The Road to Canterbury
By Kate Heartfield
☆☆☆ (7/10)
What an underrated (and slightly overhated) gem! I asked for a free copy (thank you IndieGems and the devs) because I loved the demo, and a pilgrimage to Canterbury sounded so unique. I love medieval settings, but there are quite a lot of them in the CoG collection. I hoped for great storytelling and an immersive feeling of wandering the roads of London in the fourteenth century. I got what I asked for … mostly. I got the great storytelling—both in-game and out—as well as feeling like I was on a horse, taking in the sights myself. However, I can’t help but see the missed potential here. The game is short, about 175,000-words. Most CoG or HoG games are at least 200,000, I think? As a result, the character development and some plot/mechanics need work. Some of the plot is rushed or underbaked, and the characters are strangely flat and blend into each other. I can see the role the author wants the characters to play because the foundation is there, but other readers may not. Still, I would gladly read more of the author’s work.
Pros:
Some really lovely, witty writing. I wish I took better notes but the writing seems to be pretty apt for the period. There’s some great description about what characters wear and the setting, as well. A lot of description on food! Very George RR Martin-esque. What I really loved is how grounded it all feels. The world isn’t romanticized; it’s sort of dirty, desperate, and alive with superstition. Yet, there’s beauty in that despair: the hope of redemption, love, or even a good story told along the way. It’s philosophical without being preachy and historical without being dry.
Slight inventory system. During the game, you have to control your spending. The currency is pounds, shillings, and pence. You also get to have a horse! You can buy food, clothes, little trinkets, and donate to poor people. This was super great.
Storytelling. In game, about each day, each pilgrim will tell a story. You can decide if you like it, and you can also tell your own story at the end. I also liked seeing stories I was familiar with (Bisclavret mention!). Your reward is some awesome holy relic. I, of course, did not win, but whatever. There’s alo chances to talk to the poor and sick. One of my favorite scenes was visiting a hospital filled with lepers.
Historical focus. Canterbury is just such a unique premise. There’s a lot of politics in regards to England, France, and the Hundred Years’ War, which I enjoyed reading about.
Choices matter. After peeking into the code, I was surprised by heavily how your personality and stats matter. I liked how at the end, if you ask one of your fellow pilgrims for help, their reaction is based on their relationship with you and your own stats. Asking a knight for help if you were cunning and prideful got me a “no.” And interestingly, the threshold for stats seem to be razor-thin. For example, I’ve read many modern works with 50-59% of a stat is middling, 60-69% percent is okay, 70-79% is good, and anything above that is incredible. But for Canterbury, the checks are within the same decad, i.e. 52% is good, but 54% is what you need to pass a stat check. I kinda liked it, actually. Many times, I barely passed a stat check, which made choosing decisions more real/difficult.
Cons:
Short length. I’ve read worse, more rushed works, so this isn’t the game’s worst flaw by any means, but the word count made me pause. The main plot of the pilgrimage and storytelling is great. But the background of the story is the Hundred Years’ War. From the first page, you’re expected to make up your mind about how to side for. I know it from popular fiction vaguely, so I was a proud #English loyalist, BUT for newer readers, I don’t see why they would care. It’s hard to actually pick a side; we’re not told much in-game besides what the characters say. I’m glad the author doesn’t preach about what side she prefers, but the most I got from the narrative is “war is bad.” True, yes, but kinda dry. Additionally, there’s a duel at the end of the game, which you can take part in? And you can fight? And your decisions could lead to two people dying? But this is treated pretty nonchalantly in the narrative. I have no knowledge about duels in medieval Europe, but I feel it’s pretty strange for the protagonist, a relatively normal person, to go through that.
Romance is undercooked. A symptom of the problem above, I think. There are a couple romance options, and I picked Selime, a Muslim woman from Constantinople. However, my character and hers fell in love after about 10 days and decided to travel the world together. I didn’t have a lot of time with her, and while the romance has a yearning vibe to it, it just feel flat, especially at the end. I also found it a bit strange that there was an openly gay couple, as well as my character and Selime. While introducing time-period discrimination is accurate, it’s not fun, sure. But clearly, the work prides itself on a (semi) accurate historical flair, so I found it strange how no one seemed to care about my female character romancing a non-Christian woman. Oh, well. #Gayrights