“What does it mean to play that game as a feminist? What critiques do you have of the game? How does it intertwine feminist theories (or other theories mentioned in the book), or fail to do so? If it fails to do so, discuss how utilizing feminist perspectives could improve the game.”
Queers in Love at the End of the World: https://w.itch.io/end-of-the-world
For this week’s critical play, I chose to play Queers in Love at the End of the World, which is a 10-seconds long interactive text-based fictional game. The game was created in Twine by Anna Anthropy, and it is playable on browser, Windows, and macOS. The targeted audience seems to be players who are interested in queer stories, short games, and feminist game designs.
When I first chose this game, I thought it was 10 seconds for a choice, and when I “failed” the game right after the first choice, I was shocked to fully realize 10 seconds was the entire game’s duration. In the next few tries, I just tried to click the first option of every branching choice. However, after a few other random variations where I just kept getting to the end, it might also just be my luck, but most of the times, I got the ending with the singular line that said, “Everything is wiped away,” which was one of the three endings I got that just left me somewhat frustrated, thinking how unrealistic it is. I felt like I was being led towards anger and that the developers are probably evil and probably laughed at players like me within their visions.
When I finally gave up trying to just reach the end, tired from the frustration, I started to read as many words as I can in whichever interaction branch I am at, I started to notice myself understanding more of one storyline as more repeated retries went on. After a number of tries (that I forgot to keep count of), I reached a wonderful ending—I also knew the words and choices I made that led there.
In “Play like a feminist,” Shira Chess wrote, “A feminist story doesn’t need to be based in reality or truth, yet it should speak a kind of truth that resonates with diverse and underrepresented audiences.” When I first came upon this sentence, I thought I understood it. However, I didn’t realize that I had actually failed to comprehend it. Only when I changed the way I approached Queers in Love at the End of the World that I realized that for me, the brute forcing towards an end, simply for the sake of completion is exactly the kind of playstyle that is not ‘playing like a feminist.’ Tho ‘play like a feminist’ is to be able to be moved through branches in the game with patience and care, bearing through each repeat until every word is comprehended before reaching and fully grasping the ending.
This game is definitely not based in reality or truth since it is impossible for that many interactions or choices to exist within the last 10 seconds of our lives (nor is our lives’ endings repeatable). However, the manner in which the game was able to, in such a short amount of time, change the way I play completely and led me towards realizing that not everyone may have reached the same steps I did. After all, for one, this requires some level of patience, which is often seen less in groups that are more represented than those that are less represented.
Now as for the MDA framework, the mechanisms for this game are very simple: reading, clicking, choosing, and restarting after 10 seconds. All these come together to create a sense of urgency, frustration, and repetition for the player before it has a chance to transition towards care. As for the formal elements, I think that the main conflict in this game seems to be the player, themself. To be more specific, their attention and patience to keep repeating and to read more with each try as well as making choices. Compared to this game, the other interactive text-based games are a lot slower so that the players can gradually explore every route at their own pace without a sense of urgency.
After playing and reflection, I have come to conclude that the way that I play this game as a feminist is to recognize that an absolute conclusion does not necessarily have to be “the ending.” However, the only critique I have of the game is the difficulty of motor function when the choices are different spaces in each branched interaction, that requires faster reaction than some might be able to.
——
