Be a Supporter!

ir/rational Redux

rated 4.24 / 5 stars
Share Links:
Puzzles - Other

Click on an icon to vote on this!

Credits & Info

Jul 8, 2012 | 6:59 AM EDT

If you liked this, check these out!

Plenty more like this here!

Author Comments

UPDATE 4 (8th September 2012): IR/RATIONAL INVESTIGATOR ANNOUNCED! /sharedfiles/filedetails/

UPDATE 3: ir/rational has made the front page with 45,000 plays in under a week! Thank you everyone - and keep your eyes peeled for announcements in the coming months!

UPDATE 2: Walkthrough available here: /2012/07/irrational-walkt hrough.html

UPDATE 1: Made 10,000 views and the Popular Games list in 24 hours! Thanks to everyone who's played!

Argue the toss in a twisted tale of logic...

In ir/rational you complete, create and discredit arguments by selecting propositions and filling in the blanks. It's a puzzle game based on propositional logic, and a graphic adventure all in one - only here you don't so much need to escape the room as prove why you'd even want to.

- Unique, language-based argument system: formulate logical proofs to progress through the game

- Dark philosophical comedy by Tom Jubert, writer of Penumbra, Driver: San Francisco and FTL.

- 10 screens and roughly half an hour of intelligent, challenging and inventive gameplay

- Musical score by award-winning composer Mikko Tarmia

My website:
My narrative design blog, Plot is Gameplay's Bitch:

- Click to progress story
- Complete the arguments by selecting options from the drop-down menus

NB Some systems don't display all the dropdown options at once, and you have to use the arrow keys to scroll.

If you can't see the right answer, chances are you can resolve the problem with the arrow keys. Hope it's not dampened your enthusiasm!



Rated 4.5 / 5 stars

Dear Creators,

I registered here on NG because I think there is a flaw in the argument lines of LEVEL 9.


I figured out, that the yes/yes/yes/probably are the machines answers, however, the actual mistake is in the arguing itself:

1. If the machine has contradicted itself, then the machine is not perfect.
2. The Machine thinks smugness is a relevant clue.
3. The Machine thinks smugness is a red herring.

4. IF the Machine thinks smugness is a relevant clue AND The Machine thinks smugness is a red herring then ......

And this is the part where I got stuck, Something like this should follow: then the machine doesn't know what a red herring is.

INSTEAD you have to write "the machine has contradicted itself" which CANNOT be placed here since it is in line 5.

In other words if you deduct with the "then" in line 4 that the machine has contradicted itself, then line 5 is a redundant line!!! Redundant, because it echoes the deduction already made in line 4.

So you either change the "then" part in line 4.. OR remove line 5.

I don't know if I'm making sense here. You have a deduction in line 5, which has already been deducted at the end of line 4.

At least please consider my post. I would also appreciate if the creators addressed this issue. Thanks and great game!

tjubert responds:

Hi! It makes sense, but I'm afraid, as far as I can see, it's not broken int he way you think. It's percetly okay to repeat the same clause in a different context, as 'the machine has contradicted itself' is here. First it's part of an IF-THEN, then it's stated as a conclusion (since we knwo the IF part of the statement has been satisfied. It's a bit like having to show your working in maths.

What's actually a problem with one of the possible solutions to that puzzle is that you can use both smugnes is a red herring and smugness is a relevant clue together, and strictly speaking you should have a premise which states that they mean the same thing. Actually, that's a much better puzzle. Next version!


Rated 5 / 5 stars

I thought it was an amazing game. The problems provided made me think without dulling my interest and the plot made me want more games like this. This has definitely been one of my favorite escape games.


Rated 5 / 5 stars

That was a truly amazing game. The challenge applied to one's logic skills was fantastic! I ask you to attempt to make a sequel or a similar game.

1. IF I enjoyed being challenged THEN I enjoyed the game
2. IF I enjoyed the game THEN I will wait for more like it
3. I enjoyed being challenged
4. THEREFORE I enjoyed the game
5. THEREFORE I will wait for more like it

Good luck in what ever you do man.
\\emotion: in waiting\\

People find this review helpful!


Rated 3.5 / 5 stars

It's a very nice concept, gameplay wise at least. I haven't had any of the issues with interface or whatever that other people seem to be having. Perhaps It's just my choice of browser.
However, as shinobody mentioned, some of the logical assumptions made are slightly dodgy, and the plot was lacking a little. however, as is proved with the little code bit at the end, at least in the context of a game it doesn't really matter what the facts are, so long as for gameplay purposes you are aware that A is definitely A, and B is definitely B.

It would've been nicer if it had been a little longer, and if the puzzles had had a more practical application. If you're making a sequel, I think it'd be nice if some of the puzzles actively influenced what you did in-game. That way there are multiple endings, depending on how good your reasoning was throughout. While I appreciate that it was aiming for the whole 'mysterious sci-fi sadistic robot' theme, the fact that almost all the puzzles were just questions posed to you by an obscure little machine makes the plot feel slightly lacking.

However it's a very nice idea, and it'd be excellent if you could expand on it a little more.


Rated 4.5 / 5 stars

The only thing I was thinking all game was "please no code or numbers, please no code or numbers, pleasFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUCK"

AWESOME GAME, make another one, this time with options, like multiple endings or something like that, for some people (not me) been killed in the end is a turn off

People find this review helpful!