|
On the topic of weird foibles the game will accept, it'll allow you to say that Hok-Seng Lau was killed by the Captain, which I suppose is very technically accurate, as he's the one who ordered the execution. It makes a lot more sense to figure out which bullet hit him, though.Nidoking posted:I wonder whether the game would be better if it didn't confirm anything. Possibly not until you're done, but possibly not ever. You fill in the book, and you know how much information is needed, but the game just never tells you whether you got it all correct or not. Yeah, something I've always felt was missing is some kind of 'hard mode' where the game doesn't lock in any answers as you go. On the other hand, it would be very frustrating to finish the game and realize you slipped up with one little mistake. For instance, this LP inspired me to replay the game, and for a while I had one death incorrectly written in as 'strangled' because I'd missed the knife in the killer's hands. Maybe there's some sort of midway compromise? Like maybe it checks them off as you finish a chapter, or maybe a button you can press at any point to confirm what you've got? I can't think of a perfect solution.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
fractalairduct posted:On the topic of weird foibles the game will accept, it'll allow you to say that Hok-Seng Lau was killed by the Captain, which I suppose is very technically accurate, as he's the one who ordered the execution. It makes a lot more sense to figure out which bullet hit him, though. What wouldn't make sense is to blame it on Mr Wolff, as they suggested during the video. He's just middle management, passing on the decisions of the higher ups.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 11:15
|
|
|
fractalairduct posted:On the topic of weird foibles the game will accept, it'll allow you to say that Hok-Seng Lau was killed by the Captain, which I suppose is very technically accurate, as he's the one who ordered the execution. It makes a lot more sense to figure out which bullet hit him, though. Killed by in what way? The only "killed" option is with a sword.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 14:17
|
|
|
I thought the game didn't actually accept "Shot, Gun, R. Witterel" for Lau, which is why I was a bit intent on "are you sure the game doesn't want you to figure out who exactly shot him". The list I have that lists all acceptable fates doesn't have that, it only has "Shot, Gun, Hat Guy".
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 14:52
|
|
|
I don't know about logic specific to the execution but I'm under the impression that there's an oddball outcome in which the game will accept you blaming literally every death on the captain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 14:55
|
|
Fedule posted:I don't know about logic specific to the execution but I'm under the impression that there's an oddball outcome in which the game will accept you blaming literally every death on the captain. It won't accept that as correct, but it will give you an achievement for it.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 14:56
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:I thought the game didn't actually accept "Shot, Gun, R. Witterel" for Lau, which is why I was a bit intent on "are you sure the game doesn't want you to figure out who exactly shot him". The list I have that lists all acceptable fates doesn't have that, it only has "Shot, Gun, Hat Guy". I asked because one thing I had specifically verified while editing a later video is that "Shot, Gun, R. Witterel" doesn't work for Hok-Seng Lau. There is an element of truth to it within the game, but we'll see that when we get there. I also tried "Killed (Sword), R. Witterel" just in case. Also no good. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but I've got a file ready to try anything else suggested for him. Fedule posted:I don't know about logic specific to the execution but I'm under the impression that there's an oddball outcome in which the game will accept you blaming literally every death on the captain. I was going to save this for the finale, but... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 15:52
|
|
|
The game is pretty loose with cause of death for some of the fates. For example, for Abigail, you can use clubbed by a terrible beast or crushed by falling rigging, and the game will accept both.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 19:49
|
|
|
You can put whatever you like in the book and sail away, once you've seen all the fates. The game may not lock in everything, but you're the insurance investigator so you'll be taken at your word.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
I've never actually entered the Captain as the culprit, I'm passing this on based on what I read on the game's wiki, which unfortunately doesn't provide an associated cause of death. I also can't find this information anywhere else, so maybe it's just wrong? E: Actually, looking at this wiki page again, I think it's just worded poorly, and it's not supposed to be saying that the game will accept that as a valid answer. fractalairduct fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Dec 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 03:48
|
|
New video! We begin our second recording session, Nidoking sets me up for a fall, and then puts on an accent. Fun times are had all around.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2021 18:32
|
|
|
This was a really magnificent video and it was exactly what I was looking forward to when I first saw the thread. IT's a bit sad that we did not get see the moment of epiphany during editing, but the investigator accent makes up for it. Also I think you're onto something there with the Chinese zodiac. Theres a cow (ox), a monkey, a rooster, a goat, I think there is a pig, probably some rats somewhere, and if we're being generous, the kraken can be a dragon. That's more than half the zodiac. Incidentally, no horses, rabbits, snakes, or dogs. It would be a spoiler to discuss if a tiger shows up. cant cook creole bream fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Dec 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Half the zodiac animals are just livestock animals though, and aside from the monkey all the animals we've seen aboard are livestock. This was long before refrigeration, so the best way to keep meat fresh on a long voyage is to keep it alive. Hence having a butcher on the crew.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2021 21:07
|
|
|
Surprised that Nidoking correctly identified the fourth mate by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion, and yet did not identify the last midshipman by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion. Brains will work however they wish, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Surprised that Nidoking correctly identified the fourth mate by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion, and yet did not identify the last midshipman by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion. It's a bit weird that the midshipmen get unblurred at that point while the officers do not. I think that guy gets unblurred when he's standing next to his steward. But I have no clue how you would figure it out in that order.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
You doing a round-up of everything I shouted at the screen during the previous videos healed my soul.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 01:41
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Surprised that Nidoking correctly identified the fourth mate by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion, and yet did not identify the last midshipman by what he was wearing and the process of exclusion. I didn't notice the positions of the two people I had names for because I had their names. At this point, I was still very much working on the basis of the information I had and not reading between the lines much. That was the point of the long, rambling intro - I didn't catch a lot of helpful details because I was still trying to follow the story. Once I understand what's happening enough to interpret the things I'm seeing and hearing, I'll be able to get more information out of it. I'm honestly in awe of people who can see something once and understand it immediately, and it's why I've never taken to literary or art criticism, and why I usually only do Let's Plays of games I've played enough to be very familiar with. I'm pretty sure the people who do criticism or reviews that point out a lot of subtle details are actually reading or watching the subject matter many times to catch them all, but the criticism itself never gives me that impression, so it really feels like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't catch everything in one go. It's very demoralizing. cant cook creole bream posted:It's a bit weird that the midshipmen get unblurred at that point while the officers do not. I think that guy gets unblurred when he's standing next to his steward. We'll cover this when we get to the single detail that the game considers pivotal to that identity. Part of me wants to try to compile a list of exactly which details or combinations of details the game considers to be sufficient and necessary to identify each person, but that would require playing through the game many times, taking every available path, and checking the book regularly. I'm on my seventh loop of Heaven's Vault already, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 01:47
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:I didn't notice the positions of the two people I had names for because I had their names. At this point, I was still very much working on the basis of the information I had and not reading between the lines much. That was the point of the long, rambling intro - I didn't catch a lot of helpful details because I was still trying to follow the story. Once I understand what's happening enough to interpret the things I'm seeing and hearing, I'll be able to get more information out of it. I'm honestly in awe of people who can see something once and understand it immediately, and it's why I've never taken to literary or art criticism, and why I usually only do Let's Plays of games I've played enough to be very familiar with. I'm pretty sure the people who do criticism or reviews that point out a lot of subtle details are actually reading or watching the subject matter many times to catch them all, but the criticism itself never gives me that impression, so it really feels like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't catch everything in one go. It's very demoralizing. I can’t speak for other media, but feeling like you’re missing loads of info and people might think you’re dumb seems to be very common among people who LP Obra Dinn, but I’ve honestly never seen a play through where anyone caught even half of what was technically possible the first time in each memory. I know people sometimes make a big deal of paying attention to when a face gets unblurred since it usually includes information, but it’s in no way necessary to complete the game, and in my case at least I had well over half of all the crew unidentified by the time I’d seen all the scenes, and mostly I just went person by person through the bookmarked memories to work out who they were. If you miss stuff the first time round, the game expects you to be coming back to memories over and over and over again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
I'm very much like you Nidoking, it's hard for me notice everything the first time through.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 02:33
|
|
|
I never noticed that the watch showed you the chapter of each death until it was pointed out to me. I could see that it was showing a different time for each body, but I assumed that was just (roughly) time of death.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 06:40
|
|
|
TheMcD posted:New video! The way I see it with the scene with the trail of blood: 1.The Midshipman calls out "Mutiny!" then gets stabbed. 2. The 4th mate comes in and sees the stabbing and guns down the culprit. 3. Brennan and the 1st mate come down and see the boy stabbed and an officer shooting another and thinks he is the mutineer and kills him in an unhappy misunderstanding. I don't think Brennan or Hoscut were in with the mutineers at all during that scene. Hoscut seemed to run to comfort the boy while he was bleeding out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 07:14
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:I'm on my seventh loop of Heaven's Vault already, thanks. That's a great game too! logger posted:The way I see it with the scene with the trail of blood: This is most definitely true, and I think Nidoking will redefine his story here later. A sad thing about all of this is the stabber was talking with the fourth mate about leaving. He only suggested it at that point directly after seeing a colleague bleed out. (That's not a great experience and can make you doubt authority. Just ask Hoscut.) But then that boy comes along, ruffles the guy up, he gets stabbed and the Mate is not so much on board with that strategy, so he tries to stop him. During that struggle, a deadly shot is fired. And Brennan, after having a really bad night, just sees a person shooting another and directly clubs the shooter to death without even hearing him out. I guess that was just a really unlucky attempt to knock him out. Alternatively, having already killed someone for justice, Brennan was really eager to relive the experience. I have the vague memory that it is possible to actually squeeze by everyone during the death of Paul moss to see the exact moment of the stabbing below deck. cant cook creole bream fucked around with this message at 08:01 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 07:45
|
|
|
This was such a great game. It makes me sad there aren't other games with similar mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 07:59
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:I didn't notice the positions of the two people I had names for because I had their names. At this point, I was still very much working on the basis of the information I had and not reading between the lines much. That was the point of the long, rambling intro - I didn't catch a lot of helpful details because I was still trying to follow the story. Once I understand what's happening enough to interpret the things I'm seeing and hearing, I'll be able to get more information out of it. I'm honestly in awe of people who can see something once and understand it immediately, and it's why I've never taken to literary or art criticism, and why I usually only do Let's Plays of games I've played enough to be very familiar with. I'm pretty sure the people who do criticism or reviews that point out a lot of subtle details are actually reading or watching the subject matter many times to catch them all, but the criticism itself never gives me that impression, so it really feels like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't catch everything in one go. It's very demoralizing. Oh no, I didn't mean it as a diss. In fact, in my first playthrough, it took me ages to figure out who the fourth mate is; same for Brennan, I didn't figure him out until I was several more scenes in than you are at this point. It was meant more as a "huh, it's weird the things one person notices while others don't." I'm sure that if you have five people playing through this game at the same time, going through the same scenes, they will all notice and figure out different things, besides the obvious ones (e.g. the Captain's identity).
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 14:10
|
|
|
There is at least one guy who I have no idea how you're supposed to ID. So much of the previous videos makes so much more sense now that you've explained that you'd not realized you could put in ID'S whenever you wanted
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Oh no, I didn't mean it as a diss. In fact, in my first playthrough, it took me ages to figure out who the fourth mate is; same for Brennan, I didn't figure him out until I was several more scenes in than you are at this point. It was meant more as a "huh, it's weird the things one person notices while others don't." Yeah my sister managed to identify the two female passengers in the very first scene they appeared in, while I ended up totally stuck and had to guess them. Heck, in the scene where Abigail is crushed by the falling rigging, I didn't even notice the kraken until I activated the watch, so I initially assumed the kraken was invisible until I did that. I thought "oh hey, so they thought they were caught in the worst storm ever, but they were actually being attacked by a monster" in a sort of 'normies can't see magic' kind of way. Totally wrong, of course, but if I could miss the kraken, I don't think I could criticise anyone for missing anything in any other scene.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 15:29
|
|
|
I think this is one of the few times I can say "everyone loves a recap episode" with a straight face.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
We'll start the next video with returning to Escape to look at the details I'd missed the first time through, before we get to new scenes. I will indeed have ideas about what's happening during the chaotic scene, and those of you who have been reasonably frustrated by my earlier attempts at understanding things may want to have soft pillows on standby.Mikl posted:Oh no, I didn't mean it as a diss. I didn't really take it as such, but I had a lot of mood swings over the course of the LP. The one you just witnessed was me feeling rather clever for having caught all of these details and made a bunch of deductions, using only the evidence from the videos. I don't particularly want to describe the one I'll have after the second session, but it was a pretty bad reaction to the first ten minutes or so of choosing a person to identify and almost immediately seeing the very obvious answer, many times over. Anyone who wants to retain whatever amount of respect they have for me may want to pass by this spoiler: After a few hours of realizing how much I'd missed, I decided that for the third session, I would assume the character of Magnus Snortimer III, an insufferable jerk who basically turns everything into an insult, refers to himself as "moi" regardless of the context, and punctuates every sentence with an obnoxious derisive snort. Choice quotes include "It's unfortunate that so many of you will have wasted your time watching the past (number) episodes before getting to the start of this Let's Play" and "If Nidoking had two brain cells to rub together..." I ultimately decided not to do this mostly because it would have made McD very uncomfortable, partly because the lingering effects of some EMDR treatment I underwent years ago kick in when I start thinking too negatively about myself, and also a tiny bit because all the derisive snorting made me light-headed. I am completely serious about all of this. So, in short, I am in every way my own worst critic. It's also why I stick to my recommendation to ignore the blurring and unblurring, not worry too much about filling in the book, and take notes on paper rather than in the book until you've seen everything, precisely because it relieves the pressure of worrying about what you may have missed if you don't make it a goal to catch everything until everything is there to be caught. Gnoman posted:So much of the previous videos makes so much more sense now that you've explained that you'd not realized you could put in ID'S whenever you wanted To be as fair to myself as possible, I did realize it at first (it's how I labeled the Captain), but the specific confusion of Abigail not being highlighted in the book when I went to look at her (because she was dead and therefore not "present", a distinction I hadn't yet understood), as well as the blue screen separating the two recordings by about half an hour, put that out of my mind. From that point, everyone I was in a position to ID was someone I'd seen die already (or would see shortly), so I had a page to turn to. Like I've said before, probably the worst thing about the game's tutorials is that they only become available when you do something the game hasn't yet told you that you can do, to explain what it is you've done. If you stare at a single character long enough, it DOES tell you to press E to zoom, but it only tells you to open the book while zooming if you open the book while zooming. And if some aspect of the tutorial isn't available when you activate it, based on the information you have so far, the tutorial will skip that part entirely. You can replay tutorials from the ? icon in the book, but you only learn that by clicking it, and I thought it might be a hint feature that I didn't want to engage. Reveilled posted:Yeah my sister managed to identify the two female passengers in the very first scene they appeared in, while I ended up totally stuck and had to guess them. This is another example - like I've said, The Doom part 8 is one of the most important scenes to study thoroughly, but it's also the first time the watch shakes, and the game prompts you to follow that thread without explaining what's going to happen. Unless you already know what it means, the game discourages you from examining everything at your own pace. A principle that I think more game designers should learn is how to think like a player who doesn't understand the game yet. What is that player likely to do, is it something they should be doing, and is the game doing enough to discourage them from making bad choices? I have a whole essay called "Why FROM Software hates you and does not want you to play Dark Souls" based on what happens when you beat the tutorial and arrive at the start of the game proper. In short, there's a message immediately telling you that you can kindle bonfires, and within a few minutes, you get enough resources and find the correct menu items to kindle a bonfire. The specific bonfire where you discover this cannot be kindled, so at the end of the natural progression, you've wasted two very valuable items that aren't easy to come by this early in the game, you still have no idea what kindling a bonfire is supposed to accomplish, and you've exposed yourself to invasions shortly before entering one of the two areas in the game most infamous for high-level griefers invading just to mess with new players. This is the typical first experience of Dark Souls, and seems to have been perfectly designed that way. Moreover, there are other ways to proceed, which are blatantly Not The Way You're Supposed To Go, and you're supposed to know that because they're very difficult. But the game has a reputation for being exceedingly difficult, so why would the game being exactly what it was described to be be an indication that you're doing something wrong? Obra Dinn, at least, doesn't so much punish you for pressing Action when the prompt to press Action appears, but it does take you away from the flow of inspecting a scene in the first instance when there is enough in the scene worth inspecting that you would want to spend more time there, and it's easy to lose track of where you need to return by the time you realize that you may have missed something. Let's not forget that it's very easy to fill out all of the information on that page completely during your first visit - people in search of new information are more likely to return to memories where there are unknowns. The style of Return of the Obra Dinn's controls and presentation works very well in a game where figuring out how to play is intended to be part of the gameplay. Return of the Obra Dinn is not such a game. I believe it plays much closer to the intended style if the player were to enter the game with a full understanding of how to use the book and the watch, and that it has lost something in the decision to make the player figure that out by playing the game before the game can be played properly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
Samovar posted:This was such a great game. It makes me sad there aren't other games with similar mechanics. There's Family, where you are tracing musical history through a fictionalized 80s music scene, by tracking who played what instrument in what band, with album covers and archival documents about the musicians themselves as your clues. It's really good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
cant cook creole bream posted:That's a great game too! You don't get to see the actual stabbing but you see the stabber running after the stabbee holding the knife and infer from there that there's not enough time for anybody else to handle the knife in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:This is another example - like I've said, The Doom part 8 is one of the most important scenes to study thoroughly, but it's also the first time the watch shakes, and the game prompts you to follow that thread without explaining what's going to happen. Unless you already know what it means, the game discourages you from examining everything at your own pace. A principle that I think more game designers should learn is how to think like a player who doesn't understand the game yet. What is that player likely to do, is it something they should be doing, and is the game doing enough to discourage them from making bad choices? I have a whole essay called "Why FROM Software hates you and does not want you to play Dark Souls" based on what happens when you beat the tutorial and arrive at the start of the game proper. In short, there's a message immediately telling you that you can kindle bonfires, and within a few minutes, you get enough resources and find the correct menu items to kindle a bonfire. The specific bonfire where you discover this cannot be kindled, so at the end of the natural progression, you've wasted two very valuable items that aren't easy to come by this early in the game, you still have no idea what kindling a bonfire is supposed to accomplish, and you've exposed yourself to invasions shortly before entering one of the two areas in the game most infamous for high-level griefers invading just to mess with new players. This is the typical first experience of Dark Souls, and seems to have been perfectly designed that way. Moreover, there are other ways to proceed, which are blatantly Not The Way You're Supposed To Go, and you're supposed to know that because they're very difficult. But the game has a reputation for being exceedingly difficult, so why would the game being exactly what it was described to be be an indication that you're doing something wrong? Obra Dinn, at least, doesn't so much punish you for pressing Action when the prompt to press Action appears, but it does take you away from the flow of inspecting a scene in the first instance when there is enough in the scene worth inspecting that you would want to spend more time there, and it's easy to lose track of where you need to return by the time you realize that you may have missed something. Let's not forget that it's very easy to fill out all of the information on that page completely during your first visit - people in search of new information are more likely to return to memories where there are unknowns. The style of Return of the Obra Dinn's controls and presentation works very well in a game where figuring out how to play is intended to be part of the gameplay. Return of the Obra Dinn is not such a game. I believe it plays much closer to the intended style if the player were to enter the game with a full understanding of how to use the book and the watch, and that it has lost something in the decision to make the player figure that out by playing the game before the game can be played properly. I don't think you're intended to see all the details the first time you access Doom 8. This is actually a scene most players will specifically want to return to because it's the last memory for a lot of the Doom disappearances so it's the most likely way to find their fate, particularly for Finley Dalton who only appears in two memories.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:02
|
|
|
Counterpoint: If you're not intended to see all the details the first time you're in a scene, why is it that people's faces becoming unblurred the first time you see the scene in which those details are present is a game mechanic at all? It certainly may be true that players aren't expected to notice and understand all of the details the first time they see each scene, which is part of the gameplay loop based around the scenes being presented in an order that tends toward reverse chronological, but I don't believe that it's intended for players to feel rushed to move to the next scene rather than examining the scene they're in to their satisfaction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:Counterpoint: If you're not intended to see all the details the first time you're in a scene, why is it that people's faces becoming unblurred the first time you see the scene in which those details are present is a game mechanic at all? It certainly may be true that players aren't expected to notice and understand all of the details the first time they see each scene, which is part of the gameplay loop based around the scenes being presented in an order that tends toward reverse chronological, but I don't believe that it's intended for players to feel rushed to move to the next scene rather than examining the scene they're in to their satisfaction. There's several valid ways to approach the game. Personally, I think there's a lot to be said for going through all of the scenes with the primary aim of just figuring out the general plot of what happened to the ship, and then filling in the gaps with everyone's specific identities. But if you want to go through scene by scene and figure out as much as you can as you go, then the game will support that by telling you which characters it doesn't expect you to have enough information to solve yet. There's advantages to both ways - with the former, you have a complete view of the story and can mentally track what a character did throughout to help figure out what their deal is, while with the latter you minimise the amount of clues you need to put together at once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 01:10
|
|
|
Probably the best part is that if you're bad enough at the latter approach, it becomes the former by default.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:Counterpoint: If you're not intended to see all the details the first time you're in a scene, why is it that people's faces becoming unblurred the first time you see the scene in which those details are present is a game mechanic at all? It certainly may be true that players aren't expected to notice and understand all of the details the first time they see each scene, which is part of the gameplay loop based around the scenes being presented in an order that tends toward reverse chronological, but I don't believe that it's intended for players to feel rushed to move to the next scene rather than examining the scene they're in to their satisfaction. I was talking about Doom pt 8 specifically, after that the player knows what the shaking watch is for and does whatever they want. They can examine the other scenes to their satisfaction and maybe they will forget at first that they didn't examine that one scene carefully but eventually they'll be back to figure out what happened to the people that disappeared after that chapter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 02:56
|
|
|
whitehelm posted:I was talking about Doom pt 8 specifically, after that the player knows what the shaking watch is for and does whatever they want. They can examine the other scenes to their satisfaction and maybe they will forget at first that they didn't examine that one scene carefully but eventually they'll be back to figure out what happened to the people that disappeared after that chapter. I found the shaking watch distracting enough that I didn't like walking around and trying to put information together while it was happening.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 03:37
|
|
|
Even when you know you can wait, having the watch shaking like it is about to detonate gives a really hard urgency to moving on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
Tenebrais posted:There's several valid ways to approach the game. Personally, I think there's a lot to be said for going through all of the scenes with the primary aim of just figuring out the general plot of what happened to the ship, and then filling in the gaps with everyone's specific identities. But if you want to go through scene by scene and figure out as much as you can as you go, then the game will support that by telling you which characters it doesn't expect you to have enough information to solve yet. There's advantages to both ways - with the former, you have a complete view of the story and can mentally track what a character did throughout to help figure out what their deal is, while with the latter you minimise the amount of clues you need to put together at once. Yeah, this was my general strategy, and honestly I didn’t even pay all that much attention to blurring/unblurring except when the unblurred face was the person who died. If I couldn’t work it out from the scene I just mentally filed it under “detail missed from another scene”, moved on, and came back to that person after seeing everything. In fact I think the only time I used the meta-fact that someone had switched from blurred to unblurred in the current scene to alert me to a vital clue was to identify torn-apart guy and that was really only confirming for me that my intuition of “this guy has lots of tattoos, I guess he’s Polynesian?” was not too extreme a logical leap. I think the emphasis some advice places on paying close attention to blurring/unblurring is a little overemphasised to new players sometimes. It’s an optimal strategy, but puts a lot of pressure on the new player to process everything in the scene rather than just dealing with the immediate events and coming back later to see what they can tease out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 04:24
|
|
|
It also relies on information from outside the game pretty often, which I don't particularly like. Sure, I could close the game and go image searching for those tattoos, pull up that video of UK accents to match against voices, and have some amount of general knowledge, but that's not how I usually want to play games. We'll see how much of a handicap that turns out to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Nidoking posted:It also relies on information from outside the game pretty often, which I don't particularly like. Sure, I could close the game and go image searching for those tattoos, pull up that video of UK accents to match against voices, and have some amount of general knowledge, but that's not how I usually want to play games. We'll see how much of a handicap that turns out to be. IIRC tattoo guy is the only case where you have to use outside-of-game info that isn't common knowledge to identify someone (the people with accents all have other identifying clues you can use), which makes it feel even worse...
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 05:46
|
|
