Previous Next

Apparently it's bad practice to kick off a review with a summary of the game's plot. You're meant to begin with some sort of 'hook' to catch the reader's attention - a joke, perhaps, or an amusing anecdote about the game's programmers. Let's throw away the rule book, eh?

You are Doralice, "the sexiest captain on the Paris-Miami flight", according to Fascination's manual, and you find yourself in a hotel room with a briefcase given to you by a dying passenger on your plane. In the briefcase is a vial containing a dangerous aphrodisiac, he explained, which has to be taken to the president of a certain company without it falling into enemy hands. The passenger's dying words were: "The briefcase combination is... AARGH!" On the advice of the manual you tap the combination 'AARGH' into the briefcase and it opens to reveal an electric toothbrush which in turn contains the aforementioned vial. The door to the hallway is in the corner. You've played this sort of thing before. I'm sure you can work out where you've got to go next.

Those who decry the gaming world's proliferation of male heroes will be pleased to note that Doralice is actually a babe, and she's just as capable of clearing up mysteries as any crummy man. But, erm, hang on a minute. Why is Doralice there, exactly? Merely to provide a little non-sexist variety? Or something rather more sinister?

Now don't panic. I'm not about to launch into some sort of self-righteous, pseudo-feminist spiel (I hope). I'm as much a fan of a bit of innocent rumpy-pumpy as the next man. Hell, I've even watched a couple of Carry On films. But Fascination comes across as the product of a group of individuals who thought it would be "a bit of a laugh" to pretend to have an attractive woman performing at their every beck and call. To this end you can send Doralice through a graphic shower-scene without encroaching on the story line in the slighest, and there are pieces of her underwear lying around for you to rifle through, again to no obvious end.

What clouds the issue, is that Fascination hasn't been dreamt up by your average deranged games person, but a French female designer. There's also the fact that the sequences which appear to have been included purely for titillation are far too jokey and cartoon-like to excite even the most desperate individual. The argument that sex in computer software exists for cheap thrills might work for strip poker games, but it doesn't hold water here. Is it possible that what comes across as mild exploitation to us British is simply an example of the French people's open attitude towards sexuality? It's a strange thing to be asking in a game review, I know. But with Fascination it's a relevant issue, believe me.

If this all sounds like your idea of fun, though, there are more important points to consider. Games like this are all about solving puzzles, and it's the puzzle side of things where Fascination falls down. It's not so much that the answers are too obvious - would you have guessed, for example, that the best place to hide a vial of liquid was in the ice-box of a fridge? The trouble is that, while there's a problem waiting to be solved, that's all you're allowed to think about. Your movements are restricted pretty much to the location in which the puzzle is set, and you can't actually do anything that isn't connected with the puzzle's solution. It's impossible to get side-tracked, or to go and tackle something else while you're having a bit of a muse. And as your actions are limited to clicking on things on the screen and using objects from your inventory, a few minutes' random clicking and using is usually enough to turn up the answer to most situations. And then it's on to another location and another puzzle. Ho hum.

At the moment, for example, I'm stuck in a kitchen where I've obviously got to mix together three chemicals to create poisonous fumes. (I've no idea why, but it's the only thing I can do so it must be right.) Every time I do it, however, the fumes get into my eyes and I die. I've presumably got to protect them somehow. I'll get there eventually , but I'll wager the answer will be found by luck rather than intelligence.

But don't despair, I do have one or two appreciative comments up my sleeve. The main one regards the graphics which are clear, well-drawn and nicely animated on the rare occasions on which they move.

There's a nice tune at the beginning too (but what about those jingles?!). And one ot two of the jokes (this is a 'humorous' game) are actually quite funny, in a French sort of way. The mascot that dances on the bonnet of the car when you turn the stereo on is a case in point. This is a game which does its best to make the player comfortable when playing it, I'll give it that.

Okay, so I may have simplified things a little regarding the restrictiveness of the thing, but all the time I was playing it, my overwhelming feeling was that I was being channelled in the direction the game wanted me to go, rather than being left to explore it of my own free will. I hate that feeling. I like to be in charge. [It's true, we've seen the jackboots! - Ed]

These people clearly know how to write computer games, and I hope they do another one. But before they do, they'd do well to take a good look at the direction Lucasfilm are taking things construction-wise. Linearity is out. Flexibility is in. And shower scenes are best left to Wash 'n Go adverts.

Uppers: It's well programmed, there's the occasional laugh to be had, it looks nice and could be ideal if you're baffled by traditional, tougher adventure games. (I'd hesitate before recommending it to the 'younger' player, though.)

Downers: The game's layout is far too linear - you solve a problem, move onto the next location, solve another problem, etc. And Germaine Greer would have a heart attack. [But surely that should be in the 'Uppers' section - Ed]

I did kind of enjoying playing Fascination, and the Cruise For A Corpse style game system is one of the easiest I've ever used. But it's too straightforward and limited in scope.