Highly enjoyable (after I finally read the definitions of "neighbor" and "to the right/left")! Did you write a program that can automatically generate these?? I'll definitely try this again. Note, the emoji graphic in "share" might be buggy? I'm seeing one green checkmark, one green square, and four red squares..

Thank you so much for trying out the game and taking the time to write the feedback!

I did! That was the main workload of this project, and is still ongoing. I have ideas for improvements, and I also have to fix some sentences manually sometimes. But it's getting there.

The sharing shows a kind of "health bar". Every time you make an illogical guess, it reduces one. Running out of "health" doesn't prevent you from completing the puzzle, but it does show up in your share. Based on this, you made 4 "illogical" guesses. If you didn't, then there's a bug. But feels like I should anyways clarify this, if it wasn't clear to you. Thanks again!

I was in a situation where I had to guess. It would be nice if there was a hint (after a successful guess) on why that box was 'ready for solve'. i.e., what other reveals can lead to this box being ready for a Innocent/Guilty choice.

I did enjoy the game though. Re-reading the clues is helpful - reinitialize your context window!

I wonder where you felt like you had to guess. The puzzles are always solvable with logic. Your guess must have been by chance also logically deductible!

I think it's the green checkmark and the green square that are confusing. Like why is there a check on the first green square and not the second one? Maybe it would be cleaner without any checkmark at all? Anyway, nice game, I shared it with my sister who also wants to solve more of them!

I can see the confusion. I have to think about it. Thanks for sharing!

I really enjoy this! I like Murdle, too. I was very interested in a sort of quest generation system that would use similar concepts to generate RPG quests, basically constraint solving I suppose.

Thank you! This was definitely inspired by Murdle, so glad to hear it's finding the right audience. And yes, constraint solving is definitely at the heart of the generator. And you mentioning using it for RPG quests sets my mind racing...

If you haven't heard of it before, also check out Goal-Oriented Action Programming. I was looking at that for giving NPCs essentially their own questlines. So you have some random event happen ("Grug the orc steals Marf the orc's prized club!") and that would generate a quest for Marf to find his club. So he investigates; he sniffs the air (orcs have good noses). He strolls around and interviews the other orcs he sees and asks them if they've seen his prized club. Eventually, he might find his way to Grug the orc and they have a confrontation. Now, all of this is while you're sneaking through the orc hideout to retrieve some MacGuffin...

Really good game. I liked that you can't guess your way to success, but must solve it logically. I found the terminology ok after reading it.

Great to hear! Preventing guessing was a critical step to make this concept click. Accidentally making an illogical guess (be it right or wrong) felt like it ruined the rest of the puzzle, since it spoiled the intended solve path. Happy to hear positive feedback on the choice!

This is great, but the need for a long glossary of terms is a sign that you might want to keep tuning language/word-choice.

As you've seen in replies here already, many term choices you've made have enough variety in how they're conventionally used that people incorrectly assume they know what it means only to see the "nope!" popup when they try to apply it. That frustration is going to spoil first impressions of what actually seems to be a really great puzzle system, which is a shame. The more you can reduce that experience, the less likely you'll be to prematurely burn off players.

A good measure for getting it right would be that you don't even need a glossary at all, or that you can get it so condensed that you can make it more prominent without becoming distracting.

Alternately, you could maybe use symbols instead of words to represent your rules, as more players would intuit that they should learn the symbols before making (wrong) assumptions.

This is great feedback, and I think you're spot on. It's been really challenging to find wording that is brief enough, but also specific enough. I hope it's something I can improve in the future as I keep exploring new ways of giving hints. The idea of using symbols is interesting, hadn't considered that!

After getting frustrated by the game not accepting my responses to the obvious clues repeatedly I resorted to clicking on each person and selecting both Innocent and Criminal.

- "My only innocent neighbor is to the left of Harold"

- "Barb and I have one innocent neighbor in common"

- Implies Gary is a criminal

But the game won't let me.

Thank you for taking the time to go through this. The hint should be clarified. It means "somewhere to the left", so on the same row to the left. It is either Freya or Gary since they are both to the left og Harold, and common neighbors of Barb and Cheryl. You have no way of knowing which one yet. This will be clarified in future puzzles.

I really enjoyed this! I can't even comprehend how levels can be generated for it. After reading instructions I found it straightforward to play.

FYI there's a misspelled word - "accountat" on the home page.

Awesome! Thank you for playing! And well spotted, will fix!

The process of generating levels is based on constraint solving. For now I'm not going to say much more about it, since it's the most innovative and valuable part of the project.

frustrating. i eventually just clicked every single one, and keep getting the "This choice can't be made based on pure logic" message. maybe i'm just dumb...

I felt the same. I got a few tiles in and then just couldn't figure out what was next. https://cluesbysam.com/help/2025-04-29?state=EDQ%3D. Apparently Tom is Innocent, which I found by trial and error.

You know Rose or Xena is criminal since there's one under Mary. Paula and Will have only one criminal neighbor in common, so it must be Rose or Xena. All other common neighbors must therefore be innocent.

This comment is what made me realize the error of my thinking and allowed me to eventually solve it.

You might be misinterpreting what "neighbor" means or what "to the left" means. There is always at least one choice that can be made logically. If the logical choice is, say, that Jess is innocent, and you say Jess is a criminal, the game won't let you do that choice. Maybe that's what happened to you?