Puzzlebrains

I'm throwing this topic open to debate
I personally prefer a puzzle that is solvable in itself, without recourse to outside sources, e.g Darth Vader, Terry Pratchett.or whatever. I'm not saying that a little bit of research is undesirable, but that the main thrust of the puzzle should be contained within itself. I hope I'm making sense. I'm taliing here about Meta puzzles, not xwords quizwords.
OK shoot me down in flames!!! You all, no doubt have different preferences.

spoilered, Gill

I don't mind if it uses easy to research information. One which relies on detailed knowledege of something eg Saggitarius in issue 2 or Vader in this one is not as enjoyable. I would say it is fair game to use a list of the paintings of a certain person (eg Da Vinciissue1) or book or film titles with which a person is involved. But knowing who the second wife of a certain character who died in the third episode of Lost, and who was only mentioned in passing, would be a step too far. (Have I just scuppered a future Lost puzzle? )

How brave suec

The amount of time trawling through the web does upset the pleasure of solving a puzzle. Quite frankly I lose interest.

As for knowledge of certain science fiction film and books which I think in this instance are definately for the boys

I quite enjoyed the trawling necessary for Cornwallis, because there were two angles to go from, the picture and a vague knowledge of what I was looking for. Rather like doing a cryptic crossword clue, where you know the answer is right because it fits twice into the clue.

I've said before that I like looking things up and discovering things. If I'm ever in the car when a certain radio programme comes on after the news, then I race myself to see if I can switch off/over before the first bars of the theme tune. That's how I feel about the subject matter itself, but the research for the Sagittarius puzzle was (thankfully there are a couple of good resources that make it possible to track down) quite pleasant. The fact that you can spot a theme usually makes it possible to research adequately and helps you stay on track. I personally like that sort of puzzle much more than the "pushing numbers around" sort. But not all puzzles are everyone's cup of tea. An eclectic mix is probably a good thing.

I agree that a good mix is essential, and having found a good source I didn't have too much trouble with Saggitarius, but it is finding the good source that is troubling me with Vader. (A good source for lay people rather than "geeks"..... no offence intended to Star Wars Geeks)

Here's my problem Sue: I have absolutely no idea what you personally may happen to have inside knowledge of - and therefore what you might consider "research" or not.

As I think I mentioned, I showed issue one to two people. One of them solved Magnetic Poetry and the other solved Driven to Abstraction; neither of them needed to look anything up, and neither of them had the first clue about the other puzzle! (edit: and this was true with the two puzzles cited by Sue in this issue as well!)

Obviously, I have to take care to make sure that the range of subjects that are used is fairly eclectic, but I am also aware that I am biased too (in that sometimes an answer leads me down a particular path because I make personal associations.)

Having said that, there are indeed more puzzles that need "looking things up" in issue three than I had originally intended. Then again, I think that the trickiest puzzle in the magazine doesn't involve any looking up at all...

edit: what Giraffe said is true though: I think there is a fine line to walk between informational research and trivia. And it also depends upon where and how the information might be obtained (both in printed and in on-line form.) Pure information puzzles are much harder to write in these days of Google, which may be why they sometimes appear more convoluted than is strictly necessary.

Point 1 - I'm loving the magazine, even if past issues are being left half- (or less) -done on the back burner. Just wanted to make that clear before I start

My situation (not 'problem') with puzzles is that I live in a very stop-start world. I seem to be able to read books, but not solve puzzles.. Why? Because over the years I've learned how to read as little as half a paragraph, put the book down, and pick back up at exactly that point when I next get a chance to lift the book.

Sudoku puzzles / crosswords work exactly the same for me, as whatever stage you look at the puzzle (apart from the 'Fiendish' ones) you can usually see the next step.

These PuzzleBrain puzzles take TIME!!! Which is great as a hobby, but for things like an Alphactor I need steady continuous thought - as one 'fact' builds on another to give significant break-throughs.

I haven't looked at the 'logic' puzzles yet, but they tend to need the same sort of concentration (for me).

As for Internet research.... I'll fit it in when I can - and I'll need a good degree of some of the puzzles

I'll never be able to race through these mags like some of you do - but that doesn't bother me. I enjoy the banter on the threads I've started the puzzle, and I leave the other threads for when I do start.

If SueC is working from a similar lifestyle to me, then I can see exactly where she is coming from. I very much enjoyed Rehpic Drol as I only needed one bit of research and one 'tool' printing to do this between clients on the bus and finish it off curled up in front of the fire one night.

Just my 2-peneth

For the first time I have made some spreadsheets to keep my thoughts together. (normally I'm a pencil and paper person), but it does mean I can move things around the page easily and try several things at once.

I must agree with scurra (for a change). It's hard to know what counts as specialist knowledge. I'm finding this issue much more accessible than, say, issue 1, because of my existing knowledge. I'm not looking forward to Cornwallis though- will leave that to OH, but then, he'll be leaving Vetinari to me as I have nearly all of the relevant books on the bookshelf I'm looking at even as I type. (oh, and we did work together on Vader as we both have specialist knowledge in that area, despite what I posted in that thread).

However, I think I prefer puzzles that require less knowledge and more logic (like MBH, Rehpic was v. enjoyable), but as I think is clear from this discussion, the better mix of puzzles there are, the happier people will be as everyone will find puzzles they can do.
I'm glad, though, that I never expect to be able to do all of the puzzles, as that way I don't get too frustrated at those that I just can't do, for whatever reason. I doubt I'll ever be able to get as far as solving the meta puzzle.

Scurra, my areas of specialist knowledge are Neighbours, Jane Eyre and Lionel Richie songs! I challenge you to make a puzzle that fits those!!!!!

I don't mind having to do some research to solve a puzzle but it does help if the words I'm trying to find are recognisable. Some of those in Vader aren't which makes it a bit trickier. With the internet though it should be possible, (I hope). However it does mean I can only make progress when I have the computer. Not so easy to do in the bath
I enjoyed the bits of research I needed for Issue 1 and had fun with Sagittarius and others in issue 2 too. Frankly I think Cornwallis is going to prove a lot harder for me than Vader as at least Vader answers are from a more defined field.

But I like having a mix so that I can chip away at those needing research when I have odd minutes (or longer) on the computer and also have some to get stuck into in a quiet spell in bed or the bath, or even, when the weather gets warmer, in the garden.
We're all different and have different interests and abilities, what is challenging is doing puzzles that are out of your normal comfort zone.

I now feel that the time is right to chip in my two pennies.

The opening posts of this thread fascinated me. I half expected Scurra to quote me in his own reply but he didn't.

My first comments to him on this issue were "I'm not liking it very much because I don't have any knowledge on several of the themes". I qualified that with my inner struggle. One half of me said "I'm not interested- leave the one's you don't like alone", the other half said" It's a puzzle get on with it".

A few weeks down the line, having solved more of the puzzles, my opinion was entirely different. I checked my messages
to Scurra to make sure I wasn't imagining things.

My summing up to Scurra went along the lines of: On reflection, I enjoyed this issue. I have added to my file another page of info on a subject of which I had no previous knowledge but which may stand me in good stead in the future, I have decided to read a set of books that I'd not previously considered reading and I still hate Star Wars.

So- I went from knocking it to appreciating it in a very short space of time.

Feedback is important to us. Will you all post again as you progress through the Issue? Even if your opinions havent changed

Gill

I enjoyed Cornwallis because no specific isolated knowledge was required - it was just a general treasure hunt.
Vader I have filled in four blocks - realised that one (at least) must be wrong so I have put it to one side until I can find more useful help.

Just to follow up on that point a little - if someone could do all the puzzles without looking anything up (or even being sure about where to look it up) then I've probably done something wrong.

That's why we absolutely don't discourage asking for help, even it's only to find out where to look things up. For the record, if I am using internet reference sources for a puzzle, I try to make sure I can corroborate it in two separate places, to make it easier to check. Of course, that doesn't mean I can't be misleading, nor does it mean I can't miss things (like a particular picture in issue two!)

Well, I'm very easy to please. I'm happy with doing the internet research, and I'm happy when its stuff I know. However, I think I might just curl up and die if my internet connection was cut. I'd have absolutely no chance without it. Long Live GOOGLE!!!!! (or any other search engine for that matter).

Laura wrote: I think I might just curl up and die if my internet connection was cut.

yep, I'm having difficulties with my USB wireless card which has decided to start to stop working if knocked even slightly (and that includes typing too vigorously!) It's driving me nuts!

Laura wrote:Scurra, my areas of specialist knowledge are Neighbours, Jane Eyre and Lionel Richie songs! I challenge you to make a puzzle that fits those!!!!

Never say that to a puzzle setter (Although I do think it's worth pointing out that there is a Jane Austen inspired puzzle in this issue. OK, so it's not in the "meta" section, but it is there...)

Scurra wrote:

Laura wrote:Scurra, my areas of specialist knowledge are Neighbours, Jane Eyre and Lionel Richie songs! I challenge you to make a puzzle that fits those!!!!

Never say that to a puzzle setter (Although I do think it's worth pointing out that there is a Jane Austen inspired puzzle in this issue. OK, so it's not in the "meta" section, but it is there...)

When I last looked Jane Austen didn't write Jane Eyre!

I think he just meant girly classics