Anybody been reading the ongoing series? I wasn't sure if it would be worth starting a thread for it.
Oh I wasn't going to discuss it here, I just was just seeing if there was enough interest to start one here since it was the only Lower Decks thread I saw. I'll probably just go over to the general comics thread for now.Since this is a review thread, we probably don't want to get too far afield with other works. Please feel free to start a new spoiler thread for the series if you'd like to discuss plot details, or you can use the general 2025 comics thread if you just want to discuss it generally.
I have leafed through the entire book twice looking for any pages with “go to page 82” as an option and can’t find any. Is this a publishing mistake or am I just blind?
Okay, I’d avoided looking at the blurred out parts of his post before because I didn’t want plot spoilers. But now I’ve looked at it. Geez, there’s hidden (or hinted at) MATH involved??? I’m not crazy about that.It is not a publishing mistake. @David cgc explained how it works in this post.
Welcome to an old trick that CYOA authors would employ. Having passages that are wholly disconnected that you will ONLY find by end-to end'ing the thing. They range from wacky, to 'everyone dies,' to 'you're not supposed to be here, how'd you get here?! You cheated!'I started paging through from beginning to end to come across the first pages I’d not read yet.
I also endorse your clues as better than my walkthrough.And see my "Invisclues" post. It works exactly like classic Infocom Invisiclues, with the deeply nested spoiler tags giving escalating hints, starting with a subtle nudge and ending with a giveaway. And note that while mapping the book, and looking for pages not visited will work, there are in-story ways to calculate links that aren't given explicitly that will get you where you need to go.
In my opinion, these types of books must have clearly established rules and paths to follow. Having key sequences not pointed to by any of the “go to” directions and instead expecting the reader to figure out that they are *supposed to* eventually do what I did and just find the first page that none of the paths take them to (or doing only obliquely hinted at math on the side to come up with the necessary page numbers) violates those rules.
To be honest, I appreciated that there was some small bit of making a game out of it, so that it wasn’t just a basic decision tree throughout. And not only that, but worked the whole style of the book into the context of the narrative. To each their own, though. The clues weren’t really that obfuscated. IIRC, the only page in the book that couldn’t be reached by following either the tree or the clues was the one with the penguins.
We obviously have different views on this, but one of the things I loved about this book was that you had to work out what was going on.I still thought it was very well done and enjoyed it thoroughly. But, again, my experience with these types of books is that every possible “path” must be reachable by the reader’s given choices. If the reader is also supposed to be looking for “clues” then it should be stated somewhere at the beginning of the book. The penguins page is there specifically as a gag saying to the readers, “Hey, you’ve got to follow the directions at the bottom of the page!” But then that turns out not to be the case in order to get to the actual conclusion of the story. (And, I will admit, that any puzzle requiring me to *figure out* from clues I need to do *math* is one I’m not going to do well at.)
— David Young
And working out a brute-force solution, then learning of the intended solution in hindsight, then using nested spoiler tags to create a set of Invisiclues based on the old Infocom "subtle nudge progressing to idiot giveaway" pattern all added to my own enjoyment.There were hints that said you needed to do something and looking for those clues actually increased my own enjoyment of the book.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.