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?

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