Great game. I loved every second. It really made me think, which I love doing. I've always loved arguing, and also the Ace Attorney series. I always wanted a less law-centered Ace Attorney game, and I got it! Thank you so much for gracing the earth with this game. I feel you should run a kickstart or groupfund and get a full length version of this out, with more philosophers and maybe a bit less of guess-and-check. I also just wanted to say that the Arbiter's "happy" expression looked very cute for some reason. I love this game, and I love the developers of it.
Reviews for "Socrates Jones: Pro Philo"
WOW! This game was amazing. I always wanted to play a really good educational game - and u guys made it possible! It really stopped me from going to sleep for some hours. Just wanted to say thank you for the good time. Please keep up the good work!
Loved it. Though I disagree with conclusion with Hobbes. There was some real difficulty in last one, when I noticed problems in Arbiters arguments, but didn't know how to express those. In all game was really good, and it took me thoroughly inside it, so much that I couldn't stop playing before I saw conclusion.
Here is my thoughts about Natural state of Man and social contracts. Formed in 04:30 AM, but I'm pretty sure that this is valid.
______
It won't create infinite regression. It is actually social contract between strong and weak, ruler one being weak. Rulers task is to do menial tasks and for return they get marginal power.
Natural state is what brings most of the problems. It is easy to demonstrate that people are not naturally in constant war with each others. This is demonstrated when, for example, in actual wars, people show mercy to opposing side(there are better examples, but this one popped in my mind). Even after both have orders to kill the enemy, such orders cause enormous stress. This kind behavior shows that kill or be killed is not natural between humans and that there exists some other guidelines.
Contract cannot be referred in this case, because to be called a contract, both sides have to agree with terms. Any social contract between enemy is void, because there is no knowledge of agreed terms.
Completely silent, undocumented contract, in which participant are not aware of, or even aware of each other, can't be considered a contract.
As one of the few people who apparently never played an Ace Attorney game the mechanics of how to challenge assertions weren't immediately clear to me. I didn't lose the game for it, but I definitely lost some credibility at the outset. I liked the writing, the humor being a nice touch. I knew the flaws in the arguments but how to challenge them appropriately was the key.
I'm just mostly having a hard time believing that a guy could get that far in life without having any idea how to form, analyze, or challenge an argument. He managed to eventually string words together to form an intelligent thought, but it's interesting that most of the time Socrates and Ariadne were talking I was thinking, "So THIS is the endgame for the father and daughter from I Am Sam."
I never found out if this was a good game or not. The dialogue almost put me to sleep. These overwhelmingly long dialogues are just not my speed. I need action and quick release. But im not saying its a bad game....just not my speed ;-0