Here's my point. To a person that wants a fair and honest trip to the end, they just want to solve puzzles and get there. They don't want a bug stopping them any more than a programmed dead end because they are in all practical ways the same thing: A stop to the game that forces them to restart. I want to play a game, solve the puzzles, and get to the end. I usually like to play a game and finish it within a week's time. Why? Because my life is so hustle bustle and crazy that I don't have time to invest in a game for more than a week. Artificially stopping my progress because I forget something is not different to me than a bug, because they both keep me from finishing the game in a way that has nothing to do with whether I was solving the puzzles or not. Artificial extensions to the game's length only come across as cheap and hackneyed without any attention to real gameplay. For instance, say I place the key to solving the game on the first screen of the game and only allow you to revisit that screen within a certain portion of the game. There is nothing about this setup that is good puzzle design, but it has a lot to do with laziness. It punishes a player for what? For not having been as observant as they should have been? I'm all on board for having the deaths in KQ, but dead end just comes across as lazy game design.
"Hah! It's like we don't even have feelings. Now pardon me while I recline in my huge executive chair and guffaw, cigar in-hand. "
"ill just go with what Winslow always when something that funny about a location in monkey island is said"
Last edited by DAISHI; 07/06/2011 at 12:15 am.