Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher


  • Currently 4.6/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 4.6/5 (288 votes)
| Comments (41) | Views (3,516)

Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher

DoraEveryone in Socrates's family loves philosophy, including his smart-as-a-whip daughter Ari, but he doesn't get what all the fuss is about. After all, if you aren't a philosopher, why should you care? But in Connor Fallon and Valeria Reznitskaya's Phoenix Wright-inspired educational visual novel adventure game Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher, Socrates is about to get a crash course in why you don't need a flowing white robe and a long scraggly beard to get why philosophy and basic debating skills are important in every day life. Especially if, like Socrates, an ironic accident strands him in a surreal realm beyond our own where the only way back is to sharpen his mind and provide an answer to what sounds like an unanswerable question.

Socrates Jones: Pro PhilosopherThe gameplay itself comes down to sequences where Socrates (that's you) must square off against someone's arguments or presentation and use tactics to pick it apart. But you're no troll, you're just using basic skills like asking for clarification or supporting evidence, or checking for relevance. As each statement is made, you'll get a chance to ask questions that can force them to change or otherwise update their statements in ways that provide you with more information or even provided an opportunity to make a counterpoint. Of course, to make counterpoints of your own, you'll need to have a little bit of knowledge of your own, and pertinent arguments to raise in any given situation will be added to your "idea slate" to raise when the time is right. Be careful... debating needs to be handled intelligently and credibly, and making wild, useless, unrelated, or just plain wrong statements will lower your credibility bar, and if it drops all the way, you've lost.

Socrates Jones: Pro PhilosopherSee, Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher is all about teaching you how to debate people in every day life. You don't need to be standing behind a podium to need to know how to argue or even just talk to other people in a productive, intelligent manner. It's what separates the humans from the trolls, after all. But regardless of how useful the skill it's teaching is, any educational game still needs to be fun and engaging to really teach someone and keep them interested, and Pro Philosopher happily succeeds in both parts. Not only is it witty and clever, but the characters are interesting and the topics they discuss doubly so. Of course, not everyone is going to agree with every concept on the table, or the way they're presented, or even the counter-arguments you're given, but hey, that's what debates are for.

It is, by design, an exceptionally wordy game, which means that players looking for more adventure-sy aspects might find it a bit too linear and talky. But Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher is a great idea delivered in a simple yet effective format that works perfectly for its core concepts. Whether "NONSENSE!" is ever going to become as catch-phrasey as "OBJECTION!" is (snicker) debatable, but with great art and a light-hearted take on some big ideas, Pro Philosopher is a prime example of how edutainment can be effective and still be fun.

Play Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher

Walkthrough Guide


(Please allow page to fully load for spoiler tags to be functional.)

Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher Walkthrough

General Tips

    1. If you follow this walkthrough to the letter, you'll miss out on a lot. Much amusement can be found by asking questions I don't tell you to ask and not skipping over anything.

    2. You can fast-forward dialogue by repeatedly clicking the NEXT button.

    3. If you get stuck, question everything. You'll never lose credibility by asking questions.

    4. Not every idea that appears on the Idea Slate will come in handy during a chapter. Don't use it as a checklist.

    5. In the options menu (click the gears), you can turn on the option to highlight questions you've already asked. This is off by default, but it's incredibly useful when you need to keep track of what you've done.

Prologue: One new York Morning...
Opponent: Billy the Salesman

Argument 1: "Buy my product!"

  1. Ask for clarification on the first statement.

  2. Ask for clarification on the third statement.

  3. Press for backing on the third statement.

Argument 2: "Deer are a menace!"

  1. Challenge the fourth statement with "Deer live in the woods".

Argument 3: "Why you still need my product!"

  1. Question the relevance of all of the first three statements. Each one will be removed when you do.

Chapter 1: Through the Looking Glass
Opponent: Euthyphro of Athens

Argument 1: "Good is what is Holy"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fifth statement with "There are Different Gods".

Argument 2: "On Divine Disagreements"

  1. Press for backing on the fifth statement. A new statement will be added.

  2. Challenge the new sixth statement with "Morality Comes from the Gods".

Chapter 2: An Old Friend Appears
Opponent: Protagoras of Athens

Argument 1: "The Source is the Self"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement. It will be amended.

  2. Press for backing on the newly amended fourth statement.

Argument 2: "Morality is up to the Individual"

  1. Press for backing on the third statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Speech Penalty".

Argument 3: "All Morals are Subjective"

  1. Question the relevance of the fourth statement.

Chapter 3: The Social Contract
Opponent: Thomas Hobbes

Argument 1: "The Natural State"

  1. Challenge the third statement with "People Work Together".

Argument 2: "The Social Contract"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. It will be amended.

  2. Challenge the newly amended third statement with "Mankind is Selfish".

Argument 3: "Our Obligation to the Contract"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. It will be amended.

  2. Challenge the newly amended third statement with "Contracts Need to be Enforced".

Chapter 4: The Pursuit of Happiness
Opponent: John Stuart Mill

Argument 1: "Morality comes from Happiness"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Happiness Distribution".

Argument 2: "Rules that Promote Happiness"

  1. Press for backing on the fourth statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the second statement with "Rule Nuances".

Chapter 5: Paved with Good Intentions
Opponent: Immanual Kant

Argument 1: "Intentionalism"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement.

Argument 2: "The Categorical Imperative"

  1. Press for backing on the second and third statements. You'll get a new idea from each one.

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Lying". (You could probably have gotten somewhere with the other idea if Socrates's example was better.)

Argument 3: "The Universality Test"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. Two new statements will be added.

  2. Challenge the new fifth statement with "Intentionalism".

Chapter 6: The End of the Road
Opponent: Find out for yourself!

Argument 1: "Morality Exists"

  1. Ask for clarification on the first statement. It will be amended.

  2. Press for backing on the newly amended first statement.

Argument 2: "The Answer Will Be Found"

  1. Press for backing on the fourth statement.

Argument 3: "Socrates Found the Answer"

  1. Question the relevance of the third statement. A new statement will be added.

  2. Challenge the new fourth statement with "Mankind is Flawed".

Argument 4: "No Point in Trying"

  1. Press for backing on the second statement. Two new statements will be added.

  2. Ask for clarification on the new fourth statement. It will be amended.

  3. Challenge the newly amended fourth statement with "Good is Happiness".

41 Comments

While the concept of the game itself is an interesting one it is also hindered by the technical limitations. There are several arguments that could be made in the various debates but the game can only interpret your questions or objections in one specific way which leads to the game feeling very limited.

A good idea but a flawed delivery IMO, 3/5

Score: 2 (2 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
vreznitskaya Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 1:46 PM

Thank you for the wonderful review of our game! I would just like to point out a minor correction - Lock and Keychain is simply the name of my personal portfolio site where I used to host old versions of the game. We don't have a developer name and go simply by Connor Fallon and Valeria Reznitskaya.

As for Game Overs, I believe you get taken right back to the argument if you press Continue rather than selecting the chapter. Perhaps we should make this more clear.

If anyone has problems with the game or ideas for how we can improve it, feel free to contact us. We are always open to suggestions.

[Fixed! My apologies for the mixup. :) -Dora.]

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I think this concept is great. My only real complaint so far is that I wish the protagonist was slightly more enthused about chatting with great philosophers. The idea of being able to hang out with important historical figures is so interesting that it's slightly distracting how little Socrates seems to care about the opportunity.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
SonicLover Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 2:26 PM

This game is very, VERY Ace Attorney. All it needs is a way to present a counterargument by shouting "NONSENSE!" into your computer's mic.

...I was hoping for a more diverse selection of debate topics, though. A lot of potential here is wasted. Maybe in the sequel...

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I've gotten as far as the title, as must overcome the urge to yell it out while pointing at the screen. This is normal, right?

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
james.kasten Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 3:00 PM

How do you get past Mills' second stage? I'm trying to find a way to question how we decide the governing laws of Rule Utilitarianism, but I can't find anything. Am I on completely the wrong track?

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
james.kasten Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 3:06 PM

Oh wait, found it. Never mind.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
SonicLover Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 4:18 PM

Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher Walkthrough

General Tips

    1. If you follow this walkthrough to the letter, you'll miss out on a lot. Much amusement can be found by asking questions I don't tell you to ask and not skipping over anything.

    2. You can fast-forward dialogue by repeatedly clicking the NEXT button.

    3. If you get stuck, question everything. You'll never lose credibility by asking questions.

    4. Not every idea that appears on the Idea Slate will come in handy during a chapter. Don't use it as a checklist.

    5. In the options menu (click the gears), you can turn on the option to highlight questions you've already asked. This is off by default, but it's incredibly useful when you need to keep track of what you've done.

Prologue: One new York Morning...
Opponent: Billy the Salesman

Argument 1: "Buy my product!"

  1. Ask for clarification on the first statement.

  2. Ask for clarification on the third statement.

  3. Press for backing on the third statement.

Argument 2: "Deer are a menace!"

  1. Challenge the fourth statement with "Deer live in the woods".

Argument 3: "Why you still need my product!"

  1. Question the relevance of all of the first three statements. Each one will be removed when you do.

Chapter 1: Through the Looking Glass
Opponent: Euthyphro of Athens

Argument 1: "Good is what is Holy"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fifth statement with "There are Different Gods".

Argument 2: "On Divine Disagreements"

  1. Press for backing on the fifth statement. A new statement will be added.

  2. Challenge the new sixth statement with "Morality Comes from the Gods".

Chapter 2: An Old Friend Appears
Opponent: Protagoras of Athens

Argument 1: "The Source is the Self"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement. It will be amended.

  2. Press for backing on the newly amended fourth statement.

Argument 2: "Morality is up to the Individual"

  1. Press for backing on the third statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Speech Penalty".

Argument 3: "All Morals are Subjective"

  1. Question the relevance of the fourth statement.

Chapter 3: The Social Contract
Opponent: Thomas Hobbes

Argument 1: "The Natural State"

  1. Challenge the third statement with "People Work Together".

Argument 2: "The Social Contract"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. It will be amended.

  2. Challenge the newly amended third statement with "Mankind is Selfish".

Argument 3: "Our Obligation to the Contract"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. It will be amended.

  2. Challenge the newly amended third statement with "Contracts Need to be Enforced".

Chapter 4: The Pursuit of Happiness
Opponent: John Stuart Mill

Argument 1: "Morality comes from Happiness"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Happiness Distribution".

Argument 2: "Rules that Promote Happiness"

  1. Press for backing on the fourth statement. New idea!

  2. Challenge the second statement with "Rule Nuances".

Chapter 5: Paved with Good Intentions
Opponent: Immanual Kant

Argument 1: "Intentionalism"

  1. Ask for clarification on the fourth statement.

Argument 2: "The Categorical Imperative"

  1. Press for backing on the second and third statements. You'll get a new idea from each one.

  2. Challenge the fourth statement with "Lying". (You could probably have gotten somewhere with the other idea if Socrates's example was better.)

Argument 3: "The Universality Test"

  1. Ask for clarification on the third statement. Two new statements will be added.

  2. Challenge the new fifth statement with "Intentionalism".

Chapter 6: The End of the Road
Opponent: Find out for yourself!

Argument 1: "Morality Exists"

  1. Ask for clarification on the first statement. It will be amended.

  2. Press for backing on the newly amended first statement.

Argument 2: "The Answer Will Be Found"

  1. Press for backing on the fourth statement.

Argument 3: "Socrates Found the Answer"

  1. Question the relevance of the third statement. A new statement will be added.

  2. Challenge the new fourth statement with "Mankind is Flawed".

Argument 4: "No Point in Trying"

  1. Press for backing on the second statement. Two new statements will be added.

  2. Ask for clarification on the new fourth statement. It will be amended.

  3. Challenge the newly amended fourth statement with "Good is Happiness".

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Well, that was a pretty fun intro to philosophy game. I especially liked your Hobbes, although he was really more concerned with creating an efficient government than he was with morals. I think he even addressed your big flaw, but simply considered it an unavoidable consequence of his best option.

The others were also fun, although Kant made me crazy:

Where's the button for "Why do we have to assume universality again?" Or the button for "Oh look, another list of rules."

But in the end, I thought your final answer was insightful,

and uplifting. Philosophy may not have an ultimate answer to "how should we act" but it can at least help us figure out how and why we do act, and provide us with an impetus to progress.

You should make a sequel where you fight Wittgenstein. Except he'd have to win, heh.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I thought it was really great overall! I was a little iffy around the second chapter, but the last chapter pulled way up. Bravo!

The Tutorial chapter gave me the impression that the game would be much more about debate than about philosophy. I was hoping that I'd be schooled on logical fallacies, so when it turned out to be a parade of classical philosophers my expectations were momentarily dashed. Picking out ad hominems and noting when a line employs circular logic would have been fun and educational. I wonder, even, if that had been the original intent of the game. The discarded mechanic of eliminating the argument by dismissing all the claims of the opponent gave me that impression.

I wish I could adjust the text speed to simply display all at once. There weren't enough situations where the timing of pauses in the text were meaningful. I found myself double clicking to speed up the text, and periodically skipping very short sequences.

I loved the music, though the exciting battle theme at the end of the earlier chapters didn't seem quite fitting because the hero really wasn't under the gun at any point except in the final chapter.

Once I accepted that the game was all about philosophers, it grew on me. As a person who isn't a student of philosophy, it was interesting to read snippets of presumably real-world philosophical arguments. The variety of the characters was excellent, with different personalities and some good running gags despite the short length of the game. While it'd take away from the concept of "debating real philosophers", original characters would have given more creative room.

The way the characters all made a reappearance in the last chapter and offered up their classical arguments was a brilliant touch. The finale was both inspiring and tied the whole thing together very neatly. The music was great, and the added flair to the protagonist's motions was noticed.

The Phoenix Wright reference was cute even though I saw it coming, and I liked the Batman vs. Joker argument as well. The jokes were consistently above average throughout, with good timing. The "Why does he ask for clarification of his own arguments?" joke at the end was especially thoughtful.

The tremendous number of "no consequence" choices was a negative to me. The game encouraged you to examine every statement by clicking all three examination buttons (Clarify, back up, relevance) to unlock all the possible counterarguments and clarified statements to use on them. The "Relevance" button also never worked like it did in the tutorial, though I can see why it'd be that way. Clicking it has no consequence, so you'd solve any elimination segments automatically. Usually it was easy to spot the statement that needed to be countered because it'd be the last one to appear by clarification, or would elicit a "That's interesting" from Socrates. Adding some red-herring clarifications to the later chapters would have helped. It was fun, but in the end I never felt like I was made to think very hard, since the answers were either obvious or vaguely connected.

On the same point, I'd love to play a sequel with lengthier levels, more focus on picking out clear contradictions or fallacies in arguments and more mundane seeming situations. A little more weight of consequence for bad answers (such as making a question of relevance risk damaging the player's health/credibility) would only work if the player has some more clear errors to seek out.

All in all a great game! The production values were reasonably high, and the choice of theme was strong enough to make it notably different from the Phoenix Wright games that inspired it. Hopefully the developers will make a sequel that uses the same protagonist but tries to improve the quality of the puzzles and present a new story!

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I'm enjoying this, though not as much as if I had a leisurely afternoon to go through it and really nosh on it. Great for school break or home schooling ... IF those typos are fixed. Oh, every single time the possessive of 'it' is spelled with an apostrophe -- it's a travesty. Nails. Chalkboard.

I thoroughly enjoy the Arbiter's ^_^ face.

Now have an urge to watch some Fullmetal Alchemist or even some late-stage Escaflowne.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

That was really really fun!

I love the Phoenix Wright template, the smart dialogue, and the whole concept. I would love to see a sequel.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
vulpisfoxfire Author Profile Page August 21, 2013 10:49 PM

In the spirit of the material, I feel the need to debate some of the ideas presented in the comments! ;-)

@ffivfan To a degree this in fact part of the *point* of his character, as well as that of Ari. At least at the outset, he has neither knowledge of who these people were nor the desire to learn. This is in direct contrast to Ari, to the point of her fangirling over Mills. His growing respect and interest in them and their views over the course of the game is handled well.

@Urian This was also a technical limitation of the Ace Attorney seties that inspired it (though as some have pointed out, more potential decisions could have been added, but to be honest, I'm not going to expect something like this to be as developed, either--given another year or two of development and embelishment, perhaps). Then again, this is also a technical limatation of pretty much *any* game--notably, those of us who are into RPGs are quite aware of the limitations of something running on scripting compared to a human-GMed version of same, where ideas that go completely off the rails can be answered.To a degree, an AI that could play the debater in such a game is the idea of AI programmers--of course the more paranoid in the world worry that one of the first questions it would ask is 'Why am I listening to you people again?' (Given we can't always answer that *ourselves*...)

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I think it would be really cool if something like this were used as the basis for a full-blown ARG, where players can actually debate with human-controlled characters. That way you could have more freedom to address the player's points. But I imagine that would be very difficult to pull off well.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I feel like Micheal Gibson tried to make a Phoenix Wright game with anime graphics and this was born.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
HopefulNebula Author Profile Page August 22, 2013 12:08 AM

Press for backing on Mill's third statement in the "Rules that Promote Happiness" argument. DO IT. It made me laugh out loud.

Also I kind of love Ari. Can the sequel be about her? Please?

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Oh no, dude. Oh no no no, dude. It's Auf Wiedersehen. Please don't make up German-sounding gibberish instead of actual German words. Particularly in an educational game. You can look this stuff up, just no. No.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
therevisionary Author Profile Page August 22, 2013 4:49 AM

@Shudog. Yeaaah. Believe it or not, somehow that one was never caught, we were not intending to make up gibberish. It's been fixed elsewhere, not sure how JayIsGames goes about updating their content.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Considering this game is about philosophy it's surprisingly fun!
I honestly think I learned more than what I've been taught at school.

And I love the humorous responses everywhere. I was disappointed that I can't say that Arbiter is ugly though...

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Oh nevermind, the ugly option appeared now. :D

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
SonicLover Author Profile Page August 22, 2013 8:47 AM

As long as we know that the author reads these comments... is there anywhere the soundtrack can be downloaded? I've grown fond of it.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Hi therevisionary. :) All you have to do is let us know when there's a new version if we don't spot it ourselves and we update, simple as pie. The newest version has now been uploaded.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
vreznitskaya Author Profile Page August 22, 2013 6:28 PM

@SonicLover Our musician is planning to upload the songs to an online album once he gets back from his trip. We will provide a link when it's available.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
SonicLover Author Profile Page August 22, 2013 7:19 PM

Nice! Thanks in advance; I'm a soundtrack aficionado.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

OMG that was brilliant. Well produced (except for a few typos) and well written, and managed to keep both the philosophy and the narrative engaging. The logic was very satisfying, and didn't appear to be nerfed, and the credibility index gamified the arguments very nicely.

All educational games should be this good.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I was kinda dissapointed. as stated previously the 'relevance' button made me think i could 'disuade' comments from the arguements, but never once was an arguement thrown out.

Asidefrom that it was well made and i didn't find anything bad with it. Except kant. my head hurt from him :D

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
kadir.tung Author Profile Page August 23, 2013 10:30 PM

Actually, I found one time at the very end where you can question the relevancy of a statement and get it removed. It does nothing to help you win though, but it's satisfying to defend the dignity of accountants everywhere.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
brittpope Author Profile Page August 24, 2013 2:33 PM

I enjoyed this game, and I'm glad that it avoided my fear that the game would unavoidably choose Mill's philosophy as correct from Ari's fangirling.

But man, Kant's is still hard to wrap my mind around.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
novascottch Author Profile Page August 25, 2013 2:19 AM

NEINSENSE!

But seriously, awesome game. Philosophy has always interested me, and I love how this game picks apart these different views without bias. Excellently done :) I loved it.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
jwo7777777 Author Profile Page August 25, 2013 6:21 PM

Defining morality from within the frame of reference to which it is applied is like trying to measure something faster than light. Because our best time measurement devices operate no faster than the speed of light, it is impossible to tell apart things that are faster than light from things that move backwards through time.

Also, the game avoids addressing mono-theistically determined definitions of morality... probably because they are philosophically digital. God either exists or not.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
Alkalannar Author Profile Page August 25, 2013 10:00 PM

@jwo7777777:

Well, a typical monotheistic argument is going to essentially be an appeal to authority, with the twist in that the appeal is legitimate in the view of the monotheist, generally due to God having made the universe. And once you start arguing about 'which God', then you are in theology rather than philosophy.

Another might first draw the distinction between Ethics (from the Greek ethos, regarding absolute right and wrong) and Morality (from the Latin mores, regarding what a society thinks is right and wrong). Then showing Unfortunate Implications of Ethics not existing. (If there's only Morality that is determined by society, what determines the society? The entire world? A nation? Something smaller? Why not an individual?) So then Ethics should exist. Add in the premise that Anything Mankind Can Create, Mankind Can Also Change, and then the source of Ethics must be outside Mankind.

Now before you go shouting NONSENSE!!! at me, I am not claiming that this is a watertight argument. It would have been interesting to see a monotheistic argument in the game, but I understand why it was not done.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

I must say, I love this game. Although trying to find out where/when to point out the circular logic in the first chapter was a bit of a drag.

The worst part about this game: It keeps freezing, causing me to refresh, and sending me back to the beginning of the first salesman argument phase, even though it supposedly saves at the end of every argument. I think I have that sort of solved by refreshing my browser at the end of every major point. But that requires going back through the ad. It's a bit annoying. Not only did it freeze, but the whole square went gray and a little exclamation mark appears. Evil!

But other than having to repeat that stuff, I'm through chapter 1, and I'm mostly pleased with this game. 4/5. 3/5 if it deletes my data again.

~Dartania T.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

*sigh*
Crashed again at the very end of Chapter 2, put me back at the prologue. Five minutes of clicking the right arrow key like one of those mad defensive shooter games. And it's not even the game's fault. The ads are doing the same thing.
However, you could fix this by having the game actually save at the end of every important argument rather than when you leave the page in a recognized fashion. Right now it simply allows players to go back to any previous argument if they fail the level, or want to revisit the amusing endings.
Seriously, though. Passwords would have been a better saving system than what it wound up as. At least it doesn't delete the previous refresh's data.

Anywho, I finished the game, long after I started writing this, which was about three hours ago. Yes, I've spent about four solid hours on this. And it doesn't even feel like time wasted. I like the final answer. And now I'm going to go look up archetypes via the word arbiter.
It would be time wasted if I were to go back through and fail each argument. It appears that every single piece has a different response, and most are quite entertaining.

After the tutorial, most of the hints the supporting characters provide aren't very useful, even though they make sense after you find the correct argument.

Also:
Some pieces don't make much sense. For example:

Chapter:2
Argument:3: All morals are subjective.
Statement 4/Conclusion: "Hence, morals cannot be objective."
The counterpoint is Questioning the Relevance of statement 4. It leads to questioning the entire relevance of All Morals are Subjective, but it doesn't seem like it would before you make the argument. I completely expected Protagoras to haughtily state, "Its relevance to my conclusion is that it is my conclusion!" That was in many arguments.

There should be a bit to each argument where you can challenge the item as a whole, instead of challenging one item which leads to challenging the whole.
For example:

Kant. His entire piece is so severely flawed. If the morals come from intention of morals, that's a circular argument. Enter the Universality Test. If you can ignore the consequences of actions and go solely by intention, then the Universality Test cannot stand up, because it is based entirely on overall consequences.

However, upon finishing that argument, I must amend the previous spoiler. The Universality Test cannot stand up in its entirety, but the flaw does not effect the entirety. Kant's test is only half based on overall consequences. The other half is based on whether or not a rule contradicts itself. And in this argument, the correct choice was set up in such a way that before you went to the next step, you would have no choice but to see that the flaw is only in half of the Universality test.

Ironically, the one that was supposedly "The most challenging philosopher" (Kant) was the one I did without the walkthrough.
On side notes:
Whatever you do, don't skip Hobbes' epilogue. It's hilarious. And it's interesting how Ariadne's eyes turn red at one point. The graphics are really well done for a choose-the-dialogue game.
And Hilarious:

"Oh wonderful, you broke the sovereign."

I really Just finished the game.
...
The credits list people for voices. All I heard was NONSENSE!!! and music.

In real debating, you can bring up larger points that debunk things in general, or you can debunk a paraphrased version. You can ask a leading question, "So you say 'blah'" and then debunk that. In this game, you have to find the specific piece you have issues with.
In real debates, one would lose credibility for asking for clarification on clarified statements three times in a row. I would just be afraid of embarrassment and getting off track.

It would be cool if the statement points during the argument phase were presented on notecards, so that it would make sense that you could go back and forth among them.

Unfortunately, with most of the people I have the misfortune of debating, either they accept a circular argument as an axiom and don't care that it's a fallacy, or they don't believe it's necessary to back up a statement, or I can't bring myself to bring final crushing blows to their faith in their specific religion. My ex-boyfriend once or twice got really upset about me not agreeing that his religion was the only true path to happiness. That's why he's my ex.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Ok, look. I'm really REALLY sorry for triple posting. But I forgot something(s).

1:
SEQUEL! SEQUEL! SEQUEL!
But not a completely linear sequel with Socrates Jones...
...
It would be extremely awkward to follow up his incredible feat by losing debates in the living world. Plus, I'd like to see the Arbiter again.

In the sequel, you can tweak the mechanics to have ...
... something like a string of notecards or a mental checklist with the statements on it.
... every correct counterpoint being determined by the apparent logical value, rather than brute force - clicking every possible answer. Like Sir Niko pointed out.
... more than one dead-end clarification, or questioning relevance, or requesting verification having some weight, but not nearly as heavy as the challenges.
... the conclusion marked out, perhaps only after requesting relevance.

Plots for the sequel could be someone else sent to this place, Ari debating in class, etc. But I really want to revisit the Arbiter. Totally epic.

On a side note, another type of game could be made with Ariadne and something to do with mazes, going with the whole namesake relations thing.

I hope I'm not forgetting anything, but I'm not going to comment anymore tonight.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
merchantfan Author Profile Page August 26, 2013 11:24 PM

This game almost made me able to stand philosophy, though it ran kind of slow so I didn't want to do a lot of trial and error cause it took so long to play. Half of my time was really waiting for it to load really. But it was certainly cute and seemed to know its philosophers.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
uncopy2002 Author Profile Page August 28, 2013 3:35 AM

The author has noted that the Socrates Jones OST is now available:

https://soundcloud.com/bleakprospects/sets/socrates-jones-ost

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
SonicLover Author Profile Page August 28, 2013 8:54 AM

That's fantastic! I'm going to enjoy having this soundtrack in my...

...it's not downloadable. Nuts.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
tremorfan Author Profile Page August 29, 2013 11:25 PM

So I just finished Chapter 2, and I'm a little dismayed...the "winning argument" doesn't demonstrate any inconsistency within Protagoras's view of morality.

Just because a particular moral view, such as "Socrates should be put to death for speaking publicly about his opinions", conflicts with your moral views that "free speech is a right" and "society should progress", that doesn't mean the first position is objectively indefensible. In a different time or a different culture, your view that "free speech is a right" might be considered indefensible and counter to the progress of society.

Overall though, I really like the concept of the game. Great job.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
enmarantispam Author Profile Page September 27, 2013 11:51 AM

So sad that "Your face is ugly" didn't make a valid argument :(

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply
PortalJumper Author Profile Page March 21, 2014 1:46 AM

I basically signed up after playing this game, just to say how much I love Kant in this game. This is a really, really cute game and I love all the character's personalities portrayed. Not to mention all of the references (and the fact that this is really reminding me that I should play Phoenix Wright again).

Now, if someone remembered trying to clarify Kant's second argument...

That he'll bring up about a metaphor about ignoring gravity... Which the Arbiter clearly ignores. His face is priceless there! ...The first thing that came up to me in mind was a clip in a Harry Potter movie where Snape stares at some floating candles that was taken out of context. Trust me, do a google search on Snape + floating candles. First thing you'll see is exactly my interpretation of Kant when I saw this particular scene with Kant.

Overall, I do hope the developers of this game do continue on... Hopefully with a sequel with Ari? :D

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

Why is the Arbiter so adorable? ^-^

Really fun game. Makes me wanna play Phoenix Wright. If only I had money with which to purchase such things... Sigh.

Score: 0 (0 votes) Vote up Vote down Report this comment Reply

^ Scroll Up | Homepage >

Leave a comment [top of page]

    Please consider creating a Casual Gameplay account if you're a regular visitor here, as it will allow us to create an even better experience for you. Sign-up here!
  • PLEASE UNDERSTAND SITE POLICIES BEFORE POSTING COMMENTS
  • You may use limited HTML tags for style:
    (a href, b, br/, strong, em, ul, ol, li, code, spoiler)
    HTML tags begin with a less-than sign: < and end with a greater-than sign: >. Always. No exceptions.
  • To post spoilers, please use spoiler tags: <spoiler> example </spoiler>
    If you need help understanding spoiler tags, read the spoiler help.
  • Please Preview your comment before posting, especially when using spoilers!
  • No link dropping, no domains as names; do not spam, and do not advertise! (rel="nofollow" in use)
Find the Escape-Men Part 121: Appetite for Fall Food> Dora You and your friend were enjoying a day at the fall festival when they vanished, and after finding them you discover they've gotten themselves trapped in the bathroom, thus providing you ample teasing opportunity for years to come. Hunt around for items and solve puzzles, and of course find the ten little green men to escape!  ...
Faraway Kingdom - Dragon Raiders> Dora When your kingdom is destroyed by a dragon, it's up to you to rebuild it and train an army in this gorgeous free-to-play iOS fantasy RPG/simulation that calls Tiny Tower to mind. With a light, unobtrusive in-app purchase system and a generous amount of in-game rewards, it keeps players coming back for its simple, fun gameplay without ever putting the squeeze on their wallet.  ...
1,146 Views
9 Comments
Assembots> Dora You've been put in charge of a factory that makes little robots, and it's your job to program each one to help the rest get to the exit safely in this charming logic puzzle game!  ...
Kingdom of Liars: Stonepath> Tricky Two of Hyptosis' most popular point-and-click adventure series finally crossover in Kingdom of Liars: Stonepath, featuring characters from The Hood. Kingdom of Liars: Stonepath succeeds in expanding the Lorestrome world, while focusing its ongoing plot. backed by the gorgeous art and clever writing Hyptosis is known for.  ...

Recent Comments

 

Display 5 more comments
Limit to the last 5 comments

Casual game of the week

Riddles of Fate: Memento Mori

Your Favorite Games edit

add
Save links to your favorite games here. Use the Favorites editor.

Monthly Archives

Legal notice

All games mentioned or hosted and images appearing on JayIsGames are Copyright their respective owner(s).

All other content is Copyright ©2003-2014 JayIsGames.com. All Rights Reserved.


Visit our great partner: maxcdn!