It's a miracle that the third game in the trilogy managed to get made, so I suppose I'm glad that Zero Time Dilemma exists at all. An imperfect ending with some dangling plot threads is better than no ending. There are some memorable moments (though much of what I liked here was done better in Nirvana Initiative), and C-team's "divorced polycule" dynamic was a strong point.
There is one big difference from the previous entries that I want to highlight, because it's where the game ultimately doesn't work for me. In 999 and VLR, the puzzle rooms are honest, a kind of no-man's land. When they're not 100% safe, you at least understand Zero to be playing fair. There is the occasional scare or corpse to put you on edge, the fear that something might be waiting in the next room, but success never puts you in any real danger. If some of your companions have serial killer tendencies, they'll nobly put them aside while you work together on solving the soup cans. And if you complete the room successfully, you are rewarded with keys, passwords, useful items, information.
ZTD turns this formula on its head: your "reward" for completing the room tends to be your beloved characters getting machine-gunned. Or gassed. Or incinerated. Or hell, blowing up the entire facility. It's firmly operating in the Saw school of puzzle design: less "player epiphany" than "player antipathy". In another game, this might have been an interesting design choice. In a Zero Escape game, I found it disappointing. ZTD circles back to the very formula 999 was subverting, but the reason I liked the latter game was because I consider that formula to be misanthropic and rather dull. In other words, it's a fine enough game taken on its own terms, but as a direct sequel, it can't be taken on its own terms.
There is one big difference from the previous entries that I want to highlight, because it's where the game ultimately doesn't work for me. In 999 and VLR, the puzzle rooms are honest, a kind of no-man's land. When they're not 100% safe, you at least understand Zero to be playing fair. There is the occasional scare or corpse to put you on edge, the fear that something might be waiting in the next room, but success never puts you in any real danger. If some of your companions have serial killer tendencies, they'll nobly put them aside while you work together on solving the soup cans. And if you complete the room successfully, you are rewarded with keys, passwords, useful items, information.
ZTD turns this formula on its head: your "reward" for completing the room tends to be your beloved characters getting machine-gunned. Or gassed. Or incinerated. Or hell, blowing up the entire facility. It's firmly operating in the Saw school of puzzle design: less "player epiphany" than "player antipathy". In another game, this might have been an interesting design choice. In a Zero Escape game, I found it disappointing. ZTD circles back to the very formula 999 was subverting, but the reason I liked the latter game was because I consider that formula to be misanthropic and rather dull. In other words, it's a fine enough game taken on its own terms, but as a direct sequel, it can't be taken on its own terms.
almorica
2 months ago