Wrong Way Go Back series is ready for kind souls to help review.
Prospective reviewers should: 1) be aware that getting reading the gamebook first on paper will alter their experience of an online version, 2) be aware that in order to be helpful, detailed comments are required. This means identifying errors, highlighting poor continuity, and general feedback about the difficulty level, 3) have time to actually do the review. As a guide it shouldn't drag on past a week. This means being able to commit to several hours of work.
Sorry if this seems demanding, but sometimes people agree, then I never hear from them again, or they send feedback of the like: "Yeah, it was good."
Those interested please email me at: ff_stories (at) hotmail.com (Al, if you would like to help again, you can contact me though my personal email)
I enjoyed Waiting for the Light a great deal. Here are my thoughts on what it all means:
SPOILER
The hints come mainly from the game show section. The question about David Lynch is the clue to the game's style, and conception- it is a dream-like metaphor exploring the psyche of the narrator. The central conceipt of the game is hinted at by the question on Robert Plutchik- his wheel of emotions provides the colour-code for the games exploration of how we choose to react and deal with our internal life and feelings. The aim is to deal with each emotion (represented by a different colour) not by negating or affirming it, but by harmonising it- to bring all the colours together to White. Each section challenges you to do that- for example by allowing the arguing couple to find a real, non-superficial answer to their problems. If you do all this, you escape from the darkness (which the "bad endings" represent) of repression or the un-moderated id, and reach solace and balance/ light. As a note- and a final joke, the page entry on which you do this is, of course, 42 - Douglas Adam's meaning of life!
END SPOILER
So there you go. I thought it was an elegant and interesting composition, that reminded me a little of Adam Cadre's Photopia. Nice work!
I left it open for a sequal because, in my opinion, this first adventure is a somewhat underdeveloped. That said, I only have a vague idea of where the next installment may go. If you have any suggestions based on what you've read, I'd be interested to hear them!
One of the things I liked most about Waiting for the Light was that lack of mission. Instead it was like emerging from darkness into light, everything being new and mysterious, knowing nothing except having a vague sense of who you are.
Hi Everyone. Its been a while since I posted to this guestbook, but I've some questions regarding waiting for the light. First and formost, what exactly is the object of the game? I take it from various endings I've reached its to escape some facility, but what exactly? The introduction tells you practically nothing. Also, how is it possible to determine whether you've reached the best conclusion to an individual section? Without any aim or objective, its really hard to decide what's right and wrong here. Any help would be appreciated.
1. I agree that moderation is the best idea though longer sections are more acceptable if you're a genuinely good writer. The main problem with long chunks of text means the appeal to replay a book will be less. Background information can be longer as there's no need to re-read it every time you play.
2. I'm not a fan of complex rules but if they work well they're not so daunting. My best advice is to play-test it a few times yourself and see how cumbersome and effective the rules are, and then simplify if need be.
Sounds good anyway. I really liked the concept of Overlord! but I think the book had too many flaws to live up to it. I'd like to see someone else take a crack at something similar.
As in all things, I think the answer is moderation, so the issue is how to define 'too short' and 'too long'. There are many gamebooks that have entries that are only a few lines long, asking for decision after decision usually of the type: Turn left or turn right? Open the box or not? I find these kind of books boring because there is usually a right choice and a wrong choice, and so the experience of the gamebook is like navigating logic gates, the correct combination of 'yes-no' resulting in victory. Such books are often very dry, and the only reason why I care about what the right answer is is to solve the puzzle. For that reason I base my decision on what I think the writer of the gamebook is thinking rather than because of any elements of the story itself. Regarding 'too long', if anyone has written entires that are too long, it is me. Perhaps other people can respond on this point in the context of what I have written.
On the second point you raise, my view is that a gamebook is a story first and foremost. Although I have gone to the dark side occassionally in the past, I have found it helpful to remember that complex rules and trying to achieve realism in a gamebook can never achieve an more than a feeble imitation of a computer game. Therefore, I would recommend playing the strengths of the written medium, which is inspiring imagination, depth of character and plot; things computer games and tv/movies cannot show as deeply as the written word. By all means have rules, and have unique rules to your story, but I would follow 2 guidelines: keep them minimal, make sure they support the story rather than impede it. How that works in the execution will depend very much on what your story is about.
Good luck. I look forward to reading a futuristic/sci-fi gamebook that wasn't written by me :P
I could do with getting people's opinions on a couple of points.
I'm just starting work on my first gamebook, where you play a futuristic dictator who's just come to power and needs to make decisions on how to run your planet. (It's inspired by a combination of Overlord from the Way of the Tiger series and the old ZX spectrum game Dictator).
Before I get to far into it though, I want some feedback on these issues.
1. How much text (without it being broken up into decisions) do people like/tolerate/hate in a gamebook? Do you get bored if it's overly lengthy? Do you even read it? Both in the main text of the gamebook but also in terms of background information on the game universe.
2. What are your views on somewhat complicated rules systems? I'm definitely going to be writing my own for this, but I'm aware that coming from a RPG background may mean I'm prone to making rules too complex. (I'm not sure how much of an issue this will be currently. I suspect it mostly depends on if I end up deciding to put space battles in or not).
Zach Carango Fri Jan 15 01:58:57 2010 General Chat
@duck
I decided rather late in writing to drop a health score (my idea was to make the game system as streamlined as possible). Had I left that stat in place, I think things would have been much more balanced.
Thanks for the advice!
Zach Carango Fri Jan 15 01:23:36 2010 General Chat
Thanks for the heads up Kekataag, that link is definitely messed up! I had some trouble scrambling the sections and thought I had caught all the errors. Sorry about that, I'll send a corrected version right away.
In Handful of Dust, when you turn to section 10 near the beginning of the adventure, it seems somewhat disjointed, mainly because it mentions places and characters that haven't been mentioned before.
Is this an error on your part or how it is intended to be in the adventure?
I haven't played A Handful of Dust yet, but I recently finished Phobia. I hope you'll take this feedback in the spirit it's intended!
Good points- It's a really original concept and well used. I like the general horror feel of the book. The phobia system worked well.
Negative points- This is mostly a mechanical thing. I was less keen on the amount of random rolls in the book. I'm less bothered if you just get a non-lethal penalty if you fail, but for me there were a few too many "make a skill test or die" bits. That makes a book too random for my liking. It detracts too much from the skill of making the right decisions.
Hope that's useful!
Zach Carango Thu Jan 14 01:31:49 2010 General Chat
Hi everyone,
Just wanted to thank Andy and encourage anyone with comments about Phobia or A Handful of Dust to post. I enjoy hearing what other people have to say and any kind honest feedback would be much appreciated :)