Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Wether the doc straight up murdered Violet or is really terrible and can't even do a simple tracheotomy, he was the one that aggravated Violet's mental issues with his "theories".
So the "jon is "evil" " ending, even if really heavy emotionally, can't be the canon conclusion for me, I can't wrap my head around it.
Regarding Vogel: My read on him vacillated a lot throughout my playthrough from weird philosophical sparring partner/mentor, oddball eccentric, to sinister corruptive figure, but I don't see him as a full-blown villain by the end. He really does come across to me like a chaotic, impulsive, provocative figure who was drawn to Sherlock by curiosity to see the kid who got his brother arrested for murder and hung around because it was fun to push his buttons. I don't really think he was deliberately manipulating Sherlock for any sinister end, just constantly pushing him to question his black-and-white worldview and seeing how far he could get Sherlock to bend. All that said, the overall vibe I got from him was what a creep, even occasionally leaning into predatory vibes in some scenes.
- Otto killed unintentionally
That death caused by the allergy was nosense for me, while the resistence of the medicine was far more realistic. But I don't see why Otto would intentionally kill Violet. Yet Mycroft is not really the type who accuses someone unless he is 100% sure.
I'll now watch all the other endings
About Vogel
I didn't quite understood the paiting... maybe I'll understand watching all the other endings.
Btw I hated him from the first time
OFF topic but I a little disappointed that they didn't aged sherlock for the scene with watson. They met at least when they were in their '30 and while watson appereance seems reasonable, sherlock in the same attire of the game is not correct. Just different clothes, hair and face skin would have been perfect
Watson had been at war for a few years and was wounded and got shellshocked by the time he met Holmes, who had barely left England until then. Though Holmes wasn't as much a cherub as he's depicted in here, it stands to reason that Watson looks a bit more haggard or at least aged.
As a side note, the Holmes & Watson introduction scene adapted from A Study in Scarlet was one of my favorite scenes in the game, really liked how the direction and acting drove home the sad reality behind the pithy, very English Victorian dialogue ("Nice to meet you, I have depressive episodes" "Oh that's cool, I have PTSD"). Watson in particular was animated/acted with a quiet, nervous, muted energy that effectively conveyed "just got back from a horrible war" lol.
That said they could have at least put a lab coat (maybe the Scatterbrained Scientist outfit lol) on Sherlock; dude's probably getting blood and chemicals all over his super fancy waistcoat.
How you deal with Jon and the conclusion of your Mother's death
and
Depending on the conclusion you chose, the narration (and who) it's given, that explains what Sherry has gone on to do...before the static meeting of Watson
Re. "Allergic reaction isn't feasible", you have to bear in mind that you can't build up a tolerance to all chemicals. Furthermore, the medicine was dosed by a 10 year old child with no real understanding of said medicine. Is it really so surprising that such a situation will end up with a dangerous dose?
I chose a different ending and still got the vigilante thing (carriege scene) I think its more connected to how you chose to end the Mycroft related cases. I never played them his way.
Vogel is in part what a psychologist might do, or not.. :) In the end (I also chose your first, in case that matters) he has one quote that stuck in my head. "I took your Sisyphos and made you Ozymandias" followed by "what remains now is if you let yourself be dominated by that or not" (or something similar), "I will now return to another "work"". So essentially what he does is to pull up a mirror, and let Sherlock decide the outcome.
In the case before that, regardless of what you choose (at least in the hang them endings (tested)) he will always tell Sherlock, that he is a trainwreck that will crash, because of internal contradiction, and that he cant wait for it. Thats on the question if a person has free will. To which the intelligent mans answer is no, btw. Not only because of personal and family ties (which Vogel mentions afair), but also because of "ethics programming". On which Vogel then says in one response, that morals and ethics is what happens post facto, and doesnt guide decisions. Never quite heard that school of thought, but its interesting. :)
(Devs should name philosophers.. ;) )
In the gallery case he responds to the question "what theme does the exhibition have" with "it has none - its your interpretation" also in all cases afair. So Rorschach test esentially. But this could be overinterpretation.
In the Eyes wide shut case, he encourages Sherlock to drink and have fun, which any normal person would do (open to interpretation..;) ) which my canonical Sherlock of course refused. :) When you then dont pick the "i want to analyze the champagne" option, you get a response "that that is progress". Again, hinting at a pattern, that could benefit from being disrupted. (I didnt try the other dialogue options in that case.)
In police files of Violet Holmes' death we can read, that her face was swollen and in red spots - this CANNOT be from drowning. She would have to lie under the water quite some time to get such a swollen look - which means, that Sherlock would have drown by that time, because he lost his conscious while being under water. Drowning also doesn't make skin red.
"Swollen skin with red petechiae" - this sounds like ANAPHYLAXIS RASH which is a symptome of anaphylactic shock. Could she get such a shock after well-known but overdosed drug (potassium bromide) applied by Sherlock? Probably not. But what if doctor Richter gave her something NEW during argue in her room, at the day she died - he had an almost empty bottle with no label in his suitcase (he mix it by himself - it was a drug combination from mushrooms causes hallucinations). Or maybe the combination of BOTH of theese drugs caused UNEXPECTED ALLERGIC REACTION?
So I saw it like this:
1. Violet Holmes is acting hysteric, argue with doctor Richter - he probably reminded her of her husband's death, as he planned to do often, plus - he gave her the new medicine from the suitcase.
2. Sherlock puts potassium bromide tranquilizer (probably a lot) to the tea, while Mrs Holmes and doctor still argue (according to his memoir).
3. Mrs Holmes drinks the tea - probably in the garden, where she went after the argue (the tea set is left in the garden).
4. Somwhere meanwhile, Sherlock is in the cabinet of curiosities where he hears from Mycroft that the doctor did something horrible to their mother (according to his memoir).
5. Sherlock goes to check on his mother and takes her for a ride around the pond - she seems very calm at the begining, so she probably drank that tea with the tranquilizer.
6. At the father's tree - Sherlock is sayin that father had passed away and Mrs Holmes gets angry as always when disagree (note about that can be found in Otto Richter's observations of her). Beeing delusional, she beats Sherlock - also - her reaction could've been strenghten by the new drug (hallucinogenic mushrooms), and she pulls him to the pond, threatening to kill.
7. She's drowning Sherlock, and somewhere meanwhile the anaphylactic shock is on (after the new drug from the suitcase or overdosed tranqulizer or both).
8. Sherlock looses his consciousnes under the water.
9. Violet finaly loses her consciousness too, due to anaphylactic shock and probably overdosed tranqillizer, then goes hypoxia (hypoxia is the main cause of death).
10. Doctor Richter gets on place - he probably heared the screams.
11. He grabs Sherlock and - maybe - also Violet out of the water.
12. The boy is alive, but Violet doesn't breathe.
13. He's trying to do tracheothomy but he fails (he might be in shock after what happened with his patient after the new drug, or he is just a very lousy doctor).
14. Mycroft appears.
So... if it goes about responsibility, I would say it lays completely at doctor's shoulders. But I think Sherlock would blame himself basing on evidences and memories - and so did I. Whether is Jon or Sherlock, as they are one man, I guess is up to everyone in person. The most important, I think, is that with the death or leave of Jon, some part of Sherlock is dying once and forever (probably the one responsible for deeper feelings and so on..)
As it's been said at the end - Sherlock was just a fragile child trying to help his sick mother who abused him, probably causing a lot of his future problems, but only the doctor Richter's bad actions are the main cause of what happened.
About Vogel:
Throughout the game, as a Sherlock, I let go some of the criminals I caught, because of many different circumstances and the fact, that the guilty was often also a victim.
But when it comes to me as Sherlock, I accused myself of murdering my own mother without any special treatment, when these special treatment where absolutely aquired in here. Without a doubt, Sherlock was a victim in his own case, but he refused this to himself.
And, I think, here comes the Vogel, a person we can blame for our changing mood. He was always trying to undermine our decisions, to make us stop thinking only about the truth and morality. But in the end, when our soft side called "Jon" is gone, we kind of understood that and stand for truth again. "The truth is the truth". No matter what.[
Other thoughts:
- Mrs Holmes may be used to these potassium bromide tranquilizer, in a way that they doesn't work any more on her, but she can of course still overdose them;
- Even if Mycroft goes with everything that Sherlock deduce in all 4 endings, I'm pretty sure that Mycroft would lie (or is lying) to him after hearing that his brother deduction got wrong and Sherlock blamed doctor Ritter instead of himself;
- Mycroft would have accused Richter anyway no matter if he had to save his younger brother or not - Richter's experimental treatment doesn't work and he continues it, which drive Mrs Holmes to delusions and murder atempt, so the doctor's fault is clear - for using a method of treatment that causes or increases the harm;
- There is a note from the judge in charge of Mrs Holmes' death case which suggests, that Mycroft helped him with some personal issue, so he was probably doing everything he could to win in court and blame Ritter as the ONLY responsible for mother's death;
- If it is actually Richter guilt or accident (he killed Violet, whitout Sherlock involvment), I think Mycroft would still like to protect Sherlock from the bad memory of his mother who beat him more than once and even tried to murder him, because that sounds like enough trauma to last a life time.
How the way Sherlock says "John?" at the very end can subtly differ depending on which ending you go with. It's little touches like that that I appreciate in a game.