Under rating threshold (hideshow)
That was a good one, except I didn't find any clues for the green buttons and just had to brute force my way through that one.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Is it only me? Or is it that you just cannot find any clues for all those combination locks.. *goes to a different game* -_-
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I've seen some "puzzle" games that asked for brute-forcing, but this must've been the worst I've seen yet. Where are all the clues for the large number of combination locks? I know there are certain tropes in puzzle games, but most of the tricks seemed to be "because it's in a puzzle game" and not "because this makes any kind of in-universe sense".
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
This game had toooooooo......... many puzzles!!!! I have some questions regarding the game. Why did the people who weren't the murderer have bomb, poison and axe?????
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I managed to beat this game by bruteforcing not only the code under the piranha but also the light switches and the final guess. This really shouldn't be possible. I didn't even interact with the other guest except the murderer to finish this game.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Also, just because you find a dead guy with a book in his hand doesn't equal any sort of evidence on where he was murdered. The more logical choice was the music room. You know, the one with a mechanism to hang something?
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Speaking of lazy, these are getting worse and worse. We need puzzles... oh just throw a combination lock on 7 things and call it good.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Not one but two puzzles (three-digit safe and six-switches panel) can be bruteforced. Good thing too, because I eventually ran into the combination for the safe, but still have no clue how to "correctly" solve those switches. Then again, judging by the lack of sensible logic in the rest of the game...
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
The whole story doesn't make a lot of sense and the ending just makes you feel like all your other work was for nothing. Shame. Could have been great
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
The existence of the book was not a clue - it is possible to carry them from one room to another to read it. What would have been better was if there was some visual clue to where it happened
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Clever way to make us guys the murderer! I just wish the "important pieces of evidence" Had more to do with the game.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I would have preferred Watson going beside Sherlock looking at him obnoxiously because Sherlock's giving everyone a snare. lol
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Spoiler:
Honestly, it never occurred to me that the murderer would have the safe combination - it was just process of elimination since they were the only one who didn't still have a weapon on them
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
So you use 50 megs of my mobile data forcing me to watch a commercial when I want to play a game, you use another 10 megs of my mobile data loading the game, then all I get is a black screen? As far as I am concerned, you owe me $2.00 for all of the mobile data you wasted. 1/5
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Why was there even a murder in the first place, there's not a motive at all... GIVE ME A REASON WHY YOU KILLED THAT MAN
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
...Why did I try to bring down a massive bell right next to someone? Why did I take a chainsaw to a ladder some guy was standing on? Why did I try to cause an allergic reaction?
...Are we entirely certain this isn't just Holmes trying to cover his tracks?
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Bugged for the solution(at least in French version). Tried twice, always blocked when I want to enter the Murder/Weapon/Room. I tried all possibilities and watcher walkthrough just in case, Done button doesn't work.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Nice, fresh format for a Carmel Games clicker. Like the mystery puzzle at the end, it made it more than just a sequential click plot to solve. Although the solution required a little different observation that I thought at first. Which was good :)