Should The Knot really be considered a spoiler?

I have noted that several reviews of “Adventures in the Tomb of Ilfane”, “Incident! Aliens on the Teresten!”, and “Terror in the Immortal’s Atelier” describes their reliance upon another as a spoiler, not least the presently only review of one of them on IFDB:

While I can understand this in the context of IFComp, where the three entries all had similar blurbs and similar artwork, and all could be found simply by scrolling a bit, I’m not sure how it even can be guessed when they are listed on IFDB as they currently are.

Wouldn’t it be better to list them on IFDB as three downloads under one single meta-title, e.g. The Knot? Does anyone know who the author is and ask them how they’d like it presented?


They were released as three separate games so they should all have separate entries. There’s a Series Name field that can be used to tie them together, or Cross-References to make explicit links to the other games. Or just write in the description what the deal is.


Hello – so The Knot is mine – I was figuring on the main discovery-based twist really having the shelf life of the comp – or, really, until a couple of reviews came out and a few people had discovered the secret, so at this point I’m not entirely worried about whether or not it gets spoiled.

Post-comp, I’m probably going to release it on my page as one game called The Knot; I’m figuring it’s going to be available as a zip containing the three separate files. I might simply kayfabe it as them being a little less interconnected than they actually are, but that’s a blurb-level problem. I’ve been directing friends to since it’s a lot easier than having them find three separate games.

So anyway, I don’t have a very strong feeling in any direction–I’ve never been particularly diligent about handling the IFDB end of things and will defer to whatever people think is most appropriate, but eventually I do intend to release this as a single package of all three games, so the cat can be considered to be out of the bag.


Then I propose we do the same on IFDB as well. The existing entries can then simply link to an entry for The Knot.

Is there any IFDB moderator who would like to chime in?

The IFDB moderators do not yet exist outside of Michael Roberts. I personally would prefer just making a ‘series’ page linking the three together, but I don’t think it’s wrong to make a single ‘Knot page’ and reference that the way that you’ve described. But deleting the old pages would (I think) require administrator intervention, which probably won’t be available for a few weeks/months.

Ah, right. I always thought of you as a moderator because you keep fixing and improving things there all the time.

What I fear will be the case if it’s just listed as a series, is that someone will try one of them first, not understand what is going on, and give up. Of course, with a good description, this can probably mostly be avoided too. I’m partial to linking the current entries to a new entry The Knot, but I’m happy to be outvoted too.

1 Like

Well, I’ll support you since the author seems for it.

1 Like

My vote is for three separate entries in IFDB (properly cross-linked and explained). Among other things, they achieved three different ranks in the IFComp.


That’s a good point. By now I think we should do both, actually: Keep the entries and create an entry for The Knot (all properly cross-linked and explained). Unless someone beats me to it, I will make an attempt at doing this in a diplomatic way.

Thanks for the game(s). When the games were released in Oct I had immediately noticed the similar art work (which I liked) and was going to follow up with figuring out who did the art, That might have lead me to connect the the three games without any other help. But then I saw another reviewer speculate on their connectedness, and that cinched it. I completed the game on Oct 7.

I didn’t understand it well, but enjoyed solving it, and it stuck with me for longer than some of the other games, so probably earned an extra point for that.

1 Like

Hey thanks :slight_smile: The art was done by my partner – for his twitter, which has some screenshots of a pretty awesome-looking game he’s working on. I was very worried about people not clicking on the interconnectedness so I might have overcompensated with some of the connections and the whole flashing lights reading THIS IS A PUZZLE at some points, but considering the 100+ games I was glad I did.

Obviously, as soon as I started on the concept I had to make peace with the ieda that some people wouldn’t get it – a few people, based on the feedback I got, had the exact scenario I figured, which was “I played the game and bashed up against an unwinnable puzzle and so I looked at the source and now I’m even more confused”, and, like, I run the risk of diminishing it but this is the part of the game that is the Hilarious Practical Joke that I set up, and I can only beg everyone’s forgiveness and tell you I meant it in gentle good humor. But I was very nervous because I really hoped at least somebody would get it. I think you were the second or third to solve it, so I can probably credit you with me finally being able to breathe again :slight_smile:

But yeah – I wanted to create a puzzle where, if you don’t have all the parts or recognize that they’re connected to each other, it’s incomprehensible, the player is left confused, wondering if someone’s playing a joke on them or if something is poorly or improperly implemented or if there was some Artistic Statement behind it all – there’s certainly something that you could sputter out about fascism and unsolvable puzzles or something – but none of that really works, and it doesn’t add up. But when you realize they’re just three different incarnations of the same story, it becomes super obvious – after you make that leap, the game explicitly tells you where to cut, glue, and fold, and before you know it you have a lovely 3D papercraft model of The Knot to display at your desk.

Overall I feel really happy with the execution – I wrote it using a lot of graphs and charts and it’s structured with a lot of symmetries, so it was kind of wonderful in that once I figured out some of the anchoring points, whenever I came up with an element, its reflection in the other two parts would reveal itself. Even editing was easy – I jumped between them pushing things down and at some point there was an audible click and I realized I was done. The big thing I wasn’t implement is that I have a soundtrack written which weaves everything together – the three parts each have their own set of instrumentation, with a few leitmotifs in common, and in the ending – when reality blurs and God finally figures out that the most effective way to deal with the Nazis without becoming a Nazi is with a Ponsonby Britt-style bomb – all of that gets woven together in with the text (giving a little extra kick to the timed text, which I know is divisive and I don’t care because I like it so I kept it in anyway, for reasons I trace to a half-understood lecture my favorite professor once gave on Helene Cixoux’s “The Laugh of the Medusa” and Julia Kristeva’s idiosyncratic use of the term “semiotic”) into something that sounds really noisy and pretty and cool. And Twine is kind of awful with sound, particularly when you’re syncing it with tightly-timed text, and my browser was also giving me all of these weird hiccups relating to browser permission of autoplayed media, so I had to kill that darling. It’s something I’ll probably restore for the rerelease.

Anyway, I guess this counts as my postmortem, so thanks for that too – now I can check something off my to-do list and go to bed with a clear conscience! Thanks for playing and hey, thanks to everyone in this thread for – I think the best way I can phrase it is “noticing this weird thing I made and caring enough about the metadata to make sure it’s categorized properly” – anyway it is all appreciated!