We're a dissatisfied housewife about to move house; we're estranged from our two grown-up children, distant from our husband, and too depressed to really do anything about the packing. Meanwhile, the house seems to be literally expanding around us -- not figuratively as our husband assumes whenever we've tried to tell him about it -- with existing rooms growing in size and new rooms popping up daily. It turns out that the new rooms are doorways to past decisions, and changing our decisions then changes our present-day situation.
I think it's best for the moment if I simply recount my experiences with the daily decision-changing. The first time it happened, I saw a simple change in family circumstance; not one which really affected my present situation very much, but I saw it as a change for the better, and it alerted me to the possibility of further changes to fix the present situation. The second time resulted in our daughter no longer being estranged from us; I was glad about that, but it meant that the first change couldn't have taken place. Oho, I thought, this is quite clever: the changing circumstances are not discrete, and in fact play off each other. And so it went, with erasing the rifts between our son and our husband, making it so that the first change was once again possible ... and then the opportunity came to fix the decision that stunted our husband's career, and fixing that meant that we were now divorced.
It turns out that maybe some of our failures in the past may have had better results than if we had succeeded, and, as shown by the interaction between choices 1 and 2, some successes obviate others. Maybe "better" is a matter of perspective. Depending on the choices made, the ending plays out in a wide variety of ways, and the ones I've seen so far have been generally positive. There's no one ending that's marked as the optimal best ending; instead, we're free to choose the one we want.
Personally, I find this fascinating.
The heart of the game is basically about going to whichever room is new on each day and choosing whether to change the past represented there or to make the same choice as before. The parser format invites far more exploration than is really necessary, but I think that this adds to the sense of immersion rather than detracting at all from the game. Time passes normally as well, with some days having timed events which aren't at all necessary -- but which, again, add to the immersion.
And now, a rant. "Aunt May is sat in a chair". I loathe that syntax. Of all grammatical sins, I hate this one the most. Naturally, when I first saw it, my reaction was one of revulsion ... but I thought, "wait, this is an elderly woman in a nursing home, maybe it's really a clever way of saying that she isn't in that chair of her own free will, that she was placed there and arranged in that position by a nurse or an orderly ... that she was, quite literally, 'sat' there." But no. Further instances showed that no such cleverness was intended in this one case. Nor does it appear to have been a case of reproducing dialect for effect. Bloody hell. LEARN TO SAY "SHE IS SITTING" AND "SHE IS STANDING" OR YOUR ENGLISH TEACHER WILL VOMIT BLOOD.
Pardon me. "Your English teacher will have been vomited blood". Does that work better for you?
Oh yes, breakfast. Let's see. I guess it's a sort of omelette made from yesterday's leftovers, a tasty way of reliving past dinners. Also, eggs were broken. Calming chamomile tea, to say that everything's going to be all right.