So, just finished Fahrenheit. It was good stuff, actually – flawed, yes – but still very, very good. I didn’t even mind the sub-Nickelback “rawk” that played over the end credits.

I’m tempted to say that it’s unlike any game I’ve played, although a couple of things tell me stop short of making such a claim:

Firstly, for a game that’s mainly about storytelling and dialogue, it’s actually fairly restrictive in terms of the choices you can make and how you can take the story down different paths. You can say and do things you regret (or which are clearly ‘wrong’) but still come out of it okay in terms of driving the story forward. At several points it did strike me that, save for the fact that the technology has all moved on and there’s polygons where the grainy video used to be, the game isn’t really that much different from the dreaded ‘interactive movie’ that plagued gaming (particularly on PC) during the early-mid 1990s.

Secondly, your progress in the more action-oriented sequences is normally determined by your ability to either hammer a couple of buttons quite quickly or move the analogue sticks on your joypad according to a sequence displayed on the screen. Your character may be moving about, fighting monsters or doing a backflip, but you’re playing an altogether different game, focusing on moving your thumb in the right direction. While it’s certainly better executed, the general concept reminded me of the much derided non-interactive Don Bluth cartoon/games that appeared on Amiga and ST such as Space Ace and Dragon’s Lair. They looked good, but they were bum – and widely derided as such (although possibly not by using the word ‘bum’).

fahrenheit ffgjournal

Both of the parallels I’ve drawn are with genres that are probably better best forgotten, yet I still really enjoyed the game. Still, since it’s a little too new for a full review, I won’t worry too much about breaking down the reasons why – I’ll just recommend that you check it out if you haven’t already.