what a cool concept, this is the first time I've tried this kind of game.
good work.
Play game
L. C. Noire's itch.io pageResults
| Criteria | Rank | Score* | Raw Score |
| Creativity | #1 | 4.556 | 4.556 |
| Technical | #20 | 3.556 | 3.556 |
| Overall | #20 | 3.711 | 3.711 |
| Audio | #25 | 3.556 | 3.556 |
| Gameplay | #38 | 3.444 | 3.444 |
| Visuals | #69 | 3.444 | 3.444 |
Ranked from 9 ratings. Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam.
Message from the creator(s):
To judges: this game is built using Ren'Py, whose Web version is still in Beta. For best experience, please use the desktop version. Thank you.
Rule
Rule A
Only used the colors black (#000000) and white (#FFFFFF)
Theme
No
This game does not follow the optional theme
Original Art
Yes
Created own art
Original Audio
No
Didn't create own audio
Comments
3 years ago (+1)
Hello,
Thank you for your detailed feedback!
The dialogues are randomly generated along with the cases, so some of the dialogues might remain the same. I wanted to add more combinations, but it made the randomized algorithm much more complex for the time limit of the jam. I'll definitely add more content for future updates.
I'm wondering if you could elaborate on what you mean by "feeling overwhelmed". Do you mean the characters all have different versions of the story and it was difficult to figure out who was telling the truth?
Yeah that's kind of what I meant haha.
I mentioned the love triangle and the business deal going wrong and stuff. After investigating their houses, there were two suspects with emails or letters detailing something like "Hey, I got the job done." Which led me thinking, "So, it's one of these two?" It felt really weird.
3 years ago (+1)
tl;dr: I tried to add some criminal psychology into the game. Basically, motives map to modus operandi (how the victim was killed). Figuring them out can help you eliminate some suspects. Interrogations help you figure out motives, but not everyone might be honest or have full information. So, you'll need evidence to figure out who's telling the truth. Admittedly, this part isn't as fleshed out as I would like given the jam's time limit. It's definitely something I'll look into.
Got it, haha.
I think I wasn't clear in my instructions. I'll give an overview first since it helps understand the purpose of interrogations.
Basically, you can crack any case by elimination with evidence found at the location where the suspect died, their motives, which map to their modus operandi (e.g. how was the victim stabbed?), and their abilities (e.g. do they know the area well enough to hide from the cameras?). The algorithm is designed such that there is only one suspect who fits into all this, and this is the culprit.
Interrogations help figure out motives. I was trying to create a type of interrogation similar to one of my favourite games, Interrogation: You will be deceived, which is basically a game about deduction and deception. It's an interrogation game where suspects are almost never honest at first. You have to talk to different suspects, check their claims against each others', and choose the right questions and the right way to ask them to figure out what's the truth.
In L. C. Noire, suspects may lie or simply do not have the full information. For example, for Brigitte's case, people who don't know her well may assume things about her relationship. However, people who know both the victim and Brigitte may read something else in the situation. Then there is the self-proclaimed eye-witness who saw an argument about blackmailing.
Any of them may be speaking the truth or trying to hide their identity as the culprit by pointing finger. The best way to figure this out is to collect evidence at the suspected suspect (Brigitte)'s home.
I think you found a list of lab materials with a meeting time and location? This seems like an illegal trade of lab material or a blackmail message. This makes the last claim (the one about the argument) the most likely.
Since this directly has to do with financial gain and loss, Brigitte most likely has a lucre motive. So, you can exclude her if the victim's body has postmortem stab wounds or been tied up and stabbed, because these indicate strong emotions while lucre-driven modus operandi is more practical. You can also exclude her if the victim died by rat poison since it contains strychnine, which causes intense suffering (as detailed by the Glossary). Brigitte works in drug development research so has access to drugs that don't cause as much unnecessary suffering.
Admittedly, I didn't have the time to flesh out the interrogation part. I could have added more questions that allow you to directly question the suspects about evidence found or hints. It's definitely something I'll look into in future updates.
Though I tried to make the task easier in my game by allowing players to choose the most likely motive once they've read all key conversations related to a suspect. (So all 3 conversations about Brigitte.) I'm not sure if you've been to this part? I admit that the instructions could have been clearer on this.
There is no penalty for a wrong guess, so you can basically try every answer. More details are provided once you make the right choice.
Ok, that was a long post haha. I hope this answers your questions.
Feel free to ask me if you have any questions! Also, if there is a case you're stuck on, feel free to post a screenshot of the report and let me know the evidence found here. I'll do my best to help out!
I like the idea you brought up where if the evidence is found then you can show it to the suspect, or directly question them about it, and they would eventually speak out about the whole thing. It would honestly be a nice touch. I think L.A. Noire does this pretty well when you catch a lie, you can just bring up the evidence that you found and the suspect would give up and tell you everything.
I think if you want instructions to be slightly clearer, or have an easier introduction, then maybe a case where there are only three suspects (instead of seven) and you just leave the player to do the rest. Because kind of what I mentioned on my play through, I did felt a little overwhelmed with all the information and stories I got from interrogations. I had to constantly go back and review what I found on suspects' houses and see if anything fit with what one or the other said to me.
I think I said this already, but I do see this with a lot of potential and I hope you work on it some more.
3 years ago(+1)
Yes! I'm actually going through L.A. Noire right now.
I'll also be working on the instructions. I was planning to make an interactive tutorial, a planned sample case. I still want to keep 7 suspects since they ensure the diversity of the cases. Though I can use only 3 suspects for the tutorial. Other players also suggested adding summaries of your interrogations, which they can directly review instead of going through the conversations again. Maybe I'll add the evidence you found too. I'll also try to cut down some parts.
Thank you for your feedback!
By the way, I just followed you on Twitter. I hope I can hear more from you in the future!
2 years ago(+1)
Just had the chance to finish the game (actually find the suspect), quite challenging! Here's some more suggestions from me:
- Summary of found items in Suspect's house (like others have said?)
- Maybe have a highlight on the option which was not there before or have something new, was a bit stuck on how to find the relationship not knowing you need to choose the first option again once you know more about them
- Maybe in the game over screen also say how or why the actual murder is the murder? I was kinda confused as how the murder was the murder, if you know what I mean.
Overall, brilliant job on the game! A deserved first place in creativity!
Hello, Lone Rabbit!
Thank you for hosting this jam and for the insightful feedback!
I am definitely considering adding more features, but I might spread them over several updates. I might also simplify some parts.
I intended for the game community to be the place where people share their cases and ask for the how and why. With the randomized algorithm, there are over 100 combinations and many solutions to write. I'll try to figure something out.
I'm glad you seem to have enjoyed this game! Hope I'll see you around! Also, keep it up with all those amazing jams!
3 years ago(+1)
Hello!
Yeah, I agree. I felt that I could have used more time. I've wanted to make a randomized murder mystery for a while and this jam sounded like the right excuse haha. (I also think that the black & white theme suits this type of games.) So I got absorbed in the technical part of the game.
I could have focused more on the UX given that this jam was only 2 weeks. I've actually planned for more features than what I've submitted, e.g. more questions depending on a specific claim a character says or an evidence you found or more UI elements, but this made the randomized algorithm much more complex for the time limit.
The instructions can definitely use some improvement. I can add a planned out case as tutorial just so players familiarize with the process. I'll definitely consider adding a summary and cut down/simplify some parts too.
I really want this game to be as enjoyable to play as it is to make. I'm glad I joined this jam. Getting feedback here helps me see how to reach my players.
Thank you for that detailed feedback and all the suggestions! They're very helpful.
You did great with the time you had! If you're planning on continuing I'd definitely start by putting the case generation to one side (don't remove it, just ignore it for the time being) and focus on making an easy to use game. That doesn't mean easy to play, just make it a bit more intuitive. Once you have the UI nailed and you're sure of the mechanics/how you want players to interact with your game, you can focus fully on the algorithm stuff. If you do end up releasing this, let me know, I'd love to play the finished version :)
If you're planning on doing more game jams, I'd definitely recommend stripping out extras next time (like the shop and money) and focus on your core features more. Then if you have time you can add all those bits in. Quality > quantity when it comes to jams.
3 years ago (+1)
Haha, thanks!
I'll definitely focus on the UX/UI first, make it more intuitive.
I agree. I could add extra features like shops in later versions and focus on the core for game jams, especially when they're only 2 weeks.
I'm glad you'd like to try the finished version! Your feedback and suggestions have been incredibly helpful. They shed a light on what exactly was missing or needed to be improved.
I'm just wondering if you have a Discord or Twitter. I'd love to receive more of your feedback in the future!
3 years ago(+1)
Hello, thank you for trying this out!
A summary is a great idea. I can definitely do this. Listing the key facts. Or I can cut down some parts.
Hello, thank you for trying out this game and for your feedback!
I'll try to answer all your points!
I've been playing some other games, and I can get what you say. It's a different style.
I did want to make a more detailed Instructions section, maybe even a step-by-step tutorial, but didn't have enough time. Do you think this would have helped? Just so I know how detailed I need to go, have you read these recommended guides before starting the game?
https://itch.io/t/1344327/game-instructions-short-version
https://itch.io/t/1345585/a-step-by-step-guide
Also, could you clarify what you mean by "fake clue"?
Some characters are not completely honest, but most are not lying. I've designed the game such that you can just click through the dialogues and follow the instructions to go to the character whose interrogation has progressed. Basically, you'll be able to find the true relationship just by clicking through everything. Even when you arrive at motive selection, you can basically try every option until you get it right without any penalty.
New Game basically means creating a new game, and Continue means continuing your current game. Is that what you're referring to?
I don't really understand your last point. The first person not having any option is because they have nothing to say yet. Or do you mean that you'd like for the first person to have an option instead?
I tried to make every suspect's personality unique, so I thought the options could reflect that. I was more expecting people to try out different suspects first and find a cooperative one.
I'll try to get more feedback and see what to do with that.
I'm sorry you didn't seem to enjoy that game. It's my first game jam, so I wasn't sure what was expected and went with a game I had in mind for a while. A blend between Interrogation: You will be deceived and some other detective games I've played.
"I did want to make a more detailed Instructions section, maybe even a step-by-step tutorial, but didn't have enough time. Do you think this would have helped? Just so I know how detailed I need to go, have you read these recommended guides before starting the game? "
No. The game by itself is too complicated, no matter how you explain it.
"Just so I know how detailed I need to go, have you read these recommended guides before starting the game? "
No. I did read most of the instructions on the game itself though.
"Also, could you clarify what you mean by "fake clue"? "
Example: When you go to the Dr's house it says "I know what you did."
"New Game basically means creating a new game, and Continue means continuing your current game. Is that what you're referring to?"
No. I mean like, after you lose all or guesses/ "deduct" the correct person you should just start a new investigation.
"I don't really understand your last point. The first person not having any option is because they have nothing to say yet. Or do you mean that you'd like for the first person to have an option instead?" OK. I get they have nothing to say that.
What I recommend doing is making so that the first person has an option by default.
If you need the whole recording of me playing the game, here is a VOD: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1000715818
Starts at about 38:30.
Hey, thank you for that video! It clarifies things.
" No. The game by itself is too complicated, no matter how you explain it."
Can you take a look at https://itch.io/t/1345585/a-step-by-step-guide and tell me whether it clarifies things?
The game is actually very similar to CrimeBot and Interrogation.
In CrimeBot, you're given crime-related evidence similar to the report and a list of suspects like the one in the game. All you do is figure out who is the culprit based on these files. It's the gist of the gameplay of this game.
Though I was trying to add more criminal psychology into the game. For example, instead of a general "stabbing", there are different types of stabbing, which can reflect different motives and point to different culprits. Depending on how much a culprit wants the victim to suffer, they can choose rat poison.
Conversing with the actual people can help get a good understanding on their psychologies. This is where the interrogation part comes in.
In fact, the only difference that this game has with many investigation games (apart from the randomized part) is the interrogation part, where you can find out the suspects' motives.
From what I saw in your video, I think this is where you were stuck?
The interrogation part is a simplified version of Interrogation (the game), which is basically a game of deception where you have several suspects who might lie, try to figure the right questions and the right way to ask them, and cross-reference different suspects' claims to obtain the true answers. It can get pretty complex.
I tried to make my interrogation much simpler so that more people could enjoy. There is no wrong question and it refers you to the suspect whose interrogation has progressed.
I saw you were progressing rather well until you lost the lead for Betty. Talking to other suspects (James) about Brigitte could have unlocked the conversation related to Betty (by unlocking Brigitte's first as the instructions suggested).
Once you unlock all conversations for a character, you'll be able to get a different answer for Know that name? It will ask you to choose which of the four motives you think they have.
This part is more to clarify the motive for the player in case they weren't sure about the suspects' claims. There is no penalty for wrong guesses, so you can basically try every possibility until you get the right one. There will be some more clarifications once you find the right motive.
"Example: When you go to the Dr's house it says "I know what you did.""
I'm just wondering why you think it is a fake clue. It is a blackmail message, which is related to the lucre motive (financial gain or preventing financial loss).
Although many characteristics seem fitting, it couldn't be the Dr because you found perfume at the scene and the Dr isn't interested in fashion (in the suspect file). It was Myriam because she is interested in fashion, has access to barbiturates (through her company), and had a lucre motive, which prompts her to choose a more practical method to kill (no unnecessary stabbing or pain). Similarly, others, as you'll find out, had motives that made them choose a less practical way to kill or just didn't have access to barbiturates. By elimination, it is Myriam.
The evidence found at suspects' homes are all related to their true motives. This is what I meant by "solid evidence". Though some might be more obvious than others.
I admit, this is more the type of game for which you might fail a couple of times in the beginning and gets easier as you play. I was hoping people, especially those interested in psychology and forensics, could learn through it.
I tried to provide more background information with the glossary and the sample case analysis, but I can expand on it. I've also made it so that you can guess the motive as many times for this reason.
"No. I mean like, after you lose all or guesses/ "deduct" the correct person you should just start a new investigation."
Do you mean automatically starting a new game? Yeah, I can consider that if it makes it clearer. I wanted to keep the old save just in case the player wants to review their last game (whether they won or not), but I'll think of something.
"What I recommend doing is making so that the first person has an option by default."
I can consider doing that too. This has to do with the randomized algorithm as the characters' dialogues and options are randomly chosen, but if it can help, I can consider hard-coding it in the future or giving more hints.
I get what you mean when you said that the game is complex. Personally, I don't think the game is complicated by itself as there are some existing games that are very similar, but I do think that my instructions could be clearer.
I'd love if you could take a look at the Step-by-Step guide linked above and tell me what you think. I might make the instructions more similar to that if it's more helpful.
I'm very glad you've decided to try this game and let me know your thoughts. This is more an experimental thing. I wanted to create some sort of investigation game for which I'll never (or almost never) run out of cases to play with, where I can get 'acquainted' to the characters, and which had more details overall. So, I'm very curious as to how people find it.
Hope my reply helps!
"Can you take a look at https://itch.io/t/1345585/a-step-by-step-guide and tell me whether it clarifies things?" No. It does not, because that's what I did.
"Though I was trying to add more criminal psychology into the game. For example, instead of a general "stabbing", there are different types of stabbing, which can reflect different motives and point to different culprits. Depending on how much a culprit wants the victim to suffer, they can choose rat poison." That makes the game even extra complicated.
"The interrogation part is a simplified version of Interrogation (the game), which is basically a game of deception where you have several suspects who might lie, try to figure the right questions and the right way to ask them, and cross-reference different suspects' claims to obtain the true answers. It can get pretty complex." You could have made the first interrogations ( plural ) easier, with fewer suspects or even fewer lies.
"I'm just wondering why you think it is a fake clue. It is a blackmail message, which is related to the lucre motive (financial gain or preventing financial loss). " There is a suspect file!?!?! Instead of telling me every single time I talk to someone and they telling me that they might be lying, you could have reminded me that the suspect file exists.
"Do you mean automatically starting a new game? Yeah, I can consider that if it makes it clearer. I wanted to keep the old save just in case the player wants to review their last game (whether they won or not), but I'll think of something. " I mean either changing what it says on the "Instructions" page or automatically starting a new game.
"I can consider doing that too. This has to do with the randomized algorithm as the characters' dialogues and options are randomly chosen, but if it can help, I can consider hard-coding it in the future or giving more hints." You definitely should. If I, as a player, try something and it does not work, I might just not try it again AT ALL.
- Galse22
3 years ago (+1)
"That makes the game even extra complicated."
I wanted to create something that reflects real murder cases more closely, but I can give a more detailed explanation in the Glossary.
"You could have made the first interrogations ( plural ) easier, with fewer suspects or even fewer lies."
I think I wasn't clear. I was talking about the Interrogation game, not my own game. Although mine has lies, it's still linear. You basically don't have to figure out any lies. It might be harder to explain this since you didn't get to that part, but in the end, the game will just state the motive for you. Though I can make unlocking characters' conversations more straightforward.
"There is a suspect file!?!?! Instead of telling me every single time I talk to someone and they telling me that they might be lying, you could have reminded me that the suspect file exists."
I did say that in the Instructions. I talked about how suspects' characteristics are important, you can find identifying evidence at scenes, and you can consult suspect files in Suspects. I also talked about how everything that appears on file is true.
I didn't put any hint there because the evidence found at the suspect's house is unrelated to the suspect's file. It's only related to the interrogation.
Though I could add a reminder after you find the evidence at the location (not the suspect's home).
Thanks for all the feedback. I can definitely simplify some parts in the game and add more explanations.
Sorry you didn't enjoy this. Good luck for the jam.
Leave a comment
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.