It's rough around the edges and limited right now but I can see it being something amazing in a few years give or take. That's provided if they continue working on it.
Yeah, just checked. If I remember correctly there was a time when all features (including the measly text-to-speech) were free and not locked behind a 'premium' wall. It's a bit sad.
The AI is incoherent. Maybe it can construct a sentence but it can barely keep track of plot. As a result, it often creates unpredictable and nonsensical scenarios which are not connected with each other in any way. Maybe in a few decades AI will write books/games, but not anytime soon.
A multiple choice book. A gamebook/CYOA. It is fun to some to immerse in such adventures if they do not mind playing without graphics. Although most of these adventures are linear and lack any sort of open world.
It's funny that earlier today I was chatting with an old friend about this genre and this was before I saw this game. We were talking about which of the old game mechanics/genres are just old and which are just archaic. My stance was: "Although some genres like metroidvania or turn-based are old and were developed out of necessity, they still have their place and could be implemented in a fun way. But there are other genres, like purely text-based RPGs that are simply archaic and have no place in today's world. Simply because they've evolved into something more approachable; in this case, visual novels. The "Emily is Away" series is a good example of that. My friend laughed and said: "You can't be more wrong, buddy. I'm sure if you do a bit of googling you'll find purists and dedicated fans and communities who insist on keeping alive what you regard as archaic and obsolete. There is no objectivity here." He was right. I had to concede 😄
You are right. That wasn't the most educated of my opinions 😅 And it's one that I don't hold right now. But I do think I did a poor job of explaining what I used to think in my previous comment. It was more like this: Let's think about videogames as an evolving medium, right? I remember the MS-DOS era vividly, when text-heavy games were developed not out of choice but necessity. But now that we are past that period, is it still a good idea to have pure books in and marketed as games? Or will it find proper audiences if it stayed as a book. To use a metaphor similar to yours, imagine if someone tries to broadcast a radio channel on TV and not on radio. Is that a good idea while we have a dedicated medium for that very purpose, namely 'the radio'? Or to speak in terms of books and comics; it's not to say comics obviate or even devalue books, it's just that a medium known as 'the book form' already exists. And if anyone wants to read a purely text-based novel they know where to look for it. But in the end, I am aware of the flaws of this opinion and no longer think that way.
i was expecting another game where i can play as omni man
http://pm1.narvii.com/6280/eb537a49237e6113fc799b7d4ce17a3b74d0f761_00.jpg
We were talking about which of the old game mechanics/genres are just old and which are just archaic.
My stance was: "Although some genres like metroidvania or turn-based are old and were developed out of necessity, they still have their place and could be implemented in a fun way. But there are other genres, like purely text-based RPGs that are simply archaic and have no place in today's world. Simply because they've evolved into something more approachable; in this case, visual novels. The "Emily is Away" series is a good example of that.
My friend laughed and said: "You can't be more wrong, buddy. I'm sure if you do a bit of googling you'll find purists and dedicated fans and communities who insist on keeping alive what you regard as archaic and obsolete. There is no objectivity here."
He was right. I had to concede 😄
But I do think I did a poor job of explaining what I used to think in my previous comment.
It was more like this: Let's think about videogames as an evolving medium, right? I remember the MS-DOS era vividly, when text-heavy games were developed not out of choice but necessity.
But now that we are past that period, is it still a good idea to have pure books in and marketed as games? Or will it find proper audiences if it stayed as a book.
To use a metaphor similar to yours, imagine if someone tries to broadcast a radio channel on TV and not on radio. Is that a good idea while we have a dedicated medium for that very purpose, namely 'the radio'?
Or to speak in terms of books and comics; it's not to say comics obviate or even devalue books, it's just that a medium known as 'the book form' already exists. And if anyone wants to read a purely text-based novel they know where to look for it.
But in the end, I am aware of the flaws of this opinion and no longer think that way.