Game Review - Agatha Christie - Hercule Poirot: The London Case

Game Review: Agatha Christie - Hercule Poirot: The London Case by Blazing Griffin / Microids

Caveat: The copy I purchased from the Epic Games Store shows "Trial Version" in the lower right corner for unclear reasons.

Score: +2/-13/FAIL

"In this detective adventure game, you will take on the role of the famous detective, Hercule Poirot, as he joins forces with Lloyd's of London to ensure the transportation, protection, and sale of a valuable painting of Mary Magdalene. The painting is to be the centerpiece of a new exhibit at a London Museum, featuring other works of ecclesiastical art on loan from Brussels."

SPOILER WARNING

There are basically three parts to Hercule Poirot - The London Case:

• Point-and-click game
• This plays out exactly as you expect: Go to various locations, click on things to reveal more things, and keep clicking in a basically on-rails order until you finish the scene.
• Mind Map
• This is a graph where your discoveries are mapped out as nodes and you have to form links between them to make "deductions".
• Discoveries Minigame
• Some objects you examine result in a minigame where you are supposed to find things the developers need you to find.

Unfortunately, more "features" does not make a game any better. Logic and continuity errors FAILed the game for me very early on.

• +1 Almost fully voiced (except some of Poirot's conversation choices), though a few have the voiceovers cut off.
• -1 And by cut off I don't mean the grossly overused trope of people interrupting Poirot before he finishes his sentences, so that the plot can be forced in certain directions. I suppose it could be "necessary" for the plot but the same excuse over and over is just boring.
• +1 The story and characters are interesting, if you can overlook the unforgivable flaws in how the investigation is portrayed.
• -1 The final twist with evidence coming suddenly that Poirot did not procure himself makes the whole story unsatisfying.
• FAIL/-1 Some obvious things overlooked:
• For example, during the Prologue, Hastings holds on to potential evidence (the Porter's Knife) which Poirot discovers to have metal flecks from scratching something. Why wouldn't Poirot confiscate the knife and compare it with the scratches on Florence's door?
• You find a cork smelling suspiciously of bitter almonds (cyanide?) but that is NOT added to the Mind Map immediately and later mentions of cyanide such as its use in the Restoration Room is also not flagged. It's like the investigation is being deliberately hampered even when the clues are presented to the player.
• FAIL/-1 Some leaps of logic:
• For example, in Betty Allen's dressing room, the safe is discovered open but Betty doesn't react to it and you somehow conclude that her husband opened it even though there was no evidence he was there or that he knows the combination to the safe in her theatre dressing room.
• You are able to see Irene's shawl with what Poirot claims is familiar blue paint before actually encountering the blue paint. But we already know she is an artist and later we notice she also has blue paint inside her apartment.
• You are in the Restoration Room well after the theft of the painting and you discover various clues about blue paint on the Master Key. But you immediately conclude this is related to the theft of the painting.
• The more obvious line of inquiry would be to press the keyholder about the movements of the key to confirm this.
• There is paint on Irene's shawl, but in such an unlikely location (back of the shawl) that it's quite a leap of logic at that point in the game to assume it came only from the Restoration Room when the owner is an artist.
• FAIL/-1 Some continuity issues that make no sense. This is a non-exhaustive list (yes, they do more and worse as the story goes on).
• For example, once you discover who stole the painting, Poirot supposedly goes to report to Detective Inspector Hardwicke and Hastings says he will look for Kristensen (why?)
• But they both show up at Irene's place without Hardwicke.
• Hardwicke appears only after they break down the door to her room and extinguish the fire (presumably they did so because the fire is out when he's there arguing with them).
• And then Hardwicke just leaves completely instead of staying at the scene to ensure it is not tampered with, trusting a foreign policeman and an insurance salesman.
• After Poirot concludes his investigation, he claims police have already come and gone -- while Poirot was there?
• -1 Misleading directions, such as "Report your findings to Hastings" when there is nothing to report yet. Or "Inspect Irene's Apartment" when you actually do need to speak with Hastings (about things you didn't need his input about) in order to proceed.
• It would help if there were a marker over someone when new dialog is available. There isn't so you might sometimes check, only to find "Your assistance is required" and "I need to discuss something with you" often goes to no dialog options at all.
• The Mind Map that had significant problems in the game before it, Hercule Poirot: The First Cases has some of the same problems as well as new ones:
• -1 You must complete the Mind Map even when connections are either obvious or pointless, to progress with the basically on-rails story.
• -1 Seemingly meaningful connections often cannot be made. So it becomes a lot of guesswork clicking trying to figure out what the developers want and being berated for it when you make a reasonable connection but there's nothing programmed for it.
• For example, you cannot link "Burnt painting was a replica", "Irene created replicas of the Penitent Magdalene painting", and "Irene involved in some form of fraud".
• -1 The Mind Map is made worse now by NOT putting the new deduction on the link between nodes that formed the deduction. This litters the Mind Map with new nodes and you might try to link them to the same nodes that formed the deduction.
• The Discoveries minigame
• -1 "Discoveries" when inspecting objects need to be clicked in a specific location which is not always intuitive
• For example, when looking at the painting in Chapter 1, you have to click the correct eye (right eye) to get the "Eyes" discovery. For the halo, you have t o click the upper left part. So when inspecting an object.
• This confuses what a "Discovery" is because you could be inspecting the "wrong" part of it and have nothing to click.
• You can click a location when your reticle expands. But that then means you can just keep sweeping the object with your mouse watching the reticle to expand.
• So instead of actually discovering anything, the Discovery minigame ends up not being about Discoveries so much as watching for the reticle to expand, indicating that you can click something. Because otherwise, you have no confirmation at all that you have Discovered anything.
• -1 Feels like busywork when your "Discoveries" are mundane and feel pointless.
• For example at the Restoration Table in the Museum, the table obviously has various related clutter, but you are supposed to click the Paint Palette, the Book about paints and pigments, the Cotton Sticks, and the Scissors.
• This is fine but there are more than a dozen objects on the table and none of what you click comes with any immediate relevance to the investigation. So the player is just randomly clicking items until they find the four that the developers want them to click.
• Another example: You are a museum door and one of the Discoveries is to click the Door Knob/Handle and the feedback is literally "there is nothing out of the ordinary". So you "Discovered" nothing at all.
• -1 Some "puzzles" are ludicrous.
• For example, to lure a cat out from the confessional, you need to run to the Museum to get some cream.
• -1 Pointless check-ins with Hastings, such as to discuss deductions where Hastings was not required. It would make sense if he had discovered something elsewhere and Poirot used it to form a deduction, but when Hastings had no part at all in the investigation leading to the deduction, it is just busywork.
• For example, in the Restoration Room, Poirot deduces that the box with a blue smear of paint was moved. But we have to "discuss" this with Hastings before we can act on this information. All the while, Hasting has done nothing at all before or after this discussion.