DriacKin said:
He criticized it for the dialogue options being too ambiguous
How unfortunate Yahtzee fell for the big retard trap set up to catch the stupid or if not stupid then certainly not paying attention or thinking about the evidence and what people are telling you.
That case about the guy with the glasses has bugged the shit outta me as more than a few times i've heard people complain when they picked lie and showed the busted specs as evidence to his wife.
derp- she's lying his glasses were old and brokken.
How did anyone have a problem with that?
Glasses held together with tape at the scene.
Victim is almost blind without them.
Wife says he just bought a new pair.
So either
A. She is a lying bitch whore, he never bought a new pair and was brutally murdered, then his body dissappeared.
Evidence for this is superficial, even at that it's fag paper thin. I don't think it even let's you leave the scene until you've gathered the evidence that casts serious doubt on this theory.
B. He is wearing his new glasses and the old ones were left at the scene.
Tons of evidence pointing this direction, honestly If you didn't realise the 'murder' scene was fake after looking in the boot(trunk) then take the game out and load up Barneys magical hand holding adventure again. Can't go wrong with a purple dinosaur telling you every step to take.
ahhh. That's better, fucking troll reviewers.
I never felt the dialogue was too ambiguous, lie, doubt or truth. The choice of what evidence to produce if they are lying was more ambiguous, especially in some cases where I'd collected a full page of evidence and 3 or 4 items all pointed to the same thing. "no that list of prisoners with my name on it doesn't prove I was in prison" but a picture of a another man signed "with love, bubba. xxx" does.