Idea… What if I make you type the name of the object or character that solves the puzzle? Not for all puzzles, but only for those puzzles whose solution is the name of an object or character…
I already did this twice with the old ui, but that was because the solution wasn’t a character visible and clickable, but one whose existence you had to deduce. But I could extend this to puzzles whose solution is a clickable object…
This would discourage trial and error combinations, and convey the fact that you should already know the solution, not try random stuff…
This would also achieve a clear separation between the concept of exploration/experimentation/interaction and the phase of puzzle solving: "Point and click is for interacting, exploring and experimenting, while typing text is for puzzle solving. "
Yes I like it… Wait before you test the game guys. @Someone, you hear me? Wait until tomorrow
You already played most of the game so you’re allowed to take a look.
The change for me is trivial, it should be ready tonight… .[edit: nope, it will take a couple of days]. I will apply it only to those puzzle that have only one unambiguous solution, for which it makes no sense to try, but you should go straight there and type the correct word.
What I am implementing is different from Larry 7 though. It is more guided:
when Olivia has enough elements to give the solution to a puzzle, she says she believes so, and a new icon appears in the inventory, for that puzzle, labeled for example “defeat mike stallone”. You click the new icon, and a window pops up, saying:
"on which object can you act to defeat Mike Stallone?"
type your answer: _______
And what will happen after your action ? (check one:)
□ someone will go the wrong way
□ someone will go clean up something
□ someone will believe someone else hasn't paid
□ something will change its color
□ someone will wake up too early
□ ...
My main goal is to make it apparent that there is something you should have understood by now, and if you haven’t , you won’t achieve anything by trying combinations. There’s nothing more to “experiment” or “explore”, you just need to “think”. If this isn’t clear, we shouldn’t be surprised that people try to combine semi-random things…
Honestly, that was the part I didn’t like most, with the old interface.
The solution was not hard, but it can be frustrating.
(Old memories from old Sierra games…)
Think of it this way… some puzzles are like riddles, with a clearly defined answer. for example, take this puzzle: “Who is it that walks with four legs when they are young, then two legs, then three legs when they are old?”. There can be only one answer: “man”. Does it really make sense to make you click the answer from a list, instead of typing it? I am talking about these kinds of puzzles…
second part of the reasoning:
if a puzzle is not like that, often it can be framed in such a way that it becomes like that. for example: monkey island 2: In theory there can be many ways to take what Kate has in her pockets. But if I frame the puzzle like this: “you need to make Kate end up in jail. On what object should you act in order to have her end up in jail? Type answer:_________”. Now this puzzle has been framed so that there is only one solution, and a simple text entry is now the most appropriate way to implement it.
Now, that was the simplest implementation. But if you believe it’s too much of a giveaway, here’s a better one:
You need to take what Kate has in her pocket. On which object
should you act?
type answer: _______
and what will happen after your action? Choose one:
□ someone will end up in jail
□ someone will be fired
□ someone will wear female underwear
...
A first implementation of the new text interface is online
I’m happy with it but I’ll need someone’s help to regulate the difficulty. @Someone is on vacation. Who hasn’t finished the game and wants to give it another try? @Frenzie? @Gffp?
basically, now the interface and the mechanics have been changed to make it clear 1) that there’s a complex reasoning to be made, and 2) that you have all the elements to make it right now. And 3) if you don’t know what to do, it’s clear that you have failed to make a connection between a certain object and something else.
Well, I think you’ve found good solutions to turn the interface into a graphical one. And I think the road you were walking on after that main change was a good one, so I was a little surprised by this other change, which only affects the way you express the solution to a puzzle, though.
But in the end it is not a bad change: it is coherent with your way of looking at your game. I’ve solved, with this new change, a new puzzle and it was not bad. And even if I wrote a simpler name for the specific item requested in the puzzle, it worked the same.
You found a good problem at the beginning… until you say many things to the guard, (failing to solve the puzzle), olivia does not say “wait, I’ve got an idea”, so you don’t have the possibility to solve the puzzle… I should not require you to say all those things… I’ll make a change. Thanks
Good news: the first half of the game is final! (with interface number 11 )
In the meantime I’ve found another tester, Marco Giorgini , author of “the darkest tree” and “four distant daughters”, who did two full playthroughs and didn’t find any problem.
During his first playthrough, I switched to yet another interface (number 11). It works It’s intuitive and allows you to express puzzles that can’t be done with SCUMM (without solving them by accident). The additional choice it asks you to make imposes no significant burden upon you if you’ve solved the puzzle; and if you haven’t solved the puzzle, it helps you by restricting the number of possibilities you need to consider.
Next steps will be: improve the graphical map; start the music; start the second half.
