Post: <font face="Verdana,Arial,sans-serif" size="2"><b>Reply to this message</b></font>: Running round in circles by Peter2

Original Message: Running round in circles
I think we all do that! The great advantage of the M&M games is that they are non-linear. If you get stuck on one particular problem, you can always go and do something else until you work out what to do. In a linear game, like the old Eye of the Beholder series, you were completely stuck until you could solve the problem in front of you. I remember it taking me two evenings to get past one room in EOB2, and it wasn't until I spotted a tiny variation in the pattern on some of the floor tiles that I worked out what to do. That was a problem with some of the early adventure games. I remember being outside a locked house, once. I searched the garden (and found a flower), I searched my pockets (and found a handkerchief and a couple of other items I cannot remember), but there was no sign of a key or anything I could use to either pick the lock or break the door down. It wasn't until much later that I realised that I had to smell the flower, the pollen would make me sneeze, and only when I pulled the handkerchief out of my pocket would I find the key! But you couldn't find the key by searching your pockets, oh no, that would be much too easy! That was a problem with Space Quest 4, too. The first 3 Space Quests were superb games, but the fourth — oh dear me! The thing you had to do in the opening scenario was catch this blasted rabbit. To do so, you had to find a rope, hide in one particular alcove with the rope in a loop just outside, and wait for the rabbit to hop past — and I never found any sort of clue that this particular alcove was the only one that offered success. I never bothered with the game after that, it was too much like hard work.

Original Message: Running round in circles

I think we all do that! The great advantage of the M&M games is that they are non-linear. If you get stuck on one particular problem, you can always go and do something else until you work out what to do. In a linear game, like the old Eye of the Beholder series, you were completely stuck until you could solve the problem in front of you. I remember it taking me two evenings to get past one room in EOB2, and it wasn't until I spotted a tiny variation in the pattern on some of the floor tiles that I worked out what to do.

That was a problem with some of the early adventure games. I remember being outside a locked house, once. I searched the garden (and found a flower), I searched my pockets (and found a handkerchief and a couple of other items I cannot remember), but there was no sign of a key or anything I could use to either pick the lock or break the door down. It wasn't until much later that I realised that I had to smell the flower, the pollen would make me sneeze, and only when I pulled the handkerchief out of my pocket would I find the key! But you couldn't find the key by searching your pockets, oh no, that would be much too easy!

That was a problem with Space Quest 4, too. The first 3 Space Quests were superb games, but the fourth — oh dear me! The thing you had to do in the opening scenario was catch this blasted rabbit. To do so, you had to find a rope, hide in one particular alcove with the rope in a loop just outside, and wait for the rabbit to hop past — and I never found any sort of clue that this particular alcove was the only one that offered success. I never bothered with the game after that, it was too much like hard work.

Back Reply to this message

Name

E-Mail
(optional)

Subject

Reply options

M
E
S
S
A
G
E
HTML tags allowed in message body. Browser view Display HTML as text.

Link URL

Link Title

Image URL