Post by bushn in Referendum comments

Viewing post in Referendum comments

Ooh, awesome writeup. You have no idea how helpful this is! Highly appreciated. And agreed, the reset experience is really rough at the moment.

* EVEN MORE SPOILERS *

For Pleasance, I don't have a foolproof answer but I love speculation. It could be that he allows the "meaningless" code because it doesn't definitively prove that time is being travelled, as is his suspicion. Since he's the party that's colluding but not cheating outright, he doesn't feel he has the backing to cancel it. It could also be that he thinks he can win your favour by sparing your extinction and make you useful without outright betraying his ethics (or those he represents). He also gets certain valuable information based on which codes you choose and send through in the final run.

For the codes, I didn't have enough time to tweak them properly, but here's the high-level intent:

I wanted code 1 to have a special meaning in the later phases, but you're right in that code 3 supersedes it as it stands. I think your idea is pretty elegant, as I didn't want to introduce a fourth party but didn't get very far down that line of thinking.
There may be a bug in the finale, as it should only accept "Both are same" for code 3. There are (or should be) two possible outcomes at this point:
- If the two codes you decided to use are the same (last word), you side with Pigeon (because you're telling the truth).
- If the two codes are different, you side with Pleasance because you lied to Pigeon.

* END SPOILERS *

hygge4 years ago(+1)

*spoilers*

That makes sense! I think it's impressive enough to make the narrative as logical as it is when time travel is involved.

To clarify, I "won" with: Code1: "Both are same" Code2: "Both are same" Code3 "Player I same" which probably shouldn't have worked.

A few other minor things:

At the very beginning, you have a conversation with Pigeon that goes Pigeon - "Yes, since we won't have time to deliberate. It's a very structured conversation." Player - "They?"

The player's response here doesn't make sense, since there is no "they" to ask about. Maybe the player could say "Deliberate what?" or "We?"

Perhaps you can bold the parts of dialogue when the characters tell you what the code should be used for, for example:

Pigeon - Using the code, you need to let me know how you feel.

Pleasance - Use the code to tell me anything Pigeon tells you about the vote.

This may be easier for players, and would also be nice to show the players response to reference when scrolling up through past dialogue (for example, if we agreed on "use the first letters" or "use the last letters")

The circles at the bottom could be more intuitive too, perhaps by giving them all days of the week, and leaving the past meetings as "?" before you unlock them. So it would look like (from left to right)

Monday: "?" -> changes to "Secret meeting with Pigeon"

Tuesday: "?" -> changes to "Secret meeting with "Pleasance"

Wednesday: Meeting of the delegates

Thursday : VOTING DAY

Friday: Now

bushn4 years ago(+1)

Agreed on all three points. 1 is a typo from a previous revision. 2 is something I started to do but ran out of time, but definitely a good idea. For 3, I was frustrated because I knew the labels were bad but didn't have time to code the reveal (and didn't want to spoil anything beforehand). Needless to say I underestimated the complexity of what I wanted to do with time I had. Thanks again for the input!

bushn4 years ago(+1)

Hi, I've updated the game based on your and others' feedback. Mostly to improve the replay experience, but there are a few story updates and tweaks. Thanks again for your input!

itch.io

Viewing post in Referendum comments