Mmm, I think I'm going to argue this. It's not so much that you've
come up with new kinds of puzzles; it's that you're creating a
situation where the laws of "physics" aren't based on the laws of
physics. This is a fine old tradition; all the magical-artifact
puzzles of the classic games use this schtick. But you have to have
some sort of connection for the user to pick up on. The player needs
room to experiment, and maybe cues for the first few experiments.
Zebulon had a good example of this. There is a pair of teleportation
bottles. Fine; I'm likely to try putting something in a bottle.
You seem to have been working for totally unconventional uses of
objects, which rules out that kind of approach. Maybe, then, you see
other beings using the objects (touching the loop, speaking to the
spider, etc.) My attitude is that I find myself performing brute-force
experiments in a game (every verb on every object), and I'm
*surprised* when I get a result, it's not logical enough.
(Side note: logical is a tricky word. Toonesia was very logical, in
this sense. The laws of the world can be visible in the game, or known
to the player from outside sources, but I shouldn't have to figure
them out by reading the hints.)
You seem to be saying "Oh, I don't expect you to figure this out --
maybe you'll do better with the sequel." This loses me.
Other things that set me off: I'm supposed to ask the face about
*what*? Why? Did I have a reason to think it cared? And knowing what
it means for the paper to flash, and how to destroy it, and knowing
how to make that noise louder, and... basically everything.
I contrast the final duplicator puzzle, which I *did* like. I probably
would have figured it out (except that I was short of patience by then
and cheated as soon as my first guess failed.) It was behaving like a
computer program (and saying so), and I know how those work.
Similarly, I got stuck at one point because I assumed that because the
head couldn't speak, I couldn't communicate with it. That was my own
stupidity, and I was annoyed at myself when I read the clue.
> I hardly expected most people to be able to step into a totally
> unconventional world and be able to get through the first time without
> hints. I certainly won't write anything of this nature anymore (it's
> a very hard strain coming up with something in which all the puzzles
> are unconventional) but if future authors decide to have some parts
> work like this people shouldn't have nearly as much difficulty playing.
If a future author writes a *sequel* (taking place in the same world)
then yes, I won't have nearly as much difficulty. But I've already
said what I think of that attitude.
If a future author writes another game with a totally new set of
world-laws, which I have no clue what they are, I won't like it any
better than I liked this one.
> One thing I noticed is some people were apparently playing release 1
> because they had problems with the door at the very beginning. A bug
> caused the examing command on the door to give the response 'you are
> contained' rather than the one mentioning that it is opened by a password.
> The effect of this is to disorient the player for the entire game; but,
> as usual, nobody reported the problem to me (yet another problem with
> unconventional games; nobody is sure what is a bug and what is not).
That's certainly true. I was annoyed at the puzzle in release 1, and
I'm not annoyed at the fixed version. (Although, peculiarly, I rather
liked the effect of examining the door and seeing "You are contained."
That message somehow set the atmosphere of the game for me, and I kind
of regret that it's a bug :-)
Whew. Anyway. If you think I'm being harsh, recall what people were
saying of my entry. :-)
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."