5

Choices That Matter: And the Sun Went Out – Not My Weapon of Choice

Choices That Matter: And the Sun Went Out – Not My Weapon of Choice

The illusion of choice works wonders in parenting and in video games. Allow your children to choose either carrots or peas, and they feel they have control of what they eat while still getting their vegetables. Give gamers the option to be good or evil, flirt with this character or that one, and take road A or B, and they feel their actions matter in the overall story. The game, meanwhile, follows it prearranged routes, sometimes changing rails to appease us. We’re all just playing with the disconnected second controller while our older sibling occasionally acknowledges us.

Choices That Matter: And the Sun Went Out (“Sun”) promises a texted-based adventure in which your decisions carve the story. It features 2,400 either-or choices across its branching pathways. If every choice truly mattered, this game’s scope would overshadow the likes of Breath of the Wild. Sun, let alone any video game of this generation, can’t possibly be this expansive. In actuality, so many of Sun’s choices have no effect, making the game an experiment in the illusion of choice and control. The result of such an experiment is a bloated story which stops every few minutes to ask if you prefer the color blue or shooting someone.

Note: Minor spoilers moving forward.

What is it?

As the title suggests, And the Sun Went Out follows an unnamed investigator as they learn why the sun is disappearing and how to guarantee it stays. In the course of doing so, our protagonist will encounter a cult foretelling the end of the world, secret societies which speak of otherworldly energy and human sacrifices, and a growing list of murdered scientists. These exploits will send you globetrotting as the investigator follows directives from the mysterious “Company.” Although the premise has some science fiction underpinnings, your escapades fall more in the action/adventure genres in which mysteries are solved through gunfights and car chases.

The investigator narrates all of the proceedings as text against a black background. They wear a smartwatch which houses an advanced AI, “Moti,” who operates officially as a personal assistant. It’s less HAL 9000 and more Pinocchio who has complete access to the internet, minus social media and porn. Apart from helping the main character discuss plot points, Moti fulfills other AI clichés like providing inconsequential probabilities for success, updating/powering down at inopportune times, misunderstanding figures of speech despite access to the internet, calling humans illogical, and asking basic questions about morality and existence. It also functions as a semi-reliable alarm clock.

The game, itself, plays like a long-winded choose-your-adventure story. You’ll periodically select one of two options to determine what the investigator does or says. This person can’t die prematurely, so your choices will never result in a “dead end.” Instead, your inputs influence which branch you follow in a given story arc. These branches split and converge over the course of Sun’s 15 arcs, culminating in one of several endings.

What’s good?

  • With its varied vignettes, And the Sun Went Out likely has a few that will grip you. Two in particular stood out to me, one which follows our narrator into a secret underground facility and another which concerns a cult leader in Italy. The sun outages would make for a compelling mystery as well, if only the overall narrative didn’t devote 90% of its word count to unnecessary plot lines and characters.

What’s up to your preference?

  • Similar to Animal Farm, all your choices matter, but some matter more than others. Your choice can:
    • impact which branch you take in the next arc
    • improve your romantic relationship with one of the two characters
    • change what Moti says to you in the final arc
    • add an extra paragraph or two before returning you to the script the other choice follows
    • do nothing

You’ll make over 500 choices in a single play-through, and 80% of them exist to justify the choice gimmick. So many options relate to whether you act polite or like a dick. The romance options straddle, “We are platonic friends, my friend,” and “My loins burn for you due to our shared trauma.” Some may enjoy how often the game requests their input. I would have preferred 100 important choices over the 2,400 included in Sun.

  • At around 600,000 words, Choices That Matter: And the Sun Went Out has a lot of words to read, not including the eight in the title. I played through the story twice, averaging around eight hours per reading, largely due to the massive number of words I had to read. My second go-around allowed me to experience firsthand what happened off-screen during my first reading, with two arcs being the same. Rather than fleshing out the story and world, the alternate pathways highlight the weak arcs in comparison to others. Both of my readings ended in the same way in different locations, hitting home that my choices changed the flavor of the ice cream but not the food itself. Unless high word counts titillate you, Sun’s verbosity makes for a convoluted and protracted adventure rather than a complex one.

What’s bad?

  • The plot suffers from poor writing, uneven tone, and plot holes. While murderers rack up their kill count and society crumbles, our protagonist worries about who’s attracted to them, complains about airports, and actively ignores any communication from their boss. Losing the sun will lead to humanity’s complete annihilation, and the narrator seemingly copes with this by chronicling everything they eat in detail. This aimless meandering leads to a bombastic climax in which both named and unnamed characters converge in one country to fight an all-out war—replete with tanks, rocket launchers, B-tier character deaths, and one-liners—against an enemy which has no logical reason to battle our heroes. Worse still, the powers of friendship, love, and soul fix the sun situation, not the aforementioned skirmish which resulted in numerous casualties.
  • Sun’s simplistic presentation may have worked for a mobile game, but the Switch port lacks basic staples found in other text-based adventures. You have only one save file and no way of tracking which choices or arcs you encountered in-game. You can backtrack to the beginning of a previous arc but can’t rewind to a choice or hop to any other arc. An autoread function is noticeably absent. The omission of these common features further disincentivizes any additional play-throughs.
  • The choices that do matter can be difficult to distinguish, and you often have too little information to reach an informed decision. This problem mainly stems from how little we know of our protagonist. They wield a silver tongue at times, but once you rely on this skill, they trip over their words and into a worse situation. They alternate between James Bond and Austin Powers in terms of combat potential, and you don’t know which one you’ll get in a conflict. The only constant is their ability to shake off consecutive concussions like a bad hangover. By the end of the story, the investigator is thrust into a leadership role when almost anyone else would be more qualified, leaving you to command an operation with little more than gut instinct.

What’s the verdict?

Choices That Matter: And the Sun Went Out resembles Icarus in that they both die to their inflated ambition. Burdened by its obese word and choice count, the story fell to the waters before it could soar. A functional narrative does exist under all the feathers and wax. Those willing to search for it would do better with the mobile version of the story, which can be downloaded for free with ads. Otherwise, the only choice that matters is whether you avoid this sun-mangled mediocrity entirely.

Arbitrary Statistics:

  • Score:  5
  • Time Played:  Over 15 hours
  • Number of Players:  1
  • Games Like It on Switch:  Oxenfree, any Telltale series

Scoring Policy

Posted by Solomon Rambling in Review, 0 comments
“World for Two” Review – Too Little Stretched Too Far

“World for Two” Review – Too Little Stretched Too Far

As an amateur creator, sometimes your best doesn’t make the cut. For instance, with each video I have edited, my work improves and sets new standards of quality for myself. However, compare these videos to established YouTubers or anyone with a following, and my lack of skills becomes all the more evident. This is not to say my work sucks. Maybe it does. I kind of dug a hole for myself here. My point is we don’t compare a kindergartner’s finger painting to an art major’s final gallery. It’s unfair to the art major.

World for Two feels like its developer, Shinichi Nishimori, poured everything he had into its production. It’s beautiful and imaginative, and other games should aspire to match its level of polish. Despite the love devoted to this game, it struggles to be actually enjoyable, whether that is a flaw in Nishimori’s vision or the result of him making this game largely by himself. With a few more opinions and developers to hash out World for Two’s gameplay and design, it may have been a greater product, but as it stands now, it looks amateurish compared to other games of its ilk.

What is it?

World for Two basically plays like Doodle God. Those unfamiliar with Doodle God might know its original inspiration, Alchemy. If you haven’t played Alchemy, I imagine it’s a lot like World for Two.

In World for Two, you are an android created by the last human alive. All other creatures have gone extinct, and it’s up to you to populate the world with new species. You begin by harvesting crystals which allow you to produce archetypal genes, and you start with combining two “primordial genes” to make a simple amoeba. By splicing genes with samples of DNA, you’ll spawn new creatures which will begin to inhabit one of four environments. You’ll produce small critters at first and eventually work your way up to larger beasts.

You’ll have to do some legwork to continue your experiments. Once you create a new creature, you must visit it in its environment to retrieve its DNA. If you’re extracting a specific animal’s DNA for the first time, you must complete a simple matching game in which you combine two strands of DNA. Red nucleotides go with blue ones, and yellows pair with greens. After this, you can collect three samples of DNA before the creatures dies and evaporates before you. Normally, a blood sample could provide a sufficient DNA sample in the real world, but World for Two likes to tears chunks off, just to make sure they got everything.

You have access to only one environment (the Bog) at the beginning, with the rest becoming available as you produce more unique species. Different crystals can then be harvested from each biome, opening up more genes for you to manufacture and combine with DNA. In the course of this gameplay loop, you’ll glean information about the world and story by interacting with the scenery, killing animals, or talking to the scientist. It’s like the circle of life from the Lion King but bleak and pixelated.

What’s good?

  1. Nishimori has crafted stunning pixel art. The backgrounds are specifically gorgeous, with the Bog treating you to spiraling vines riddled with thorns. Each animal features a unique color scheme, and later, you’ll encounter new takes on various mythical creatures. It would’ve been nice if the backgrounds and designs contributed to a larger lore, but alas, they’re just eye candy.
  2. Although some of the DNA combinations ignore all logic, World for Two helps steer you toward successful matches without giving away any solutions. Most importantly, it keeps track of your incorrect guesses. You can also peek at a book which features an evolutionary tree of sorts which shows which animal DNA can still be manipulated to produce a new creature.

What’s bad?

  1. Most of the gameplay feels like unnecessary busywork. You click a button by a tower to collect crystals. You harvest DNA with that same button. The DNA minigame is nothing more than a multiple-choice question. The meat of the game is figuring out how a mouse becomes a beluga whale, but you’ll spend most your playtime running and tapping A to gather materials in order to enjoy the fun part.
  2. The fact that harvesting DNA kills your creatures not only results in more busywork but undermines your goal to repopulate the world. As I mentioned before, each animal yields three copies of DNA and then disappears. If you want to keep the animal around, you can only harvest two DNA samples. If you waste those samples in incorrect pairings, you need to recreate the old animal (plus any creatures needed to make it), go harvest its DNA, and then return to the lab to try again. Due to how monotonous this process is, keeping animals alive is a needless luxury, and your environments may remain as barren as they were at the start. If animals could regain their DNA over time, this issue would be largely mitigated
  3. Even with all of the needless padding, you’ll quickly reach the end of World for Two. I chose to keep one of each animal alive, so my playtime of four hours may be a little longer than other playthroughs. Of that time, I maybe spent 90 minutes actually puzzling out which combinations to make.  
  4. If the story was a creature, its DNA would be a combination of science fiction clichés and half-hearted philosophies. Our android makes fleeting observations during its journey, questioning the meaning of life. It doesn’t come to any major epiphanies, and while it can question where we go after we die, it quips that religion is beyond its understanding. The ending adds the prerequisite drama needed to slightly tug at the heartstrings, but it’s easier to predict the ending than determining how a lion is the evolutionary ancestor of the polar bear.    

What’s the verdict?

Shinichi Nishimori didn’t commit any grave sin when making World for Two. It’s competent and largely harmless, and I imagine it’s a better fit on the smartphone where it had originated. It’s also monotonous and lacking any substance. When other solo developers have made the likes of Return of the Obra Dinn, Undertale, Stardew Valley, and Axiom Verge, I can’t excuse World for Two’s failings.

That doesn’t mean Nishimori couldn’t build on his concept. In fact, World for Two is the type of game that would be perfect to dissect for my “I Can Do It Better” video series. Doing that, however, would involve me creating a video on my own, and that’s just a tad too meta right now.

Arbitrary Statistics:

  • Score:  5
  • Time Played:  Over four hours
  • Number of Players:  1
  • Games Like It on Switch:  Doodle God, Scribblenauts Mega Pack

Scoring Policy

Posted by Solomon Rambling in Review, 0 comments