|
I took this opportunity to finally play this game and it was unbelievably good. I was so smug about figuring out the chinese topmen and their shoes and basically all the times the game asks you to differentiate between people with the same given name, and the purser just looking like a goddamn nerd, and for ever just looking at the justice at sea sketch, but also for minor stuff like right at the beginning of the game, in the first memory, I looked at the guy and then at the manifest and I was like "this is clearly the first mate", and this was of course confirmed a few minutes later but it felt like a little triumph at the time. My big lingering confusion at the close is the exact status of the shells and in particular The Chest at any point in time. It seems to me like opening the chest makes some things happen that are very bad news but then why didn't Nichols get ark of the covenant'd after he went poking around in there? Lots seems to hinge on whether the shell is in or out of the chest; the theory I like is that the top compartment being full of mercury acts as a damper and prevents the shell acting as a beacon for the entire collective wrath of the sea. I can only assume that in Ch2 Nichols took it out, and in Ch4 Beng put it back and in doing so incapacitated some more mermaids but then Nichols went and brought them all (along with two more shells) back to the ship. Then a bunch of poo poo happened and I guess the captain killed two of the mermaids and threw their shells overboard, neutralising them, but I guess at some point before that Dahl went and took the third shell out of the chest and I guess the captain didn't notice it, so the krakening continued until Perrot came in to try diplomacy. I like this theory. It all tracks, except, it does not explain why Nichols was able to frame a guy for murder instead of, say, writhing on the floor in burning agony. The shell had to be in the chest before, otherwise the ship would have been right hosed from the get go, but also it needed to be out of the chest by the time of Ch4 so Beng could dramatically put it back. What am I missing here? E: Now I check again, at the point Nichols did his murder the shell was in the bottom drawer of the chest and not the top bit with the mercury. So, what's the deal with the bottom drawer? Why is it even there? Was the shell in there from the start of the voyage? Was the shell just always not properly contained? If it wasn't, what the gently caress were the Formosans thinking? If it was, why isn't Nichols short an arm like Beng and Dahl? Fedule fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Oct 22, 2019 |
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 12:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
I think that the box has compartments. The shell storage at the bottom drawer. And the magic mercury in the top compartment. Nicols opened the bottom drawer, but not the top one during the murder. Maybe the top was locked, maybe he just didn't have time. The shell in the bottom only drives people insane. It is possible that the magic mercury protects people from the shell while it is in the box. But it might not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 13:29
|
|
|
I was just thinking about this game again recently and how it taught me that a 'loose cannon' isn't a cannon that could fire at any moment, but rather a cannon that's not bolted to the floor and will shift around and ruin a mate's day in a storm
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
I could play an entire series of games like this. It ticks all the boxes for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
timp posted:I was just thinking about this game again recently and how it taught me that a 'loose cannon' isn't a cannon that could fire at any moment, but rather a cannon that's not bolted to the floor and will shift around and ruin a mate's day in a storm You didn't know that?! You're off the case, timp! Hand in your badge and gun!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
Interesting suppositions but ya probably should spoiler this, because, well. I never got the sense that the shells ever really messed with people's heads all that much? They just act as a magnet for sea horrors, and the resulting fear, paranoia and cascading betrayals are all just humans being our cool wonderful selves. The box definitely has two compartments and one of those is definitely filled with mercury but it seems as though all the big dramatic things that the box does hinge on the top compartment being open and someone touching the mercury. Specifically, I got the sense that while out at sea Beng opened the box and put the shell into the mercury, which is what did the whatever that incapacitated the mermaids, and that Dahl later took the shell out, and in both cases this proved fatal. When Nichols is doing his murder, we see the shell situated in the bottom drawer of the chest, with the top locked. It seems to be the case that the shell was always in the bottom drawer, because like I said before if Nichols had taken it out of the top drawer he would be notably minus an arm. But, neither the bottom drawer providing any shielding nor the bottom drawer not providing any shielding seem to make any sense. If it does, then what's the point of the mercury bowl and how did the mermaids find the boat crew during Nichols' big stupid kidnap stunt when the only time the shell even briefly left the chest was during the murder? If it doesn't, why didn't the mermaids show up before the ship reached the Canary Islands, since they're clearly able to operate in British waters, and why wasn't the shell in the mercury compartment, and, again, I cannot stress this enough, what the gently caress were the Formosans thinking bringing the unshielded shell on a sea voyage? While I'm here, here's another question: did the captain ever actually figure out what the shells were doing? I keep thinking that he just didn't notice Dahl was holding the third shell, but maybe he did and just didn't care because as far as he knew they were just some pretty baubles the mermaids didn't like having stolen from them. Maybe this is why he hesitated in telling the first mate "they're at... the bottom of the sea"? Okay, one more; it's not clear exactly when Paul Moss and Davey James set the last mermaid free, and thus how many people were still on the boat at the time, but it seems unlikely that they could have carried her the whole way from the lazarette to the top deck without anyone noticing, right? I wonder if anyone else was in on the bargain. At that point, the official story seems to be that the captain scared the last mermaid into calling off the kraken and that the shells were all gone (see: "A third shell! Captain didn't throw them all overboard!"), and yet even after James, Evans and the ladies made their escape (so, unquestionably post-Bargain) Olus Wiater was still scheming to "trade wretched fish and shells for gold", so I have to wonder who exactly knew, told, and believed, what. This sure is one of those stories you linger on for a while, isn't it. Fedule fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Oct 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
timp posted:I was just thinking about this game again recently and how it taught me that a 'loose cannon' isn't a cannon that could fire at any moment, but rather a cannon that's not bolted to the floor and will shift around and ruin a mate's day in a storm I didn't pick up on this at the time but just a week or so ago I found out that indian sailors who worked on European ships were called Lascars, which is what's being referred to when the two sailors are thought to have picked up their illness at the lascar house, where they'd have stayed during their time ashore. EDIT: Ending thoughts Personally I think the shell thing is one of those things that really doesn't make much sense, which is part of why the bargain makes for a comparatively weak ending. It's OK in a lot of stories for things, especially magic things, to be unclear but given that this is kind of a murder mystery game kindofsortof, lacking that a-ha moment is a bit of a flaw in the diamond, especially when it implicitly sets up the bargain as being the moment you'll get the answer. Reveilled fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Oct 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
Fedule posted:Interesting suppositions but ya probably should spoiler this, because, well. For some reason I get the impression that the shells, once seen, cast some kind of charm or obsession on people who've seen them but don't know what they are - people think they are pretty and reckon they would fetch a high price. I propose that the container was the one way the shells could be transported safely without signalling to the fish-folk where they are, but the shells want to be found and will try to get others to take them to sea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
The fact that we never find out if the shells were bewitching people and never confirm the motivation of any of the supernatural beings makes this story succeed as a horror story. The shell being less powerful in the mercury makes no sense. After Beng activated the box by putting the shell in, it seems to have much more effect. So, the bottom drawer either provides limited shielding or the Formosans think it does. And they need the shell right there to activate the mercury weapon. And the mermaids attacked as soon as the box was close enough to the water that they could realistically reach it. They might have been waiting around the ship from the start. Or maybe they only noticed that the shell was there when Nicols opened the drawer and came swimming during the full day that passed there. And going all CIA-thread on a almost a year old game also makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
It just came out a few days ago for a lot of people and it doesn’t hurt you to spoil it
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
I just completed this on my Switch and now I’m sad because it was such a fun, challenging and beautiful game. Like many others it took me a long time to identify the bosun’s mate. Besides him, the Indian steward and some of the seamen were simply trial-and-error in the end. I never expected to be this hooked on a game such as this and I hope there will be a sequel some time in the future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
I think the mermaids didn't attack before the canary islands is because assaulting an ~-60 men ship ain't worth it just for a shell - but a pair of life boat? Nice opportunity. As far as the shells in the drawer - well, the shell doesn't seem to burn people by themselves - you need to put 'em in the top to do it - and to do the stun thingy. So no need for shielding in the lower deck. And unrelated question about character motivation (spoilers about the doom, part 8): Why the hell did Abigail went outside to search for the captain? The simplest explanation is that she's dumb (won't be the only one on deck that died because of their own stupidity - see the cook), but I'll rather have something that did not rely on "it didn't make sense and it's the point"? Oh, and speaking of him, something that amused me: I found it funny, at first, that everyone seem to assume that the mermaids speak English, for no reason. Then it appears that they were right. Okay...
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
Gun Jam posted:And unrelated question about character motivation (spoilers about the doom, part 8): Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the captain down in the lazarette attacking the mermaids at this point? She wouldn't have known about them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 11:53
|
|
|
Hwurmp posted:Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the captain down in the lazarette attacking the mermaids at this point? She wouldn't have known about them. Yeah iirc that is the timeline overlap of that scene.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 12:01
|
|
|
Just finished getting through this game and I'm quite disappointed. I'm still trying to avoid spoilers, but I wound up having exactly the sort of experience I was hoping I wouldn't have. Only ID'd ~20 people. I could have picked up a few more if I didn't find the ending sequence an utterly obnoxious guessing festival (for example, how do you tell what the gently caress are the death causes for either of the formosans? "Magic" and "bitten" aren't options and I guess after seeing all the scenes I could have gone back and tried electrocuted/poisoned but that feels like a really lovely guess), but for the most part I really don't know what I missed. I assume there are a few I could probably find out by spending a ton of time combing through every scene with people in bunks, like which Peters brother was crushed by cargo, but I was so disappointed with the end sequence that I kinda stopped caring. I'm really not sure what I am missing. Even very early there are some people that become IDable for reasons that seem completely opaque to me. For example, IIRC the guy that Abigail is talking to is IDable from her scene and I have no idea how you could possibly conclude anything about him from that scene. The further I got into the game, the worse this became, with characters becoming identifiable seemingly at random. For the entire second half of the game I only ID'd people in ways I considered really obvious - names, obvious job roles, and one piece of gear the Persian guy has his sword hanging near his bunk. I spotted one or two other things that seemed like they were intended to serve the same function but never noticed them show up anywhere. What am I overlooking? I don't think you're just supposed to blindly guess through a set of possibilities, that seems really cheesy and un-fun, so I know I must be overlooking some things, but I have no idea what.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:23
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Just finished getting through this game and I'm quite disappointed. I'm still trying to avoid spoilers, but I wound up having exactly the sort of experience I was hoping I wouldn't have. Only ID'd ~20 people. I could have picked up a few more if I didn't find the ending sequence an utterly obnoxious guessing festival (for example, how do you tell what the gently caress are the death causes for either of the formosans? "Magic" and "bitten" aren't options and I guess after seeing all the scenes I could have gone back and tried electrocuted/poisoned but that feels like a really lovely guess), but for the most part I really don't know what I missed. I assume there are a few I could probably find out by spending a ton of time combing through every scene with people in bunks, like which Peters brother was crushed by cargo, but I was so disappointed with the end sequence that I kinda stopped caring. "clawed" and "burned" are like right there quote:I'm really not sure what I am missing. Even very early there are some people that become IDable for reasons that seem completely opaque to me. For example, IIRC the guy that Abigail is talking to is IDable from her scene and I have no idea how you could possibly conclude anything about him from that scene. The further I got into the game, the worse this became, with characters becoming identifiable seemingly at random. For the entire second half of the game I only ID'd people in ways I considered really obvious - names, obvious job roles, and one piece of gear the Persian guy has his sword hanging near his bunk. I spotted one or two other things that seemed like they were intended to serve the same function but never noticed them show up anywhere. What am I overlooking? I don't think you're just supposed to blindly guess through a set of possibilities, that seems really cheesy and un-fun, so I know I must be overlooking some things, but I have no idea what. Abigail calls him by name iirc. The ones that knocked me over were the other people who are ID-able from that scene. You're on to something with the bunks, but it doesn't seem like you're giving them quite enough attention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:28
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Even very early there are some people that become IDable for reasons that seem completely opaque to me. For example, IIRC the guy that Abigail is talking to is IDable from her scene and I have no idea how you could possibly conclude anything about him from that scene. Martin! Martin! Where is the Captain? Edit: Beyond that, two things which are important are working things out via process of elimination, and making reasonable inferences from your observations. So for that guy, even if you missed how to identify him there, here's a few other ways: If you look at what he's wearing and compare it to other crew members, you can determine that he wears the same type of uniform as the first mate, second mate, and Captain. Thus he is the third mate. In the execution scene, staff are grouped by their role on the ship. This man is standing next to the Captain, First Mate and Second Mate. Thus, he is the third mate. Across two scenes, you can identify a young man bringing him dinner. If you identify him as the Third Mate's Steward, you can then infer that the man he is bringing dinner to must be the Third Mate. Though in this case I believe this is intended to go the other way, you'd hopefully identify the Third Mate, and then see the man bringing him dinner and identify the Steward from that. Reveilled fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Feb 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:33
|
|
|
I can definitely say there is no need to guess at any point of the game, while I didn't by any means get everything right the first time around and really had to hunt for some stuff I did 100% the game without ever resorting to bruteforcing or guessing. And I'm no Sherlock Holmes I can assure you. Also the death causes are fairly forgiving, if something feels like it could be valid then it probably is. For the Formosans burned/poisoned/electrocuted all work for the man and eaten/clawed/strangled for the woman AFAIK. The most "correct" ones are likely burned for the man as the chest burns his arm off and clawed for the woman as you can see a mermaid reaching for her throat and the resultant claw marks afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
Kanfy posted:I can definitely say there is no need to guess at any point of the game, while I didn't by any means get everything right the first time around and really had to hunt for some stuff I did 100% the game without ever resorting to bruteforcing or guessing. And I'm no Sherlock Holmes I can assure you. I'm pretty sure eaten isn't an option for the woman, as I recall finding that particular one frustratingly difficult since my interpretation of the scene was that the mermaid had chomped her neck and I couldn't work out why "eaten" wasn't the right answer there. I do think clawed and strangled both work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:51
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:I'm pretty sure eaten isn't an option for the woman, as I recall finding that particular one frustratingly difficult since my interpretation of the scene was that the mermaid had chomped her neck and I couldn't work out why "eaten" wasn't the right answer there. I do think clawed and strangled both work. This is correct, I had exactly the same problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
Yeah I misspoke, I didn't mean Martin, I meant another officer, who I think also becomes identifiable in that scene for no apparent reason. The thing that really compounded it for me is that once you give up on identifying someone the first opportunity, you're kinda hosed - unless you write it down, there's no way to tell what scene reveals their identity. That combined with the timer forcing you out of scenes and breadcrumbing you to the next one feels like really bad game design that is out of character with how clean everything else is. I know relationships are supposed to help you ID people, but the first mate and his steward were the only example of that I found. Aside from that it was just a lot of people showing up together repeatedly with no discernable relationship between them - nothing about age, demeanor, positioning in the sketches or scenes, or equipment would suggest anything to me. Maybe that's just because I missed one person early on that was supposed to trigger a chain reaction through the game. I honestly feel like I'm outright missing some element of the game. By halfway through the game, there was no longer any correlation between when the game expected me to be able to ID people and when I did. The majority of people I could ID from that point on, I ID'd while they were still blurry by things like their accent, clothing, accessories, or process of elimination. I feel like I'm just fundamentally missing something about how you're supposed to identify people. The only thing I can think of that I didn't try besides being REALLY exhaustive with process of elimination by bunk numbers across all scenes would be IDing people by differences in their shoes. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Feb 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:11
|
|
|
Tbh I think the game is too hard but it is logically all doable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Also, just because someone is discoverable doesn't mean you need to enter the answer then and there. They may appear in additional scenes, and there may be later clues. It just means there's enough to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
When someone gets unblurred and you can’t figure it out, it’s usually good to look at the log and see which other scenes you’ve seen them in and go back and review those and see if there’s information that you can now use to connect the dots
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:17
|
|
|
You're only on a timer the first time you view a scene. Afterwards you can just go back and look as long as you want. You're right about the game having weird expectations of when a person becomes identifiable, but you're not bound by those expectations, you can just go through any person's scenes one by one to ID them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Yeah I misspoke, I didn't mean Martin, I meant another officer, who I think also becomes identifiable in that scene for no apparent reason. In several cases, you’re expected to combine visual information from one scene with spoken information from the next in chronological order, because they’re talking about what just happened. I think Abigail’s scene has two people easily identifiable that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:33
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Yeah I misspoke, I didn't mean Martin, I meant another officer, who I think also becomes identifiable in that scene for no apparent reason. The thing that really compounded it for me is that once you give up on identifying someone the first opportunity, you're kinda hosed - unless you write it down, there's no way to tell what scene reveals their identity. That combined with the timer forcing you out of scenes and breadcrumbing you to the next one feels like really bad game design that is out of character with how clean everything else is. You're missing core components of the game. You can revisit scenes all you want. There's no one scene where you are given an identity for most people, it's just when you have all the required the information. The timer I think is actually a pretty good idea since it helps gives you all the scenes and lets you see what is happening to get a better understanding of the story so you can go back and review the individual points in better detail. It keeps you moving. Any if you can't figure it out, just wait a bit and come back to it later. There's only one obvious way to screw up the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Yeah I misspoke, I didn't mean Martin, I meant another officer, who I think also becomes identifiable in that scene for no apparent reason. The thing that really compounded it for me is that once you give up on identifying someone the first opportunity, you're kinda hosed - unless you write it down, there's no way to tell what scene reveals their identity. That combined with the timer forcing you out of scenes and breadcrumbing you to the next one feels like really bad game design that is out of character with how clean everything else is. Here's some examples of identifying people by relations in the crew: in the bunk scene, there are two groups of people who are awake, the people watching over the dying man and the people at the table. You know Syed is the person dead in the bunk, he's being directly addressed. But there's three other people around him, one of whom is asleep, and one of those people is speaking an indian language. from this (and the drawing showing them relaxing together) you can infer that these four must be the four indian seamen, which you can then corroborate using the bunk numbers (with the one speaking to syed identifiable by being from the empty bunk). Meanwhile, the three people at the table are conversing in russian. This means you can pinpoint them all as being russian, and there's three russians in the crew. You can use this in other scenes to determine who they are, e.g. when you are on the rigging, one of the people at that table is up there, so he's the russian topman. Another example, the bosun's mate. The first time you see the bosun's death, you don't know exactly who he is, but he's dressed up fancy, so he has to be an officer of some sort. He refers to his "frenchman". So you look through the manifest and see, ah ha, only one of the officers has a mate who is french, and that's the bosun, so our inference here is that the dead man is the bosun and his "frenchman" is his mate. So who is the mate? Well, he died in the attack, says a man in the bosun's death scene. So we go back to the last scene the bosun is in during the attack, and he's fighting the beast alongside a man in a black and white striped shirt. Now if you know french naval uniforms you'd recognise this as a french seaman's shirt (and where the stereotypical "french" outfit with the beret and the onions etc comes from partially), but even if not, you can now have a look through that guy's history and work backwards though it and hey, turns out he appears along with the bosun in multiple memories! So, probably the bosun's mate, then. Reveilled fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Feb 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 01:58
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I think that the only person I identified based on "hey, they're unblurred, I guess I should infer it now" was the sailor from New Zealand. To me the blur didn't seem like something I'd use as an actual clue for identification because my expectation was that it was supposed to be an indicator of "technically you now have the bare minimum of info to make this inference" and I knew I wouldn't be able to do that. The way it seemed to me & as others have stated, the game partially expects you to see what it has to offer before starting with the identifying; you can return to any previously-seen info later on and the book even tells you in which memories particular crewmembers appear (although admittedly several are just kinda doing their work in multiple scenes.) And if you follow this logic, most if not all faces will be unblurry by the time you actually start the identifying game proper.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 02:05
|
|
|
God, this game was so good. I can't wait to forget all the solutions and go back to re-solve it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 02:09
|
|
|
Hempuli posted:To me the blur didn't seem like something I'd use as an actual clue for identification because my expectation was that it was supposed to be an indicator of "technically you now have the bare minimum of info to make this inference" and I knew I wouldn't be able to do that. Yeah I didn't use it much either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
I'm playing this now and I have a question: how much "guesswork" is involved in figuring out some of the more esoteric fates? I've seen all the scenes (at least I think so, the guy in the boat said something about the storm which the Before I Play page suggests is how you know you've found all the bodies) but I still have a load of unidentified people, though I think I know the fate of everyone that isn't a disappearance. But will I get some sort of concrete info or be able to use logic/elimination to figure out who everybody is? Like I know a couple of the crew members are Russian, but not who they are, so I could theoretically try different names until I get confirmation, but can I figure out who they are without doing that? And I know who the two female passengers are that escape on a boat, but is there something that will indicate to me what their fate is? There's three or four places that they reasonably could have sailed to, am I expected to just guess, or does something point me to the right answer? Basically, I feel like there's a lot of stuff that I could "brute force" because I now have it narrowed down to three or four possibilities, but I'd rather not do that if I'm actually able to find all the info I'd need to come to the right conclusion by just going back through scenes and paying attention.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:43
|
|
|
Theoretically you can learn every single person's identity with no guesswork at all. But I'm going to be honest, I probably would've found it impossible to do so. When you see it explained, you will understand why and how, but it's very tricky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:45
|
|
|
Based on my own experience, I will say that inevitably you will brute-force several answers and then after the fact go back and slap your head when you read up on the clues that you missed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:50
|
|
|
The information to get everything in the game without a single guess exists, but the logical leaps you need to take are sometimes pretty obscure and the info may be very easy to overlook. Ultimately It’s up to you, your sense of honour and the value of your time whether you (ab)use the 3 correct fates = confirmed mechanic to brute force things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:52
|
|
|
I mean, hypothetically, some of the sailors could've changed/traded their socks, you do kind of have to assume that they didn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
I still have yet to see an adequate explanation on sorting out the Chinese topmen
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:56
|
|
|
Sockser posted:I still have yet to see an adequate explanation on sorting out the Chinese topmen Literally the socks are part of it for them. That's why I mentioned it, pissed me right off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 03:56
|
|
|
Doing it without any brute force tends to mean that you need to be familiar with some of the standards of the age of sail, too. The game is actually extremely historically accurate in a lot of its details, but it will absolutely not tell you what those details are or even hint how they might relate to the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 09:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:I'm playing this now and I have a question: how much "guesswork" is involved in figuring out some of the more esoteric fates? I've seen all the scenes (at least I think so, the guy in the boat said something about the storm which the Before I Play page suggests is how you know you've found all the bodies) but I still have a load of unidentified people, though I think I know the fate of everyone that isn't a disappearance. But will I get some sort of concrete info or be able to use logic/elimination to figure out who everybody is? Like I know a couple of the crew members are Russian, but not who they are, so I could theoretically try different names until I get confirmation, but can I figure out who they are without doing that? And I know who the two female passengers are that escape on a boat, but is there something that will indicate to me what their fate is? There's three or four places that they reasonably could have sailed to, am I expected to just guess, or does something point me to the right answer? To get the boat as example, there are even two spots where you find the fate. But one is hilariously easy to overlook and the other is in the bad ending. But if you haven't solved the Russians, you just might have to cross-reverence more in general. You should know who the three Russians are and you should know who the topmen are. So the Russian topman is the one who appears in both lists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2020 10:13
|
|