Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«2 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..




The Testament of Sherlock Holmes is a 2013 adventure game, developed by Frogwares. Over the years, Frogwares has developed a hell of a lot of Sherlock Holmes games. In my opinion, this is one of the better ones. It's got some good puzzles, a surprisingly intriguing plot and even some reasonably serviceable voice acting (mostly). Admittedly it has a couple of issues, but they're generally quite minor and tend not to detract too much from the game.

This game is still relatively new, so spoilers are not encouraged. If you absolutely MUST post one, for god's sake tag it.



Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel


That said, let's get started, shall we?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcu8Mdq0EQA

You know what, let's make this a SSLP, okay? For those of you who didn't watch the video, spoilers: it's a not-very-good framing device for the story. Here's the highlight:



So let's pretend that didn't happen and skip to Watson's introduction.

And so I decided to pick up my pen and relate the most disturbing episode of my life thus far. It all began early one morning in 1898, when Sherlock Holmes invited me to accompany him on a visit to the Marquis of Conyngham..






Familiar territory so far..

After all these years of accompanying you upon your investigations, I thought that by now I should be reasonably capable of following your train of thought... But in this particular case, I must admit that I don't understand anything at all!

Ah, you see but you do not observe, Watson! There lies the difference. It is a matter of course.



A few seconds later, the Master of the house himself - the robbed Marchioness' husband, the Marquis of Conyngham, arrives and unlocks the door using the sole key.





In order to explain, let us confirm my theory before the arrival of Inspector Baynes.



So how about it, goons? Fancy solving a mystery?

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:41

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel

Mystery 1: The Samoan Necklace

What do you think, Holmes?

Let us search the room before the police get here. We might throw some light onto all this.



The Testament of Sherlock Holmes, being an adventure game, is primarily focused on examining clues and piecing together what happened. There are some minigames a little further on that focus on clue analysis and deduction, but for this mystery we'll simply be observing the clues. I will, however, be giving you guys a sporting chance to figure it out first.

Alright, so: we've got a crime scene to examine. Let's get started.






The Marquis himself!

Holmes is right, these are boring. Let's see what else the room holds.



This door is very hard to force. The Marquis is the only person to have a key. The thief could not get out through here, until eventually when the door was opened by the servants.



Hmm.





See how tiny the hole is, and not one finger print upon the window.



Therefore, the thief tried to escape through the window, but he was interrupted...

All of the windows are locked. They have not been forced.



Let's check out the piano.





Hmmm.. nope.



Ooh! There we go.

I don't understand why these music scores are covered with soot.

Hmm. Let's have a look over by the fireplace.



But why didn't he try to put the fire out at once?



There is no need. It is soot. The servants must have trodden in it while they were putting out the fire.



Whoever pulled this cord would have had his feet in the fire, unless it was pulled before the fire started.

Hmmm. Let's check out the aquarium.







As the theft was committed at night, I conclude that the thief hid himself behind the draught screen and waited until he was alone in the room.





But how did it fall? Let's summarise our clues thus far. We have:
  • The only door to the room. Difficult to force, and no sign that it was. The Marquis had the only key.
  • The necklace's display case was cut with a diamond. The hole was very small, and no fingerprints were left on the glass.
  • An aborted attempt was made to cut a hole in the window by the same method, presumably for escape. However..
  • All windows are still closed, locked and were not forced.
  • A fire started when a stool was knocked into the fireplace. The bellpull was used to summon the servants. However, the bellpull is directly above the site of the blaze. The thief had to have been standing in the fire.
  • Musical scores knocked off the piano, covered in soot. One of the scores bears a tiny handprint in soot.
  • Draught screen seems the logical hiding place for the thief as the servants entered the room, yet there are no footprints to be seen behind it.
  • The aquarium holds a single dead fish.
  • A candle has been knocked from the chandelier (located directly above the aquarium).

So. How about it, goons? Can you figure out how the necklace was stolen? Don't feel bad if you can't. The first mystery in this game is by far the most obtuse.

(As a side note, don't worry if this is a little slow for your tastes - the cases rapidly get more interesting after this one.)

Next update: the answer!

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:42

Mzbundifund
Nov 5, 2011

I'm afraid so.


Clearly a trained monkey did it, and escaped up the chimney. The candle was knocked over when the monkey swung from the chandelier because monkeys flip out and swing from stuff. The fire was caused by Holmes himself to throw his rival off the trail.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Mzbundifund posted:

Clearly a trained monkey did it, and escaped up the chimney. The candle was knocked over when the monkey swung from the chandelier because monkeys flip out and swing from stuff. The fire was caused by Holmes himself to throw his rival off the trail.

Not quite, but you're thinking in the right direction.

tomanton
May 22, 2006
this is not a bus station

The thief made a bridge to the bell pull out of musical scores and got off them before they burned up, so no soot. Before hiding behind the screen they killed the fish so there were no witnesses

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


tomanton posted:

The thief made a bridge to the bell pull out of musical scores and got off them before they burned up, so no soot. Before hiding behind the screen they killed the fish so there were no witnesses

Nailed it. poo poo, I wasn't expecting someone to get it so quickly.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel

Okay, Mzbundifund pretty much got it and this mystery isn't really the most scintillating, so let's press forward for now.







It is possible...

We have retraced the thief's rather unusual footsteps... He is a true acrobat! But what I cannot understand, is that when the servants entered the room there was no-one to be seen. An acrobat, perhaps, but an invisible one? I do not think so.

The only explanation is that the thief escaped before the servants arrived. I don't know how, but there is no other way.

Half a point for the doctor - nil for the Inspector.

I'm pleased to see that you find the situation amusing, Mr. Holmes... Very well, then, explain.

Doctor Watson was correct when he mentioned acrobatics, but he is mistaken about the nature of the acrobat. As for you, Baynes, you are quite incorrect, as the thief was in the room when the servants entered.

Explain, for heaven's sake, Mr. Holmes!

Watson, how could a thief be missed in the middle of eight men?

I don't know... Because he is very small? Stop teasing us, Holmes!

Exactly, because he is small. Small, and remarkably agile.

You're thinking of... a monkey?

And a trained monkey at that. Without a doubt, a Leontopithecus Rosalia from Central America. The animal had been hidden inside the room for several hours, calmly awaiting the signal from his master. Once night had fallen and the room was empty, a high frequency whistle alerted the creature that it was time to begin the procedure for which he had been trained.







(sorry about the repeating subtitle)









A brilliant explanation![citation needed] Bravo, Holmes!

And the necklace?

I can see it from here, my friends. It is right in front of us.

We have searched the room from top to bottom, Holmes, how were we unable to find it?

Because we paid insufficient attention to the only victim of this affair.

What victim? No one is dead!

Yes, Watson... A poor goldfish, whose destiny was to die, crushed by one of the most precious necklaces in England.

The aquarium is just beneath the chandelier... I understand...

The little monkey had likely hung the necklace around its neck, and lost it when he leapt from the chandelier. The jewels fell into the aquarium, where they remain now.













No, I recognise it, I have spent many hours admiring it, you know.

Good, I will return it to its box, and...



Guest appearance: the most worried-looking policeman in history. This was the least ridiculous of 8 screenshots.

What times!

Sirs, duty calls! My regards, Marquis, and well done again, Mr. Holmes!

There, the necklace is in its box. We have lost enough time here; let's go home, Watson.

Ah? Very well, as you wish. A good day to you, Marquis.

With pleasure, gentlemen. And once again - thank you!



221B Baker Street











Read it before you leave, it is outrageous!

If you insist...


Up next: A surprising amount of gore and a mystery that doesn't involve a monkey in Part 4 - Bishop to Knightbridge


P.S.: I know this is a pretty brisk updating pace, but don't worry, I'll slow down soon. I don't want to drown every single page in updates.

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:43

Glazius
Jul 22, 2007

Hail all those who are able,
any mouse can,
any mouse will,
but the Guard prevail.


Good Lord Fisher! posted:

Read it before you leave, it is outrageous!

If you insist...

What is this? "Sherlock Holmes, a keen analytical mind unclouded by the modern pharmacopia"?! Watson, have these people even met me?

I do like this game's approach to how cases work, though.

Samovar
Jun 4, 2011


Wow. That explanation for the stealing of the pearls may just be the dumbest thing in Holmes' history. Except maybe for the Spotted Band. Or that other one where a guy imbibes a filter of monkey juices that turns him into Mr. Hyde-lite.

Aleph Null
Jun 10, 2008


I am playing the game right now and holy hell Holmes is an rear end in a top hat. It's refreshing to see a game treat him like the self-centered smug jerkoff he would have really been.
It's like Psych without the intentional humor.
playing most of a level as Toby sold me on how fun, ridiculous, and almost irreverent the game is

Tunahead
Mar 26, 2010


Samovar posted:

Wow. That explanation for the stealing of the pearls may just be the dumbest thing in Holmes' history. Except maybe for the Spotted Band. Or that other one where a guy imbibes a filter of monkey juices that turns him into Mr. Hyde-lite.

What about the entirety of A Study In Scarlet? It features a mystery with no clues and no suspects and after it resolves itself out of nowhere midway through the story, the latter half is a convoluted and tedious flashback explaining how the victim deserved it because he was the head of an evil Mormon ninja clan.

Verbose
Apr 22, 2006

Mike believed in the shooting star, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then,but that's no matter. Tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther... and then one fine morning-
So we beat on, subs against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.


This game is probably the best in the series, maybe on the same level as Vs Jack the Ripper.

Miles better than that awful, awful Nemesis.

John Lee
Mar 2, 2013


Tunahead posted:

What about the entirety of A Study In Scarlet? It features a mystery with no clues and no suspects and after it resolves itself out of nowhere midway through the story, the latter half is a convoluted and tedious flashback explaining how the victim deserved it because he was the head of an evil Mormon ninja clan.

Speaking of which, I'd play the hell out of a game based off of A Study In Emerald.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Sorry to the few that are reading this, I've got a bit of a family emergency going on. I do have images uploaded and prepped for a new update, just need to type it up. The thread's not dead, I assure you! I should have an update up tomorrow sometime.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel

Picking up where we left off...



Indeed, the valuable piece of jewelery disappeared while the door to the room in which it was displayed was locked. The alarm was raised by the servants, alerted by the room's service bell ringing out during the night. When the Marquis, the only person in possession of the key, opened the door, everyone rushed in to extinguish a fire that had started, before it was noticed that the necklace had mysteriously vanished.The most astonishing factor is that no thief was found within the room, and all the exits were closed. As usual, Mr. Holmes resolved the case in the twinkling of an eye, and the jewel was recovered. I will not waste my time on the various explanations as to the disappearance because I would prefer to draw your attention, dear readers, to the last surprising developments in the case. Following the departure of Sherlock Holmes, who placed the necklace in the safe himself, the Marquis noticed that the jewel was nothing but a poor copy of the original.

Let it not be forgotten that the Samoan Necklace, although plain and without ornament, is unique because of the rarity of its pearls. Pearls which are found only in a small part of the lagoon of the archipelago of the same name, and to which scientists attribute their exceptional quality to the strong density of crystal of aragonite that they are made of. The priceless necklace, brought here at the beginning of the century by Lord Fenton-Arwick, the Marquess' grandfather and an eminent explorer, should have been a part of her daughter's dowry for her marriage to the Duke of Newcastle.

So, I am going to place a simple question: Should we not, in all open-mindedness, ask ourselves if the necklace was not simply and deliberately exchanged for a fake by... Mr. Holmes himself? I am aware, dear readers, that the brutality of this question, without any preconceptions, may certainly shock some of you, but the facts are there, and our thoughts and judgement should not be confused with the regard which we all share for the famous detective. It is not the first time that the Globe Explorer has expressed its reservations as to Sherlock Holmes' methods; do not forget our counter-investigation into the escape of Arsène Lupin, the Frenchman who took malign pleasure in tarnishing the image of our Royal Family and who, by "lucky chance", managed to elude capture by Mr. Holmes.

At the time, we did not hesitate to consider a tacit complicity on the part of the latter. For those who are familiar with Mr. Holmes, it is quite apparent that his character traits show more of the opportunist and brilliant usurper than that of altruistic defender of the law. I would draw the attention of our readers to the suggestion that the description of this gentleman provided by his friend, Doctor John Watson, through his stories, is a long way from the truth.

Indeed, his behaviour is derisive, contemptuous, haughty and offensive towards the police (and in particular towards Inspector Baynes, replacing Inspector Lestrade who is currently convalescent) and a habitual abuser of narcotics such as heroin and cocaine. This is why, dear readers, it is important to disregard Sherlock Holmes' good reputation in order to form an objective opinion and to ask the pertinent questions: Was the necklace that Holmes found already a fake? If that was the case, why did he not mention it, and why should he insist on placing it back within the case himself?

Has the detective some unsavoury interest in this affair? Or is it a simple case of deceit in order to steal the extraordinary Samoan Necklace? It is up to you, dear readers, to form your own opinions. But you can count on your humble servant to continue revealing to the public the doubtful methods and motivations of the one who in the future I shall not hesistate to call Sherlock Holmes the Usurper.

To be continued...
O. FARLEY

THE ANCESTRY OF PRINCE WOODVILLE RECOGNISED
The Lords committee, set up in order to verify Prince Woodville's legitimacy, made its conclusions public last night. Without surprise, the Prince's title was confirmed. As rumours suggested, in return of an unfavourable opinion by the committee, the Prince would have abandoned any claim to the inheritance of the present Royal Family, as well as any political activity.

The young man, now age 28, read History and Law at Oxford, with a Diploma in Philosophy. He spent most of his childhood in France, where he acquired a considerable knowledge of the culinary arts. For those who might think this a handicap when integrating into British high society, let me remind you that he is also outstanding on the Polo field, and plays the bagpipes quite beautifully.

Finally, we should add that lately he has become actively involved in charity work and aiding the poor.
J.B. GOODE


I guess run-on sentences were the fashion at the time. Moving on..



You know exactly to which article I'm referring, Holmes. How can Farley dare to tarnish your reputation like that?

You know, Watson, that wherever glory walks, jealousy is bound to follow. As for the forgery of the necklace, I suspect that we shall soon be enlightened in this regard. Come in, Inspector Baynes, the door's open.



You are one of our rare visitors who avoids the second to last step of the stairs, which creaks dreadfully. And if I add the clinking of the handcuffs at your belt... To what do we owe the pleasure of your visit, Inspector?



This is where the game starts throwing a Mass Effect style conversation wheel at us. However, none of the choices ever actually make any difference whatsoever - except in one instance a little later. Let's discuss slander for now.



I don't know how the reporter got hold of the information, but it's true... About the necklace, of course. I wouldn't permit myself to question the integrity and honesty of Mr. Holmes!

The necklace is a forgery? Impossible! I saw the Marquis authenticate it before my very eyes before Holmes returned it to its place.

Mr. Holmes, the Marquis believes Osmond Farley's theory... I shouldn't be surprised if the reporter isn't behind all this slander about you. He's a freelancer, well known for his explosive and subjective articles. In any case, the Marquis assures us that you were the last person to have the necklace in your hands.

Let's return to the Marquis' house, Holmes! I'm sure that we'll have no trouble in taking apart this theory.

It is unnecessary. Such allegations collapse on their own - like one of Mrs. Hudson's soufflés. Let us leave the police to solve this problem and turn our attention to the matters in hand.

Perhaps you are right, Holmes...



Inspector, I assume that you have the fake necklace with you? It's why you're here; your superiors would like me to examine it.

Indeed. They would like you to confirm or deny putting this fake in the box.

Can't that wait? I must go to the house of Lord Peregrine Maitland, the Bishop of Knightsbridge.



And the Marchioness?

She is beside herself. Without the necklace, her marriage is compromised. It is the principal item of the young woman's dowry.

What a lovely marriage... Holmes, forgive me for insisting, but don't you want to examine the fake jewellery?

Watson, I have an appointment, and it is out of the question that I arrive late.

It will only take you a couple of minutes! You really must quell the suspicions put forward in this appalling article... If you will allow me, Inspector?

Be my guest.



Okay, so we're beginning to get to a point in the game where there are many, many things to be examined. Some things can be examined in multiple places. In order to spare you guys a mountain of text or a hundred screenshots per investigation, I'm going to be borrowing a trick from the BBC to convey all of Holmes' rather boring little utterances and observations. I hope it doesn't annoy you guys too much, as I plan to use it more as the game goes on.



Too many defects; this necklace is a fake. This is nothing but a vulgar copy, and at a glance it would appear that the forger has intended for it to be seen as such.

How could we have been fooled by such a blatant imitation? I don't understand.

Yes, how is it possible? Holmes, do you have a theory about this?

I have absolutely no idea... You insisted that I examine the necklace, and I have done so. Now it is important that I keep my appointment... I am sure, Inspector, that you will throw some light on this affair.

Holmes!

You may accompany me, Watson, if you care to do so.

Goodbye, gentlemen. I'll keep you informed as to my inquiries.

Goodbye, Inspector.

You mentioned a Bishop, didn't you. Are we going to his home?

Yes, the Bishop of Knightsbridge... I put his address on our map of London, on my desk. Would you get it for me, please?

All right, Holmes.



As this update is proving rather more monstrous in size than I expected when I started typing it up, I'll split it into two parts. Part 2 should be coming soon.

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:43

FeyerbrandX
Oct 9, 2012

The Laws of Fiesta are Absolute!


As for the BBC method, I think it works well enough.

Happy Blue
Oct 18, 2012


I also like the BBC method.

Glazius
Jul 22, 2007

Hail all those who are able,
any mouse can,
any mouse will,
but the Guard prevail.


The BBC method worked out pretty well. I wonder what's going on with the necklace, if perhaps it was stolen again. I mean, somebody who's got a trained monkey is invested enough to have a backup plan.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel

Sorry about the glacially slow update pace, you brave bored few who are reading. Full disclosure: My sister passed away just shy of a month ago, which has been playing merry hell with both my ability and my desire to update this. Now that things have settled down a bit, I can start getting back into the swing of it.

Without further ado, let's pick up where we left off last time...






May we see the Bishop of Knightsbridge?

Yes... Yes, of course... But... Come in.



What...





The Bishop! Appallingly mutilated! How dreadful!



Sorry, I just love the amount of weird hand gestures the Reverend makes so I tend to put the whole screenshot in.

They were evidently unworthy children, Reverend. Now do please try to calm yourself and focus, because we will need your assistance. Do you have any idea as to the motive behind this?



Note this down, please, doctor.

Doctor? But aren't you the police?

No, Reverend. I am Sherlock Holmes and this is Doctor Watson. We are here at the request of the bishop.



Reverend, when the Inspectors of Scotland Yard find themselves at a dead end - which they quite often do, I assure you - then they turn to me for help. If you will allow us to continue our investigation then you shall have the answers to all of your questions.



It would be better for everyone, Reverend, if you kept your temper.

Watson, are you taking notes? This affair promises to be a complex one, therefore we must not overlook the slightest detail.

Yes, Holmes, I am keeping a meticulous set of notes. I have created a very clever deduction board.[citation needed]







One thing that you may notice is that this is not a very clever deduction board, it is a notebook page with a vertical line on it. Good job, Watson.

One thing we can be sure of at the moment is that this crime was not for gain. The Reverend has informed us that nothing valuable was stolen, and indeed it would seem that the Bishop had nothing of any worth to take.

Very good, Watson, do continue.

Watson does not continue. Instead, let's take a look around the room.









Hmm. Shall we examine the body more closely?









Let's analyse.







Hmmmm. Someone certainly did a number on this poor bastard. Let's take another quick turn around the room and see what we see.





And turning around to look behind the door we came in, we see:



There isn't any doubt - the wounds on the Bishop were administered with this scalpel.

Curiouser and curiouser. Let's have a quick look at this safe the Reverend mentioned.



The Bishop of Knightsbridge has the same name as his ancestor. An illustrious family.

Not particularly relevant. Let's move on.





No dice.

Reverend, I'm missing something, an implement, with which to open this chest. Could you tell me where to find it?



What are you afraid of, Reverend? What is inside the chest?

I'm not afraid of anything! In fact, I do have the necessary implements... But if I have to give them to anyone, it will be to a representative of the law and no-one else!

I can sort of see the Reverend's point on this one, Holmes is being a little skeevy. Whatever. Let's check the cupboard under the safe.







Good to know. Let's see what else we can spot. In front of the door we came in:





Well, yes, those muddy marks...

See here, Watson, footprints can often provide more vital information than the very best of informants.

Yes, if you know how to make them talk, that is.

It is child's play, Watson. We will begin by excluding the contaminating prints, which are yours and mine from where we came in, and those of our dear Reverend who was so impatient to call the police.

This triggers a not terribly interesting footprint-measuring and deduction minigame. To sum up its findings:



Strange but true. One of the crooks was wearing a different pair of shoes when he left here.





The minigame questions, if you're really curious: 1,2. Let's check around the room some more.







The Bishop's bedroom. It is very austere. Nothing in particular here.



No! You have no authority here; let me call the police.

Perhaps we should listen to him, Holmes?

Perhaps you should let me get on with this, Watson. Let us check our deduction board.



LACK -> The Bishop's shoes are missing
SHOES -> One of the murderers left in different shoes
-> ???

WEALTH -> The Bishop didn't own anything of value, not even in his safe
VERANDA -> The veranda wasn't searched
-> ???



CHEST -> The murderers were unable to open the safe


TORTURE -> The victim was savagely tortured
PENITENCE -> The Bishop was mortifying himself, he was used to pain
-> ???



BISHOP -> The Bishop gnawed at himself


FLASK -> The broken flask had some blood at the top -> ???

Sorry about the lovely text quality here, guys. That'll teach me to batch-convert images willy-nilly. I've transcribed them for now. In any case, the way the "deduction board" works is that each set of linked deductions lead to a question mark. Clicking the question mark will allow you to attempt to make the correct deduction from 3 options. For example, under the flask category we have "The broken flask has some blood at its top." The question mark for this leads to...



Selecting an option slots it into the deduction board in place of the question mark, like so:



Applying the same methods to TORTURE and PENITENCE gets us:



The Bishop resisted torture. This forms a link to CHEST, allowing us to make another deduction.



Only one of these makes any goddamn sense, so..



Ticks all round! This page of the deduction board is complete. Let's go back to LACK/SHOES/WEALTH/VERANDA.





Seems the murderers were looking for something specific. The LACK/SHOES deduction gets us another interesting fact: One of the murderers left wearing the Bishop's shoes. This deduction leads to another: The murderers are poor. Performing both deductions allows us to connect the two chains and make one final one:





These were thugs for hire, looking for something specific. With these deductions completed, conversation can resume:



Reverend, I shall ask you one more time... Open the chest! The item they were seeking must still be inside. It is unlikely that they will let this matter rest - they will most certainly return to finish what they started.

And I am telling you once more... The chest is locked and will remain so.

Very well. We have reached an impasse... You are a stubborn man, Reverend. Watson, accompany our friend to the police station, and return with Inspector Baynes. Baynes, and no-one else... I shall wait for you here. Go!

Alone at last! Now I can continue my investigation....



Holy poo poo, this update is considerably longer than I thought it would be. As such, I'll be splitting this two-parter into a three-parter instead. In part 3: we keep searching this room, except a bit more sketchily since we've rid ourselves of the good Reverend. Expect part 3 within the next 48 hours or so, instead of a month

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:43

Bruceski
Aug 21, 2007

World-changing power, absolutely no side effects!

Man, that is one mutilated corpse. Pretty well-rendered.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - The Samoan Necklace
Part 3 - Inspector Baynes
Part 4 - Bishop to Knightsbridge
Part 5 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, II
Part 6 - Bishop to Knightsbridge, III
Part 7 - Knightsbridge Analysis
Part 8 - Welcome to Whitechapel

Alright, we're back in business. Now that we've ditched Watson and the Reverend, we're free to use less legal methods of searching the place. Let's check out the veranda the Reverend wouldn't give us the key to.







Amongst the random nonsense and clues we've been picking up in this room, we also gained a small metal pin from the cilice we found in the cupboard. Let's give it a go.

This lock should be easy to pick. Let's see...



Lockpicking is a fairly simple affair in this game. A scratch in the lock tells you what shape to bend your pin into, and you bend your pin into the shape. To future-quote Holmes, it is simplicity itself.



There it is.







Hm.



Hmmmm.



Let's get this rug out of the way.



I need something.

Let's check behind the desk.









There is a message under this statue. Let's see...



This message was written by a woman! But for whom was it intended? Interesting, this chess game...

So now, if we use the horse head on the marked-out patch of floor...





...we get a puzzle. The trick to this puzzle is that we have to cover the entire "chessboard" in green squares, entirely by moving the oversized knight using knight movement rules (2 vertical/1 horizontal or 2 horizontal/1 vertical). It is not an enjoyable puzzle by any stretch of the imagination.











Holmes' trusty pocket-knife should do the job.



Huzzah, more letters. Let's snoop.







A packet of letters addressed to the Reverend! They were written by a woman who mentions his illegitimate children! Their affair isn't official. Perfect! I have you now, my wayward Reverend!



Perfectly timed.





I am afraid not, Holmes. We were unable to find him.

Doctor Watson would not allow me to contact any Inspector other than this Baynes! What manners! I am a man of the church.

My dear Reverend, I notice you are a chess lover. I trust that you will excuse me, but I am never able to resist the appeal of a half-finished game.

You are an expert at chess? Very well, then. What do you want now?

As you might have guessed, resolving your small chess problem has allowed me to discover some very interesting letters.

Letters? What do they say?

Reverend, why hide these letters here and run the risk of the Bishop finding them?

Holmes? What is in the letters?

Not now, Watson.

Where else could I have hidden them? My own chambers are too austere, they could offer no cover. I knew, however, that his Excellency, may he rest in peace, would not notice my game.

The contents of the Bishop of Knightsbridge's chest interest me greatly. Give me the elements you hold, Reverend.

Out of the question.



This is, by the way, the only time in the game that the dialogue choice makes any difference whatsoever (as far as I can tell, anyway). The difference is that "Corruption" and "Blackmail" result in the Reverend telling us to find the implements ourselves. "Threat" will force him to get them for us.



Think for one moment. Who profits from this crime?

Not me!

I think so, yes! With the Bishop of Knightsbridge no longer here, you are now the apostolic director of the diocese, are you not?

Yes, until another incumbent is appointed, but...

A position which should logically come to you. The police will not overlook that.

They will never believe you.

But of course they will... Do not forget who I am, Reverend.

...Fine! You win!

Evidently, as I always do. What are you able to tell us about the Bishop of Knightsbrige's final days? Did anyone come to visit him? Did he seem worried? Anxious? Do not omit the smallest detail.

His nephew came to visit him yesterday, at his Excellency's request. I found this visit a little peculiar, because the young man rarely visits his uncle.

Do you know why that might be? Were they on bad terms?

I don't think so, it's rather a consequence of his work. The young man is employed within the Archives section of the Royal Library, which doesn't leave him a lot of free time.

Do you know the reason for his summons?

No, but the conversation was very heated. It only lasted for a few minutes and ended with the nephew in a terrible rage.

Interesting.

I've answered your questions, will you now let me contact the authorities?

I am afraid not, Reverend, not just yet.

All right, now we can open the safe.



The safe now triggers a puzzle. The gist: we got a number of metal pins from the Reverend, which we need to put into the holes on the safe. The trick is that we need to put pins into squares that don't line up with another pin horizontally, vertically OR diagonally. As such, there are a few solutions, but this is how I did it.



Here we are. I am eager to discover what remarkable treasure could justify such an act of barbarity.

Extraordinary!

The chest is impenetrable, how? No-one other than the Bishop should be able to open it...

You opened the chest with disconcerting ease, Holmes...

I've seen and heard quite enough! This time you won't stop me!



What the...? But why?

Run, Watson! Hurry!



While Watson is out chasing the Reverend, Holmes takes something unknown from the chest.

He's escaped... I hope that your motivations are founded, Holmes, I don't much like skirting around the edges of the law like this.

It is annoying... Let's leave without delay.

What have you found in the chest, Holmes? What in there is so precious for these men to commit such terrible acts?

The Reverend was telling the truth. Nothing important was locked inside the chest, apart from a few religious items which are hardly worth stealing.

So, we haven't made any headway; perhaps the police will...

By the time the police arrive, we shall be a long way from here, Watson! We are leaving.





So ends our Knightsbridge investigation. Next time: CLUE ANALYSIS!!!

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Jul 11, 2014 around 14:43

Bruceski
Aug 21, 2007

World-changing power, absolutely no side effects!

Well, this goes straight trough "disdain for the police" into "criminal acts."

The Wizard of Oz
Feb 7, 2004



Weird mix of Jack the Ripper and Professor Layton here; anyone who's played the first Layton would remember a knight's tour and an n-queens puzzle. Have the Holmes games had increasingly prominent use of puzzle games as the series goes on? I've only played the Cthulhu one - which is almost entirely a straightforward adventure game to my memory - and part of the Jack the Ripper one, where I gave up after this absurd bullshit:



Yeah, it's not even a puzzle, you're expected to go look it up on Wikipedia. That chest isn't even physically possible!

I was pretty amazed Jeff and Ryan got through the chess puzzles in the Quick Look on Giant Bomb. Usually watching them tackle a puzzle is infuriating, but they figured them out pretty quick.

Aleph Null
Jun 10, 2008


The Wizard of Oz posted:

I was pretty amazed Jeff and Ryan got through the chess puzzles in the Quick Look on Giant Bomb. Usually watching them tackle a puzzle is infuriating, but they figured them out pretty quick.

If you fail that knight jumping puzzle enough times, it gives you an auto-solve option.

Daigerus
Nov 5, 2009


Remind me again why the little kids are somehow not put-off by the grisly murder, if that awkwardly voice-acted intro is anything to go by? It just seems out of place, knowing that them reading some journal about Sherlock is the framing device. Unless Watson decided to censor the particular gruesome details in his novelization, but still, little kids are reading this.

Ted_Haggard
Jan 28, 2009


Daigerus posted:

Remind me again why the little kids are somehow not put-off by the grisly murder, if that awkwardly voice-acted intro is anything to go by? It just seems out of place, knowing that them reading some journal about Sherlock is the framing device. Unless Watson decided to censor the particular gruesome details in his novelization, but still, little kids are reading this.

Kids love this poo poo, in my experience

Tunahead
Mar 26, 2010


Ted_Haggard posted:

Kids love this poo poo, in my experience

Yeah, seriously. Especially ones as young as that who are basically just filled with an amoral curiosity and no concept of the implications behind a dead body that has bits of it twisted into a pretzel. They'd just think it was awesome. And it's not like Watson's memoirs as written by Arthur Conan Doyle came with illustrations, although I suspect that wouldn't really diminish their enjoyment of it. Doyle also basically viewed the Sherlock Holmes stories as schlock for the idiot masses so he resolved plots out of nowhere with "a midget assassin and a trained bear that had escaped from a traveling circus acted in collusion to perpetrate this foul deed" and that stuff would pretty much get even the more squeamish little kids on board.

Glazius
Jul 22, 2007

Hail all those who are able,
any mouse can,
any mouse will,
but the Guard prevail.


Holmes loves solvin' mysteries just a little too much, I think.

Kanthulhu
Apr 8, 2009
NO ONE SPOIL GAME OF THRONES FOR ME!

IF SOMEONE TELLS ME THAT OBERYN MARTELL AND THE MOUNTAIN DIE THIS SEASON, I'M GOING TO BE PISSED.

BUT NOT HALF AS PISSED AS I'D BE IF SOMEONE WERE TO SPOIL VARYS KILLING A LANISTER!!!


(Dany shits in a field)

Holmes is a prick.

David D. Davidson
Nov 17, 2012


Glazius posted:

Holmes loves solvin' mysteries just a little too much, I think.

It's more that Holmes is an arrogant prick who likes showing off how he's smarter than everyone else.

Sandata
Mar 19, 2010


Sherlock I need to tell you something. Norbury. This is important for you to remember. Might be for the wrong reason but you look like you need it.

Personally I'm trying to finish this game my self and I have found my self being stuck quite a few times. When ever you use the Light bulb button Sherlock will note anything and everything that can be interacted. So some times it can't even help that much. Not only that but the note system sometimes feels way too strict and even when someone makes sense in my brain its not what the game is looking for. You could call this problem of mine of me being an idiot or the game being too harsh. Overall it's very close to a good adventure game if not a little bumpy.

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Sorry about the glacial pace, guys. With any luck, I should be able to get a m-m-mega size update up in about a week. Then, hopefully, I'll be back to 1-3 updates per week.

Wudgeous
Oct 3, 2013


Enjoying the lp so far, slow of pace or not! Mainly I'm posting with hopes that we get bumped into a new page before the next update. Ha.

FredMSloniker
Jan 2, 2008

Why, yes, I do like Kirby games.


My current theory: Sherlock did steal the necklace, and the reason is connected to whatever he took from the bishop's chest. For that matter, don't we only have his word for it that he had an appointment with the bishop to begin with? Maybe, when he saw the necklace, he realized he needed to get to the bishop as swiftly as would not arouse suspicion... but someone beat him there...

The Wizard of Oz
Feb 7, 2004



FredMSloniker posted:

My current theory: Sherlock did steal the necklace, and the reason is connected to whatever he took from the bishop's chest. For that matter, don't we only have his word for it that he had an appointment with the bishop to begin with? Maybe, when he saw the necklace, he realized he needed to get to the bishop as swiftly as would not arouse suspicion... but someone beat him there...

I don't see how he could have had it created in time, or why he would have had a shoddy copy made. I think the dude or his daughter stole it themselves in order to deprive him of a dowry, because they don't want the marriage to go through, or they need to hock the necklace for cash. But I'm kind of gaming this - the only two elements to have one mention are the marriage/dowry and the paper work, which means they're the most important ones.

OSheaman
May 27, 2004

Heavy Fucking Metal

Ugh a Knight's Tour puzzle, my least favorite thing ever.

Elite
Oct 30, 2010


FredMSloniker posted:

My current theory: Sherlock did steal the necklace, and the reason is connected to whatever he took from the bishop's chest. For that matter, don't we only have his word for it that he had an appointment with the bishop to begin with? Maybe, when he saw the necklace, he realized he needed to get to the bishop as swiftly as would not arouse suspicion... but someone beat him there...

I'm willing to get behind anything that discredits the monkey theory.

A trained monkey cut open the case with a diamond! Then accidentally set the room on fire. Then accidentally summoned the servants. Then got spooked trying to escape and accidentally murdered a fish when it dropped the necklace. Then it silently hid behind a screen and quietly left in shame.

What the christ Holmes?


That's really what we're going with? Maybe the monkey was also a wizard? Or maybe it had multiple personalities (one of whom is extremely competent and the other is a loving idiot).

I do like copying the trick from the BBC for the investigating though.

Bruceski
Aug 21, 2007

World-changing power, absolutely no side effects!

Elite posted:

I'm willing to get behind anything that discredits the monkey theory.

A trained monkey cut open the case with a diamond! Then accidentally set the room on fire. Then accidentally summoned the servants. Then got spooked trying to escape and accidentally murdered a fish when it dropped the necklace. Then it silently hid behind a screen and quietly left in shame.

What the christ Holmes?


That's really what we're going with? Maybe the monkey was also a wizard? Or maybe it had multiple personalities (one of whom is extremely competent and the other is a loving idiot).

I do like copying the trick from the BBC for the investigating though.

When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, is still absurd unless you can find some solid evidence like monkey fur or something.

Elite
Oct 30, 2010


Bruceski posted:

When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, is still absurd unless you can find some solid evidence like monkey fur or something.

Clearly we are dealing with a highly-trained mute schizophrenic pyromaniac homicidal furless monkey with a crippling shyness complex.

Can't you blathering simpletons make even the most elementary deductions?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Good Lord Fisher!
Jul 13, 2006

Will the U.S. ever adopt the metric system? I think not..


Elite posted:

Clearly we are dealing with a highly-trained mute schizophrenic pyromaniac homicidal furless monkey with a crippling shyness complex.

At least one of those words is correct.

edit:

OSheaman posted:

Ugh a Knight's Tour puzzle, my least favorite thing ever.

I played with that puzzle a bit more than usual for this LP actually, and discovered something interesting: The puzzle has an inbuilt hint system (i.e. if you mash spacebar then it pings the next tile you should take). HOWEVER: if you use the hint system exclusively from the start of the puzzle (as in press spacebar, move to the tile it suggests, wait for it to recharge and repeat), it will eventually put the puzzle into an unwinnable state.

Good Lord Fisher! fucked around with this message at Mar 12, 2014 around 01:55

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«2 »