Just incredibly funny. There's so many fun characters and amusing outcomes for them. The story can get quite serious at times but the comedy is just top notch. In terms of "game" the novelty of managing a live broadcast is very fun but it starts wearing off quite early. The amount of choices and how much those choices can affect the entire game is very impressive though.
A really interesting & original game, highly recommend checking it out especially on a sale.
When I was a kid and was playing Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, one of my favourite parts of the game was the radio station VCPR. I didn't get the satire as a kid, but I loved the irreverence. As an adult, I understood the Cold War paranoia and Regan conversatism the game was mocking and appreciated it even more. Naturally, I got excited when I heard about Not for Broadcast, a game that sells itself on the idea that you're a vision switcher that influences public opinion through your shot and editing choices. A REALLY innovative idea for a game.
And the gameplay is very fun despite everything. Sadly, since Not for Broadcast hinges on its writing and satire, it fails to make a good impression. Its satire can be reduced to 'Everyone sucks, regardless of ideology' and the writing isn't especially funny. Also, I didn't even realise it was set in the 80s until later in the game because it provides absolutely no indication of this until it's spelled out for you. Why does nobody mention Margaret Thatcher? Where are the references to the Cold War? There's brief mention of nuclear weapons, but that's it. It FEELS like the people who made it are in their mid 20s and didn't live in the '80s. It feels modern, which isn't a problem, but when you're making a period piece, it needs to FEEL like a period piece. Someone on here said this felt theatre kid coded, and yeah, I had the exact same thought. It would explain so many casting decisions. For example, why is Jeremy Donaldson so young? Why is Patrick Bannon replaced with a woman and not another man? Is the latter meant to mock 'wokeness' or just be inclusive casting? Who knows? The game mocks everyone, but feels ideologically confused, almost like the writers had no idea what they were talking about.
It's a shame because this could have been a gem with better writing. The gameplay itself is really cool, but Not for Broadcast doesn't hinge on its gameplay. Instead, it hinges of the success of the satire and writing, which is sorely lacking.
And the gameplay is very fun despite everything. Sadly, since Not for Broadcast hinges on its writing and satire, it fails to make a good impression. Its satire can be reduced to 'Everyone sucks, regardless of ideology' and the writing isn't especially funny. Also, I didn't even realise it was set in the 80s until later in the game because it provides absolutely no indication of this until it's spelled out for you. Why does nobody mention Margaret Thatcher? Where are the references to the Cold War? There's brief mention of nuclear weapons, but that's it. It FEELS like the people who made it are in their mid 20s and didn't live in the '80s. It feels modern, which isn't a problem, but when you're making a period piece, it needs to FEEL like a period piece. Someone on here said this felt theatre kid coded, and yeah, I had the exact same thought. It would explain so many casting decisions. For example, why is Jeremy Donaldson so young? Why is Patrick Bannon replaced with a woman and not another man? Is the latter meant to mock 'wokeness' or just be inclusive casting? Who knows? The game mocks everyone, but feels ideologically confused, almost like the writers had no idea what they were talking about.
It's a shame because this could have been a gem with better writing. The gameplay itself is really cool, but Not for Broadcast doesn't hinge on its gameplay. Instead, it hinges of the success of the satire and writing, which is sorely lacking.
Неплохая задумка, очень слабый сюжет