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
And having the townspeople see Joja guys repairing anything would likely have a similar effect to the Joja route/ending.
Maybe, if there's a mundane explanation, the townspeople might think the new farmer is well-connected with fast builders who owe the farmer favours. Though this is off-topic ^^;
It's known they're magic.
One he really should of fixed and it's stupid he didn't think of it, or fix it by now, but unfortunately, it's just an oversight.
Bugs the ♥♥♥♥ out of me.
I don't think it's an oversight, I think it was a design decision. It would completely negate the reward of finishing the crafts room if you could just access the quarry the much easier boiler room route.
I think what he should have done is just remove the mine cart at the quarry. The one inside the mines is close enough.
There definitely are some oversights in the game, though.. like the guy that's working to remove the rock debris that blocks access to the mines.. how did he get to the other side of it?
But it's not unusual for writers/game designers to not give reasons for things and leave it up to the reader/player to come up with their own reasons. A reason that a reader/player comes up with themselves will make more sense to them than one provided for them. A player-made reason might not be right - but it's also not wrong unless directly contradicted by some official source.
Technically for it to be an oversight it would have to mean that it was a mistake made because he forgot to put in an explaination or failed to notice that it could do with one. While that is certainly possible, even likley, unless he's come out and said that this was the case as opposed to it being a conscious decision to leave it unexplained we can't know for a fact that it's an oversight.
That there is no explanation isn't proof - we'd have to know why there is no explanation. If he has said somewhere that he hadn't thought about it I will concede that it's an oversight. Otherwise I'm going to assume he decided it just wasn't that important.
And I'll even admit that I don't know for a fact that the guy being on the wrong side of the debris at the mines was an oversight. That, too, may have been a conscious decision for layout or asthetic reasons. It just really feels like an oversight to me because he could have found a way to put the guy on the town side of it. But CA may have decided it wasn't important enough to make the effort of addressing the inconsistancy worth it.
Gameplay mechanics take priority over a perfectly coherent story. Do you also take issue with the fact that:
If you would like all these removed because they are never explained, go buy a farm in real life and build it up yourself. It's what the game would become.
There's things I can excuse for gameplay, like inventory, but some things can be explained, so they should be.