Its not like I'm holding that idea to you, but if its a question of how much the answer makes sense when it comes to you that doesn't necessarily make a difference towards how apparent the solution is. Most other, non-episodic puzzle styled games have less apparent solutions, but they still make sense once you puzzle it out. As long as the puzzle is difficult enough to give at least a small sense of accomplishment but still be somewhat logical, I'm good.
In Season One, I so rarely got stuck, that there was never really that issue. I guess there's a third category, "Blagh, I would have figured that out eventually," which tended to be the case in those few situations where I got so stuck I checked a walkthrough.
I'm struggling to think whether any puzzle in an adventure game can really be TOO hard for someone to solve, i.e. requiring knowledge that a few people might not have. I mean, while you need a highly visual imagination to complete harder adventure games, they rarely rely on any kind of previous knowledge that wouldn't be possessed by a ten-year-old. At least, I can't think of any examples.
...Just my justification that using a walkthrough is never necessary! Surely for most people the puzzles are a huge element of the game, making walkthroughs a bit like cheat codes.
Yea, of course, as long as a walkthrough isn't truly needed then everything should be fine at a harder setting. If a harder difficulty disagrees with someone, they can always find or make a thread in the hint section asking for help...or call up one of their ingenius Sam and Max playing friends if they have any.
I'm struggling to think whether any puzzle in an adventure game can really be TOO hard for someone to solve, i.e. requiring knowledge that a few people might not have.
Well, there was the syrup of ipecac puzzle in Curse of Monkey Island. It did go out of it's way to make sure Guybrush read the sign telling you it's a purgative, but if you don't know what that is ( I didn't at the time ): ) then it's basically a matter of trial and error.
Good point - it was probably several years after completing MI3 that I replayed it and actually looked up the meaning of 'purgative'! At least that puzzle only gives you one thing to try all the items on, but you're right, trial-and-error's a bit tedious.
Well, there was the syrup of ipecac puzzle in Curse of Monkey Island. It did go out of it's way to make sure Guybrush read the sign telling you it's a purgative, but if you don't know what that is ( I didn't at the time ): ) then it's basically a matter of trial and error.
But is it still trial-and-error if the game gives you the hint, but you don't look it up? It would be like reading a book and coming across a word that's not in your vocabulary, and then faulting the book for being confusing and hard to understand.
I'm just asking because it seems like there's a difference between basing a puzzle on some obscure logical leap that only exists in the game world, and basing one on real-world knowledge your players may or may not have (but could look up, if they were so inclined).
Fun fact: The hint card for that puzzle in Monkey 3 did orginally say "The ipecac flower is used by natives to induce vomiting," but it was changed to make it a little bit less obvious.
Comments
...Just my justification that using a walkthrough is never necessary! Surely for most people the puzzles are a huge element of the game, making walkthroughs a bit like cheat codes.
I'm just asking because it seems like there's a difference between basing a puzzle on some obscure logical leap that only exists in the game world, and basing one on real-world knowledge your players may or may not have (but could look up, if they were so inclined).
Fun fact: The hint card for that puzzle in Monkey 3 did orginally say "The ipecac flower is used by natives to induce vomiting," but it was changed to make it a little bit less obvious.