🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <QMednfOd26S68uPcRVn-2w@rogers.com>, invalid@nospams.com 
says...
> "Rohan Parkes" <rparkes@email.com> wrote in message

> > The only real criticism of the game I have is that production standards
> > seemed to fall off in the later stages of the game, which was
> > particularly evident in some of the worst voice acting I've ever heard.
> > There was an obviously non-professional female trying to voice both a
> > spoiled schoolboy and Queen Victoria. Some of the later dialogue wasn't
> > as good either. I wondered if it had been passed over to an inferior
> > production team at some point.
> 
> I guess I am like Paula. As long as the game for me has an interesting story
> and keeps my attention, I can overlook some bad acting. I thought the main
> characters of Holmes and Watson and Wiggins were all good actors. The part
> of the schoolboy could have been better acted, but his part in the game was
> more minor. Queen Victoria part could have been better acting as well, but
> that was more towards the end of the game, and not a major character. None
> of these two characters acting bothered me because I was so focussed on the
> rest of the game and what was going on in the game. I guess people pay
> attention to different features in a game and what bothers one person may
> not bother another and vice versa.
> 
> Mary

I'm not trying to put people off the game, which was, on the whole, very 
good. But I do think it's fair comment.

However, there was one puzzling feature about the game - it was based on 
a central misconception - Mycroft Holmes was not a government minister, 
as the game's developers seemed to think.

-- 
Rohan Parkes
Melbourne
Australia