Overview
Early impressions of Live A Little paint a picture of a bizarre, minimalist text adventure that oscillates between absurdist humor and frustrating design. This obscure title from Nat’s Software tasks players with inhabiting another person’s life for a single day, promising unlimited freedom in a world without consequences. Yet beneath its quirky premise lies an experience that struggles to maintain engagement beyond its novelty, delivering sporadic amusement overshadowed by baffling design choices and technical limitations.
Fleeting Amusement in a Bare-Bones Package
Live A Little’s core appeal lies in its unrestrained absurdity, allowing players to perform ridiculous actions like shouting "Llamas" before breakfast or stealing a tank. These moments of unexpected humor occasionally land effectively, with players citing workplace antics like kicking customers as genuine highlights. The complete lack of graphics or sound focuses all attention on the text-based interactions, creating a stark but intentionally minimalist framework where imagination fuels the experience.
Kicking a customer at work provides a moment of absurd fun, but selling a car for $50 makes you drunk and forces you to quit the game.
Gohst
However, these bright spots are undermined by perplexing design flaws. Actions that seem innocuous—like selling a car for $50—trigger unavoidable game-ending consequences, abruptly halting playthroughs without warning. This lack of internal logic transforms the promised freedom into a minefield of unpredictable punishments, turning experimental gameplay into frustration. The absence of clear goals or feedback compounds this issue, leaving players guessing which choices might derail their session. While the game's strangeness initially charms, its refusal to establish consistent rules ultimately sabotages its comedic potential.
Replay value appears minimal despite the premise's theoretical potential for varied experiences. Most players report exhausting the game's possibilities within an hour, with the only tangible reward being a cryptic credit screen. The title's historical status as a near-lost artifact adds anthropological curiosity but little gameplay incentive, functioning more as a digital museum piece than a compelling interactive experience.
It's a pretty decent game, kept me amused for about an hour.
Anonymous
Verdict
Absurd humor crushed by baffling design flaws
