When I first published “Bluebeard: An Interactive Tale” in 2022, I shared it with a number of folks to get their feedback. One person in particular provided a comment that has stuck with me to this day. They explained that the game had a sense of ludonarrative dissonance, because the “Overearly Endings” routed the player back to the previous choice, as if the player made a wrong choice — however, the reality is that these early endings are actually the correct choices, allowing the player to escape the cycle of violence.

While I acknowledged that this person was correct in their assessment, I didn’t have an obvious solution. I had labeled these early endings as “Overearly” endings and directed the player back to the choice in an effort to save the player time (so that they wouldn’t have to replay the early scenes). So, at the time, I was wrapped up in a variety of projects and I felt the need to move on from “Bluebeard.” Since I didn’t have a clear solution that felt right to me, I allowed the game to continue to exist as it was, flaws and all in the name of continuing my creative work elsewhere.

It has taken me two years to realize what the obvious — and as it turns out, rather simple — solution was.

Instead of treating the early endings as “Overearly” and directing the player back to the previous choice in order to keep them playing, I treat these endings as what they are — a proper ending.

All of the endings are now labeled as just an “Ending,” of which there are seven. If the player explores the game, finds the first ending and decides that they are done — then, that’s fine. “Ending 1” is just as valid as every other ending, and directs the player to start the game over again (if they choose to).

My hope is that by making all of the endings of equal weight, it will help to alleviate the sense of dissonance in the game and make more a more cohesive experience.

But let me know what you think!