One Play Games

The game "You Only Live Once", started out frustrating.  It took me multiple tries just to jump over the first hill, or hurdle, but when I finally succeeded I died right away.  The ending was comical, with the interviews and character resolutions.  I did delete my cookies to see if there was more to the game, but I experienced again the frustrating game controls and died right away.  I don't know if this was the creator's intent, but it made me not to want to play a third time.

The second game "One Chance", I did embrace the one play design and truly only played it once.  I agonized over my decisions, knowing I couldn't (or wouldn't, as I didn't delete the cookies) get a second chance.  In the game, my wife committed suicide, and I took my daughter to the park, where I assumed she died when a picture of two crosses appeared.  Finally, my choices led my character to die alone in the lab.  There was no "game over" prompt, so I waited about a minute and surmised the game is over.

The last game, Why Is Johnny in an Art Game, was the least enjoyable game I played of the three.  The game consisted only of pressing "left" and reading texts (like in one of the Stanley Parable path, the character questions his role in the game - which is actually just the narrator questioning) until the Johnny walks off the edge of the building.  Since you can't go back, the only two choices were to either stop and end the game before the plunge, or jump.  Just like in the second game, I did not delete my cookies or otherwise attempt a second playthrough.

After reading Warren Spector's "Fun is a Four Letter Word" article, I do understand the creators' intent on making these one play games.  It brings an immediacy and also an anxiety knowing you are not able to learn from your mistakes and take a different path (if you don't delete cookies, or other methods, to override the one play restriction), to just respawn or load a previous save file.  As to whether the games were fun, and in trying to get past the one play mechanic destroys the author's intent, I would say it depends on the player.  Games, by their very nature, are interactive.  Gamers will try to go outside the bounds in making the game character do or behave outside the confines of the game.  Reading a book or watching a movie does not allow this, so we accept the linear experience those medium provide (which are no less enjoyable).  As for the fun factor, that will also depend on the player.  For myself, I would say they provided a diversion, albeit temporary, but I would hesitate to classify them as fun.  Fun, I believe, is something I would do again and again - and I did not want to play these games again, unlike more conventional games.