Museum After Hours: A medley of 15 minute samplers from comedians, poets, and circus acts.
I enjoyed SHIFT‘s cyr wheel acrobatics – or at least, what little I could see of it due to the dreadful staging (not their fault). Pro tip: unless your circus performers are on stilts, you better have raked seating or an elevated stage.
Jay Lafferty had great delivery but spent her time dunking on obvious/tired subjects (millennials, Brexiters, rich people, health and safety, gluten intolerance).
Ben Target‘s physical meta-comedy was met with aggrieved incomprehension from the mostly-aged audience; I thought at least half the jokes were pretty great, which is a good hit rate.
Solid acrobatics from Tabarnak. Shame it was all over in just five minutes.
My highlight was Toby Thompson‘s lovely and funny poetry, whom we saw on Kate Tempest’s recommendation. I’ll try to catch his full show next week.
Once Upon a Daydream: Adventurous family-friendly mix of live action, music, and animation by a Taiwanese company. There are many good bits but the “miserable single woman seeks happiness through love” theme was tiresome.
First Snow / Première neige: The most Canadian thing I’ve ever seen. Deeply earnest, mulingual, multicultural, multinational, fourth-wall breaking, overly concerned about its place in the world, with good acting, important story, and confused execution. You can tell this is devised theatre.
There’s no question that Twitter’s self-inflicted mishaps and dreadful behaviour has driven people to Mastodon, but I also think that the move towards blogging and a slower, more artisanal form of short-form updating is fundamentally a reversion to the mean.
Which is to say: even if @Jack (Twitter’s CEO) wasn’t an utter asshole, I think people would have gone to blogging/Mastodon anyway. He’s just massively accelerated the migration.
In this reading, the fact that Mastodon is slower, less connected, and has more characters, is indicative of a desire to move away from the brain-melting shit-heap that Twitter has become. It turns out that blogging wasn’t dead, and there is still a place for longer-form personal writing on the internet.
One of my favourite games in recent years is Her Story. It’s more of a puzzle than a game, really; you’re trying to uncover the truth of what happened in a crime via a database of short video interviews with the suspect. The only way you can access a given video is by searching for a word that appears in its transcript and hoping it appears in the results; and to prevent you from just searching for the word “is”, the database will only show the top few search results. This means that the only way to find all the videos is by carefully listening to the interviews and noting down unique names or places or things.
Her Story is wholly linear – it would be nonsense to determine the outcome given its premise – and there’s no way to fail. Instead, it’s a tightly written and carefully crafted puzzle that demands and rewards close attention and engagement with the videos. If you play the game, make sure you have a notebook to hand.
Sherlock Holmes: Consulting Detective (SHCD) is basically Her Story: The Board Game. You solve a series of cases by interviewing people; and because this is a wholly analogue board game, the interviews are written down in a book, so it’s more like you’re reading interviews. In another curious parallel with Her Story, the main way you identify people to interview is by looking up their names in a directory (like a search index!), such that you need to pay close attention and take notes. Similarly, there’s only one correct solution to each case. There is a nominally a score based on how many people you interviewed before solving the case (the fewer the better) but most people don’t bother keeping track, and I encourage you to follow their example.
SHCD has an extraordinary reputation in the board game world. It’s ranked 65th on BoardGameGeek, on par with classics like Dominion, Codenames, Battlestar Galactica, and Pandemic; it’s by far the oldest game in the top 200; and yet it barely even qualifies as a board game! What, then, accounts for its popularity? As far as I can tell, the reasons are:
Strong theming: SHCD is thoroughly drenched in Sherlockian lore, from the main cast to the most minor bystanders. The newspapers that accompany each case, the copious dialogue, the intricate map of London – they’re impeccably designed, at least in the modern edition. So whether you’re an ardent fan or merely an occasional TV watcher, you won’t find this game lacking.
Novel (and good) game mechanics: I’ve never seen SHCD’s game mechanics – interviewing and ‘searching’ a directory for new leads – in anything other than Her Story, which was itself celebrated for its unique game design. But novelty alone isn’t enough; there are plenty of weird games out there, and some of them are really enjoyable, but only a few of those have mechanics that are as instantly understandable as SHCD’s.
Not enough narrative puzzle games: There are surprisingly few good long-form narrative puzzles available, by which I mean multi-step mysteries with a solution. There are plenty of brainteasers and the like, but not so many that have actual stories and can be enjoyed over the course of an evening. That said, if there were more good ones out there, we’d realise just how bad some of SHCD’s puzzles are.
People who dislike SHCD do not finish it: Each case in SHCD takes a couple of hours to solve, and I imagine most players are unwilling to pronounce a definitive opinion unless they’ve completed all ten cases. Consequently, there’s a selection bias amongst reviewers towards those who enjoyed it enough to play for a good twenty hours.
In case you hadn’t guessed, I didn’t like the puzzles in SHCD, which is a serious problem because the game is fundamentally all about guessing rather than solving (yes, I said it)
Even after pursuing every lead, visiting every location, and interviewing every suspect and witness, it’s very common to end a case with multiple plausible and even probable explanations for the mystery, in which case you’re at a loss as to which one you’re meant to pick. There are a few exceptions, like Case 2. This is one of the community’s favourites, and I’m pretty sure it’s because it’s the one that provides the most solid evidence in the game. By the end, you feel confident you have the answer, not merely an answer.
When it comes to narrative puzzle games, I don’t expect perfection or anything close to it. Having designed several alternate reality games and hundreds of puzzles, I know full well that you can’t predict how players will approach them, especially with lots of clues and red herrings. But when you have multiple reprints of a game that was originally made in 1981 – almost forty years ago – including multiple reprints of the English language edition, it’s baffling that there are still massive problems with several of the cases.
Take Case 3, for example. After an frustrating evening trying to solve this mystery, followed by an equally frustrating ‘solution’ presented by the fictional Sherlock (you are merely his hapless sidekick, dispatched to tackle the case independently), I discovered that this case has been broken for literally decades. Despite multiple attempted fixes to the narrative, including swapping the identity of the murderer, it remains a fundamentally broken and nonsensical story requiring massive leaps of logic, with plenty of posters on BoardGameGeek feeling the same way. Quite why the designers didn’t just cut their losses and write a new case, I’m not sure.
As per usual, Holmes was leaping to conclusions based on very circumstantial evidence. While we came to the same conclusions as Holmes, our mindset was more like “Yes, that could be a possible explanation, but there is no real proof. It is all suspicion. It is clear why the lions were killed, and it is also very clear that Barry O’Neill was in cahoots with the person who did it, and it might very well have been Thomas O’Neill as they are brothers and he was in the neighborhood. But all of that is definitely not sufficient evidence to clearly pinpoint Thomas as the killer. Can’t we find more? Can we talk to Thomas? Can we link Thomas to the case in a stronger way than just saying that he is the brother and he is a thief and he was in Europe?”
Still, considering how the previous cases were constructed, we knew that when a story can be told that fits all the facts, for Holmes that is enough to assume that that is actually what happened.
Opinions may differ, but I feel that a satisfying solution to a mystery should not merely be plausible, it should be exclusive. In other words, the mystery should not have multiple plausible solutions – at least, not given a consideration of all the evidence. I can make exceptions for TV shows and movies where the action moves so fast that you don’t mind the occasionally leap in logic, but I’m not willing to extend that leniency to puzzle games.
SHCD commits an additional sin in a later cases that involve actual puzzles – Caesar ciphers and such – that got me very excited until their convoluted nature collapses in on themselves. Don’t even talk to me about the Bridge House Hotel problem.
We all imagine that we could solve a mystery through deduction alone, just like Sherlock Holmes does, so it’s no wonder that SHCD – an exquisitely-themed game with unique mechanics – has dazzled players and reviewers. What I don’t understand is why reviewers, including Shut Up and Sit Down, claim that SHCD wants to “provide you with a level, fair playing field”.
I’m aware this sounds like sour grapes from someone who wasn’t able to solve the puzzles. Trust me – I know I’m not good at solving puzzles (as it happens, I think that makes me good at setting them). But I do know when a puzzle’s solution is unfair, in that players could not reasonably be expected to have arrived at it given the evidence. The fact that this happens in most of the cases in the game, and that there are countless BoardGameGeek posts describing the same frustrations again and again, indicates this is not a trivial problem. It’s a major flaw riven through the very heart of the game.
People are in love with the idea of being Sherlock Holmes, of lying on the carpet with a cocktail in one hand mentally wrestling a mystery to the ground. And in SHCD, the thrill of the chase is real. The challenge of puzzling the clues together is real. The pleasure in acting as a detective is real. But it’s all for naught when the solutions are broken.
The world’s greatest detective deserves much better.
If you insist on playing the game despite all my warnings, here are some tips:
Buy the Space Cowboys edition, which has the nicest materials and the fewest errors (Amazon UK, Amazon US).
2-3 players are best. Any more and you’ll get frustrated by having to pass the gamebooks around too much.
Set a two hour time-limit to solve each case. If you don’t have it by then, you’ll just get more annoyed. For some cases, 90 minutes is enough.
Old Stock: A Refugee Love Story was easily my highlight of last year’s Edinburgh Fringe. Created by Hannah Moscovitch, Ben Caplan, and Christian Barry, it’s a beautiful and funny and touching story based on real life, and Caplan has a tremendous baritone voice. From the Folk Radio review:
Old Stock is the story of Chaim and Chayah, whose characters are based on playwright Hannah Moscovitch’s real-life grandparents, two Jewish refugees fleeing Romania in 1908. They arrive in Canada where they start a new life and eventually found a large family. Old Stock is, first of all, a reminder of the long history of immigration and the role it played in the history of North America. At the same time, it’s obviously a very poignant story in this day and age.
… The title comes from a speech by Stephen Harper, a Canadian politician who made the distinction between “old stock Canadians” and new immigrants. Caplan turned it around and used the odious expression as the title for a story about immigrants a hundred years ago.
The album based on the play is out now, and it’s just as good as I remember. It’s hard to pick favorites but Traveller’s Curse (above) and Minimum Intervals are standouts.
I’ve been doing an awful lot more travelling for work this year. Most of it has been between Edinburgh and London, but I’ve also had last-minute trips to San Francisco and Shanghai that required quick packing.
To stay sane and organised, I’ve tried to streamline my luggage as much as possible. I’ve always travelled light, but it turns out there’s always more you can do, and every little bit helps. Here’s what I’ve learned:
Clothes and Toiletries
Always take an eye mask and disposable earplugs: you’ll sleep much better on the plane. You can buy earplugs in bulk from Amazon.
Keep a packing checklist with sections for extra things to take on holidays, business trips, beach stays, etc. It’s easy to forget to pack a swimming costume if you’re in a hurry.
Layers! A combination of a light waterproof hoodie, T-shirts, and shirts is good for most weather.
I wear a Mountain Hardwear sweat-wicking base layer for long-distance travel. It works well in heat and cold, and it’s lightweight.
Take as few shoes as possible. My ideal is a smart-casual shoe with a trainer base – acceptable for all but the most formal occasions, but comfortable enough for lots of walking.
I still haven’t found a good collapsible water bottle.
For long trips, you want to wash your clothes halfway through to avoid taking too much stuff. AirBnbs are especially good for this, but you can also wash stuff in a sink if you can’t afford laundry service.
However many things you’ve packed, take out that one thing that you know you won’t actually wear.
Major caveat: I identify as a man and I work in tech, so it’s much easier for me to dress informally.
Don’t unpack your tech gear and travel toiletries between trips. Yes, it’s more expensive to have two sets of every cable and adaptor, but if you keep everything in your bag then you’re much less likely to forget or misplace things.
Take extra charger cables with you, along with a multi-port USB adaptor. If you’re out and about, you want to be able to charge as many devices simultaneously as possible when you’re back at base.
Take an external USB battery, but don’t go overboard on the size, because you should be carrying it with you at all times. 10,000mAh is more than enough if you charge it every night. I use the Jackery Bolt, although Anker has a lot of good (and more compact) options.
ABC: Always Be Charging. As soon you get to your hotel room or apartment, plug everything in, even if you’re just there for a moment. It’s also crucial to charge while connected to WiFi, as this typically is required for iCloud backups.
Set up a backup system for your phone. God forbid that you lose your phone, but if you do, you want to make it as easy as possible to restore it. I also use Google Photos to have a second backup for my photos, and I open it occasionally to begin the background sync.
My MacBook isn’t just light – it charges via USB-C, which means I don’t need a separate charger brick. Most new laptops have USB-C charging, so you’ll get this for ‘free’ soon.
I don’t bother taking a tablet or a Kindle unless I’m planning to do a lot of reading; the weight/benefit ratio just isn’t high enough. My iPhone X has a reasonably big and very high quality display, and you may find it worthwhile to also get a larger-screen phone for the same reason.
AirPods are surprisingly convenient if only because you don’t end up tangled in wires all the time. Their only problem is that they have very poor sound isolation, making them impractical on flights.
Download offline maps from Google Maps before you go (unless you’re visiting China, in which case don’t bother since it doesn’t work at all). Favorite/star your hotel and other points of interest.
I make herculean efforts to stay online while abroad. Often, my Three Feel at Home plan does this for free; other times I have to buy a local data SIM, which is getting easier and easier.
I don’t bother taking a camera as it’s yet another thing to charge and carry.
I have a Peak Design 20L Everyday Backpack. It’s arguably overkill since I was pretty happy with my old Jansport, but the Peak Design looks much nicer and has lots of very thoughtful pockets and compartments, eliminating the need for packing cubes and such. The 20L doesn’t actually fit all that much stuff and it’s quite expensive, but it’s fantastic for trips of a few days, and it feels indestructible.
I’m a big fan of carry-on duffel bags versus trolley cases. I’ve been using the same TravelPro duffel bag for around 15 years (sadly no longer available) and it’s still going strong. Duffel bags weigh less, provide more space, are deformable and expandable, and are less likely to get forcibly checked on full flights, because the staff know that they take up less space in overhead compartments. They’re also easier to carry anywhere that trolley cases struggle with – staircases, rough terrain, etc. Of course, duffel bags are definitely not suitable if you are unable or unwilling to carry them across airports, but if you are, you really should consider them.
Never check anything if you can avoid it.
Empty your wallet of unnecessary crap like membership cards, coins, credit cards, before departing. You’ll have a lighter load and less to lose if it’s stolen.
I’ve started taking taxis to the airport, especially for early morning flights. It’s a good way to reduce stress, and if you want to rationalise it, flights are cheaper than ever.
Pack healthy snacks – I like Kashi bars. Just make sure you put them in a separate, easily accessible compartment if you’re travelling to the US, since there have been reports they’ve started searching for food.
Yesterday(!), I visited Shanghai Disneyland at the end of a week-long trip to the China Digital Entertainment Expo (aka China Joy), as part of a UK trade delegation. Most of the week was taken up with briefings about the Chinese games industry; endless meetings with local companies; and raucous bar-hopping and karaoke.
By the end, I didn’t feel in a physical or mental state to do much other than do laps in the hotel pool and find good places to eat duck. I did try to visit the Shanghai Museum, only to be met with a three-hour queue. Pro tip, Shanghai: build more free museums.
The point is, I refuse to be judged for going to Shanghai Disneyland on my final free day. I’ve visited Shanghai before, I’ve done the obvious tourist stuff, and Disneyland was not only a 25 minutes taxi ride away, but even better, it was on the way to the airport. Under the circumstances, it seemed foolish not to go. So, in the spirit of my Disneyworld posts from February, here are my general thoughts: Continue reading “Shanghai Disneyland in One Day”