Posted by c_hargrave on January 11, 1998 at 18:32:19
In Reply to RE: First Impressions and Initial Observations posted by NekoArc on January 11, 1998 at 13:12:52
: : : Good morning all,
: : :
: : : After a few hours' engagement with Epoche, I thought it might be worthwhile to contribute my initial impressions and open a more structured discussion of the game's themes and architecture. Thank you again to Mr. Williams for providing access.
: : :
: : : Thus far, I have explored two scenarios in some depth: the ritual conflict in the woodland enclave (a setting I suspect is loosely based on Iron Age European cultures), and the temple succession dilemma set in a city whose architecture and rites appear to be drawn from a blend of pre-Hellenic and speculative sources. Both are present with a restraint that I find admirable-no gratuitous flair, no overt moral hand-holding. The player is left to infer meaning through consequence.
: : :
: : : The game's mechanic of choice-based divergence appears robust, if occasionally opaque. I've not yet had the time to explore alternate outcomes, but it's clear the authors intend for a degree of ambiguity-certainly a design decision rooted more ethnographic simulation than conventional narrative game design. I suspect this is intentional, and quite possibly central to the "point," if such a term can be applied.
: : :
: : : On a technical note: I took some time to examine the contents bundled with the distribution. The README.TXT is sparse, although it references a "Wakefield group" which I have been able to find much information about at the time. The accompanying INFO.NFO file is more curious: while it reads like a changelog, it also has mention to research being performed. While this is far from conclusive, it would appear to support Mr. Williams' hypothesis that this is indeed some form of research project, possibly some form of market research, although I cannot begin to guess as to what it might be.
: : :
: : : I remain cautious about making grand claims. This is, after all, a game. But I confess I am intrigued by the care with which the authors have modeled social and religious decision-making. More soon, once I've had time to examine further. I am particularly interested to see whether later scenarios maintain this level of anthropological grounding, or if it veers into the fanciful. (Mr. Suthers, please restrain yourself-I said fanciful, not fantastical.)
: : :
: : : Yours,
: : : c_hargrave.
: : Hi Prof.
: :
: : No dragons. Got it.
: :
: : I think you're right. This definitely feels like I'm being tested. I'm not sure what for because sometimes all the options seem like bad ones. Maybe it's that they want to know what people think the best choice. Something like the trolley problem you were talking about in class last month?
: :
: : It's very strange though because sometimes I feel like the right answer is harder, and rewards less. I finally managed to do what Becks did with the first puzzle and not sacrifice anyone, which needed me talking to everyone in just the right order three times, until they all agreed that it might work, and then they almost starved the next year. What's with that? Is the point that sometimes killing people is ok? If that's the case, then I'm not sure I agree with how it's showing it. Especially as the next two puzzles haven't needed killing anyone.
: Hmm. I am quite enjoying it actually. It is kind of making me think, what is the more important thing, the life that was sacrificed, or the wellbeing of the community. I don't think it's as simple as just "is killing sometimes ok" but more what people feel comfortable with. I am very interested in if we can find out what the actual research was for this.
: Becks
Rebecca,
I think you may have hit the nail on the head here. This feels like a test of morality and balance, although like you the actual hypothesis they're trying to prove or disprove still alludes me.
James,
I'm glad that something from my lectures has sunk in!
c_hargrave.