u/lolhellogod

It's strange, because I really enjoyed playing the game. I went in blind, and it reminded me of those eater egg hunt games on Roblox, but miles better. Despite not being as complex as games like The Witness or Blue Prince, it was just chock-full of Aha! Moments and testing out different items were brilliantly exciting. I think playing a couple of knowledge-check games in the past also helped a ton with not getting frustrated when things didn't work. Exploration was just peak as well; studying where the blacked-out spots were on the map and returning to them to explore was just great. Admittedly, though, I found a movement trick instantly after getting an item (thank Celeste for training me in button combos), and so exploration felt a lot better than what it could've been).

But the transition from exploration and memory puzzles to note-taking and community comparison was really rough. Like, objectively, I think Animal Wells' progression is really cool in theory. You start with simple exploration puzzles, then to some more complex movement techniques, then onto flute note-taking puzzles and finally some moon-logic type shit that incentivises community interaction. All in that in this one game? That's phenomenal!

However, the game really fails to encourage you to do note-taking or online research. It tries to transition the puzzles inside the game to the outside by relying purely on the idea that you'll either be aware of its genre beforehand or that you look for the answer online out of frustration/failure. Just some murals encouraging you to go online to compare answers, or maybe a warning at the start of the game about note-taking would've done wonders. It might not seem like it, but the idea that you need to write down and then compare notes on a game is a bit of a leap.

That's kinda poo in my opinion, and means that when the community eventually does find the answers, the end of the game is really more of a "search for the answers" online sort of thing, rather than a "discover it on your own".

Like, the eggs, for example, I had 10 of them left with the majority of the map cleared. The ones left were consistently ones, not behind large puzzles, but silly misses from the environment. Why not have a system that, after collecting enough eggs, just tells you which rooms the remaining few are in? So that you can just enter the rooms and try to discover them yourself.

Why can't you easily record music notes? Have a composing sheet tool that allows you to write the directions and then pull them up when you're playing the flute. I was comfortably playing most of the game in bed, and not on a table, because the game didn't train me to expect note-taking. So most of the time I saw the music notes but didn't really want to go through the trouble of writing them down and organising them. So I just looked online. Once again, stealing a potential fun I could have had in discovering it if it had just had a better system.

Another thing, the flute, there needs to be a better way to do it using the controller, I had to retry a 60 note song for 15-20 minutes because the diagonals were just too hard to get consistently! Why? I already know the solution to the puzzle! This isn't precise puzzle platforming! Let me play the gosh-darn song!

Another thing, why did the game not end with a cut to black and a return to the save file? I mean, one of the puzzles literally requires looking at the save files. Not cutting to black really makes it seem less like an ending and more like an unfinished idea, or concept-

Argh, there are just so many small quality of life problems that made an otherwise 9-10/10 game go down to around a 7-8/10. It meant that when I finished a game I admittedly really enjoyed and got absorbed in, I ended with more fresh complaints than the feeling of the good things it actually does!

Like again, a concept of a metroidvania puzzle platformer slowly evolving form simple, exploration puzzles into more esoteric and moon-logic community puzzles is amazing, and I'd go as far as to say that Animal well even achieves it rather well with it's selection of puzzles and ideas. But it just doesn't intergrate them that well to the player experience and so you never really get to discover those puzzles, more like, learn about them

My game

Wrong solution from IGN

So the door isn't opening, and I've been staring at the correct [wrong] solution for half an hour. I thought I was going crazy, and so I hopped onto procreat to use the opacity and...

Procreate opacity over it

So no, I literally have the correct [wrong] solution, and it's still not working. Would anyone have any idea why, will I have to reset the entire thing and do it again 💀

image credits:
https://www.ign.com/wikis/animal-well/Rabbit_Mural_Community_Puzzl

Edit: [SOLVED]

Edit: Yeah folks, I was a dumbass and copied the wrong solution off a reddit post with the wrong solution asking for the right one... I'm sorry :(

Edit 2: Actually, no, wrong again, I got the solution off IGN https://www.ign.com/wikis/animal-well/Rabbit_Mural_Community_Puzzle

I feel a little childish asking this because I don’t fully understand what consciousness means; it has several different definitions depending on the context, and it’s hard to tell which context you’re in when discussing it. Whilst its meaning could be explained in depth each time it’s brought up, and I understand there are scientific categorisations, theological considerations and even several philosophical conversations that all provide a neat logical definition of the word. It's not as if every other person is doing the same. So I would still need them to explain what their definition is, and if I were more studious, perhaps I would be able to identify what version of the word consciousness they’re describing, and then, only then, would I be able to temporarily understand what consciousness means in that moment. 

Which seems like an awful fuss over one word. Furthermore, every discipline on the planet seems to take a bit of the pie on what consciousness is. It can be used interchangeably with the word aware, it can be used to describe complex thought processes, or to describe something having a spirit, or something being specifically human. It’s an extremely general word, but in practice, it’s only ever used to explain very specific things. For example, ever since computers were a thing, and especially now with AI, there’s a heavy discussion on whether AI has consciousness or can be conscious.

Irrelevant to that discussion, how am I, neither a philosopher, neurologist, computer scientist, nor theologian, ever to understand what version of consciousness is being discussed? Especially when it sometimes seems to change mid-conversation? How can I relay the opinions of an authority in a casual discussion if the consciousness of an authority I have learned from is describing a meaning hyperspecific to their field? 

Is this specific to the word “consciousness”, or is this something all words and communication struggle with? I’m a studying artist (though not an art historian), and so I have a reasonable definition of the word “expression” that I sort of expect people to share. But then, expression can also be used to describe facial expressions. The thing is, I find it a lot easier to deduce whether somebody is talking about facial expressions compared to artistic expression. Comparatively, it’s essentially a bit of a dice roll when it comes to the word “consciousness”.

With such a quality to it, how useful is “consciousness” as a word if it’s a gamble to understand what it means?

I feel a little childish asking this because I don’t fully understand what consciousness means; it has several different definitions depending on the context, and it’s hard to tell which context you’re in when discussing it. Whilst its meaning could be explained in depth each time it’s brought up, and I understand there are scientific categorisations, theological considerations and even several philosophical conversations that all provide a neat logical definition of the word. It's not as if every other person is doing the same. So I would still need them to explain what their definition is, and if I were more studious, perhaps I would be able to identify what version of the word consciousness they’re describing, and then, only then, would I be able to temporarily understand what consciousness means in that moment. 

Which seems like an awful fuss over one word. Furthermore, every discipline on the planet seems to take a bit of the pie on what consciousness is. It can be used interchangeably with the word aware, it can be used to describe complex thought processes, or to describe something having a spirit, or something being specifically human. It’s an extremely general word, but in practice it’s only ever used to explain very specific things. For example, ever since computers were a thing, and especially now with AI, there’s a heavy discussion on whether AI has consciousness or can be conscious.

Irrelevant to that discussion, how am I, neither a philosopher, neurologist, computer scientist nor theologist, ever to understand what version of consciousness is being discussed? Especially when it sometimes seems to change mid-conversation? How can I relay the opinions of an authority in a casual discussion if the consciousness an authority I have learned from is describing a meaning hyperspecific to their field? 

Is this specific to the word “consciousness”, or is this something all words and communication struggle with? I’m a studying artist (though not an art historian), and so I have a reasonable definition of the word “expression” that I sort of expect people to share. But then expression can also be used to describe facial expressions, the thing is, I find it a lot easier to deduce whether somebody is talking about facial expressions compared to artistic expression. Comparatively, it’s essentially a bit of a dice roll when it comes to the word “consciousness”.

With such a quality to it, how useful is “consciousness” as a word if it’s a gamble to understand what it means?

I recently finished reading Priory of the Orange Tree, " and I found it to be really enjoyable. So I decided to try reading queer fantasy again by picking up some of the highly rated ones, and, um, some were fine but not scratching that itch and others were like getting hit by a hammer (derogatory). So I've decided to stop trusting my gut and come looking for help.

I'm trying to avoid YA (Books like Carry On and Sunbearer Trials) and go for something similar to a queerer version of Earthsea or even Six of Crows to a certain extent. I don't really want anything too grimdark or BDSM-coded. It's not that I can't appreciate one, it's that they're not scratching the specific itch I want. I don't want to be titillated, I want to be enamoured by worldbuilding, character dynamics, and story. Nothing takes me out of that feeling when I'm wondering, reading a scene, "Am I supposed to be aroused? Is this for straight women? Teens?". I know it's kinda part of mlm but I enjoyed Priory of the Orange tree because I never felt like I was supposed to be oggling at the men & women.

Whilst I am technically open to any genre of fantasy, I am particularly wary of contemporary ones simply due to how "ironic" they make everything feel. Like, I don't necessarily mind characters being silly and saccharine, or edgy and brooding. I can accept that and enjoy it, but if each character keeps on smirking at each other because of "how ridiculous a situation they're in", I might tear out my hair.