Jack the Ripper, though long a popular figure in both literature and film, has been criminally underutilized in adventure games. In 1994 Gametek published Jack the Ripper, a text-based, historically driven snooze-a-thon with limited graphics. In 1996, Take 2 released Ripper a full-motion-video game that transported the historic Ripper to the 21st century. Finally, Microids in 2004 released Jack the Ripper, an ambitious attempt to create a continuing series, but potential sequels never materialized due to lack of finances and poor sales.

Considering developer Frogwares’ dominance in creating literature-based adventure games – [Around the World in] 80 Days, Dracula Origin, Journey to the Center of the Earth and especially their well-oiled Sherlock Holmes series – it was inevitable that they would eventually pit the master of deduction against Saucy Jacky in the aptly – if somewhat simplistic - titled Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper (The title brings to mind some of the uninspired, but succinct, horror movie titles such as King Kong vs. Godzilla, Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, Aliens vs. Predator, et al)

As is common with Ripperphiles like myself, new theories on the identity of the Ripper are always relished, but how much of a cosmic coincidence is it that these two icons - who have met rarely in literature and film (The West End Horror, Murder by Decree) and never in games - would both meet not once, but twice in the very same month!? Just as May, 2009 welcomed the release of Frogwares’ Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper pc game, so too did it see Dust and Shadow: An Account of the Ripper Killings by Dr. John H. Watson, a novel by author Lyndsay Faye and both are totally unrelated! Though the book and game both concern the unlikely meeting of fictional detective and historical serial killer, they approach it from different points-of-view. Whereas Dust and Shadow sees Scotland Yard approach Sherlock for his theories on the killer who, coincidentally, has already had the chutzpah to contact his nemesis, Frogwares takes the opposite approach as Sherlock downplays his involvement and circumvents the Yard and the Ripper seems largely unaware of Sherlock’s existence.

Frogwares’ Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper, though a work of fiction, is largely centered around historical fact as it faithfully recreates the events of the murders attributed to the Ripper. As such, it also manipulates the evidence so as to provide Frogwares with the sound footing necessary to ultimately reveal their theory as to the identity of the Ripper. While I disagree with their conclusion – I’m more prone to agree with Patricia Cornwell’s persuasive argument in her excellent Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper Case Closed - the developers do provide the building blocks necessary to support their hypothesis and thus provide more fodder for Ripperologists.

As for the game itself, does it work? Do we feel as though we have stepped into Holmes’ shoe, that we are making the deductions, wearing the deerstalker? Well, to paraphrase Sherlock Holmes, the review is afoot!

Previous Frogware/Sherlock games were always lacking in one important matter that – at least to me – shattered any illusion of reality and prevented total immersion. Streets that should have been bustling with activity were largely devoid of people. Not too mention that they were as pristine as your grandmother’s dinner plates. Well, that problem has been more than rectified. Not only are the back alleys and main streets of London now full of life, but their inhabitants are animated and constantly on the move. That drunk on the corner sipping his libation; pass by a few minutes later and chances are he’ll be asleep on the sidewalk, using the empty bottle as a pillow.

As for the streets, cobblestones cracked and broken from the weight of horse-driven carriages sprout weeds, factory soot barely coats the peeling paint over blistered and weathered wood and a low, rolling fog makes it seem as though the area is cloaked in eternal darkness. This is, finally, London as it would have looked in 1888.

The voice-actors also add to the believability as their litany of varying cockney accents and idioms are in keeping with the times. Frogwares is to be commended here for many developers refuse to include any accents at all in their games for fear of either offending someone or alienating a potential customer.

The game proper has Sherlock Holmes, at Dr. Watson’s instigation as usual, investigating the brutal slaying of a woman in the Whitechapel district of London. Though he is working outside the jurisdiction of Scotland Yard, he does find ways to surreptitiously share the results of his deductions with his friends in law enforcement so that they can further their investigation. As the brutality of the murders increases, Holmes, wending though a maelstrom of false leads and red herrings, is eventually able to track down the murderer. All of the evidence and locations in the game are based upon real life events and evidence and while this attention to detail is commendable, it is also the albatross that threatens to sink the game.

While the game does feature all of the required puzzles and situations necessary for it to be considered an adventure game, a new twist has been added – deduction boards upon which observation papers must be placed and connected to reach a logical deduction. This recreation of events and stickler to facts does at times bring the game to a crawl if not a complete halt. While placing and interlinking notes and clues on a board and creating timelines does serve its purpose in the long run as the information is eventually used to identify the killer, it also serves no purpose as there is no incentive in it for the gamer. Incorrect guesses are not penalized nor are correct guesses rewarded. In fact, you need only keep clicking on every available option until your choice turns green for the correct choice. How much more fun would it have been if there had been some sort of system in place that would have rated your gameplay and skills of deduction based on your percentage of correct/incorrect guesses? Regardless of the amount of historical and factual information presented, this is still after all a game.

The notes for the deduction boards are acquired by using a magnifying glass to search for clues and evidence around and upon the victim. Except that the victim’s body is not actually present (at least not early in the game) and is represented by either Dr. Watson in drag (seriously!) or their vivid imaginations. Each found clue then becomes a note that can be tacked to the deduction board. Again, this slows the game to a crawl, not to mention that you cannot advance from the scene until all of the clues have been found. So what is the purpose of all of this deduction? It seems, only to solidify the developer’s theory on the identity of the murderer (but, more on that later!). They would have served a much better purpose if the player were offered options that would then allow for multiple endings.

To further deaden the pace, there are cut-scenes that begin with Watson explaining away lengthy lapses in time, ‘Holmes, we’ve been idle for a week,’ and ‘Holmes, you’ve done nothing for the last two months but fiddle around in your apartment.’ This is obviously done to follow the timeline of the Ripper murders,

If you’ve played any of the previous Sherlock games, then you know what to expect puzzle-wise. There are the usual microscope analyses, searches with a magnifying glass and tape measure and Holmes’ various disguises. There is also lots and lots of dialogue, which is thankfully well-written and often provides clues to further the investigation. There are also a few puzzles that, even though I eventually solved them through trial-and-error, still made not a lick of sense to me, once such being a confusing conundrum involving perfume bottles, oil resin and jigsaw pieces.

A welcome option to choose your point-of-view, either first person or third, can be changed and chosen at will during the game. While I usually prefer playing in the third-person, there were times during the game that it was advantageous to switch to first-person in order to easier uncover evidence. As usual, all documents, journals, newspapers, etc. can be accessed through the menu as can any spoken dialogue. Hot spots on the screen can be shown by simply pressing the space bar – an innovation I’ve come to appreciate – so that pixel hunting is kept to a minimum, allowing the gamer to instead concentrate on what to do with inventory items rather than wondering if there is something else that needs to found.

There is one instance of a character acting against type that was a tad disturbing. While I realize that Dr. Watson is a general practitioner and not a surgeon, his violent reaction to Holmes’ re-creation of the Ripper’s final murder victim using a clay figure is more than a tad unbelievable. Much more believable though is Holmes’ initial reaction upon discovering the remains of said victim. It is a truly defining moment in both the game and for Holmes’ personality that provides some much-needed humanity to the character as does also his protective admonishment to his friend Watson to ‘not go back there,’ there being the room with the slaughtered body.

Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper is a well constructed adventure, but the necessary linearity and dependence on following a pre-established timeline do hinder the overall effect of the game and rob it of much of its suspense. There are though some wonderfully juicy Easter Eggs and the developer’s knowledge of the subject matter is impressive. The brothels and dark alleys of White Chapel are vividly brought to life both through the splendid animation and the excellent voice-acting.

Finally, while this has nothing to do with the game per se, there is something in the credits that is not only confusing, but also – in my opinion – somewhat unsettling. As the credits scroll to a close, the following ‘Important Notice’ appears:

The characters and events in this game are based on one of many theories of who “Jack the Ripper” really was. This game is based on theory rather than fact. The views expressed in the game are not those of its developer, publisher, manufacturer, any licensee or licensor or any person involved with the game. No representation of warranty is given concerning the accuracy of any information in this game. All reference to persons living or dead and their acts and related events is theoretical or co-incidental and should not be taken as fact. This game is not endorsed by or associated with any third party, author, character, company, film, game book or other work. All trade marks are the property of their respective owners.

So here is what I don’t understand, if 'The views expressed in the game are not those of its developer, publisher, manufacturer, any licensee or licensor or any person involved with the game,' well then exactly whose view is responsible for the game? How can neither the developer nor any other person involved with the game not be responsible for the views expressed in the game? This is about the most asinine, gutless statement I think I’ve ever seen in a game disclaimer. If no one is willing to shoulder the responsibility of theorizing as to the identity of the Ripper, then what was the point after all?

Final Grade: B- (find out more about our grading system)

If you liked this game, then Play: Sherlock Holmes the Awakened Watch: Murder by Decree Read: Dust and Shadow

System Requirements:

• Windows®: XP SP2/Vista™
• CPU: AMD Athlon® XP 1900+ / Intel Celeron® 2.0 or higher
• RAM: 512 MB or higher
• Video Card: 128 MB DirectX® 9 compatible
• DirectX® 9 compatible sound card
• DirectX® 9 or higher (included on disc)
• 4x DVD-ROM
• 3 GB Available Disc Space
• Input: Keyboard, Mouse and Speakers