Who Whacked Jimmy Piñata?

Adapted from an IFCOMP25 Review

If you are here for a dispassionate, critical deconstruction of this work and series, boy do I have bad news for you. At this point, the third entry in this ongoing candy-detective series, I am so thoroughly in the bag that I might as well be gift wrapped. My history with this series is unabashed appreciation for the goofy, completely committed premise of a candy-based noir world. Every over the top candy pun is another brick (sugar cube?) in this towering edible edifice, and I just gobble it up like a day-after trick-or-treater. This work seems to have a bottomless supply of witty candy iterations (Wax Lips a personal fave this time), and I am here for it.

My problem with this series has always been the gameplay, not the premise or writing. This iteration made a few key improvements on that front that were much appreciated. First, it introduced a subtle but very welcome tunable noun highlighting feature, that emphasized interesting nouns to focus the player on relevant words. This subtle textual tweaking goes miles to make things player friendly in a non-intrusive way.

Even better, there is a new paradigm to the detective work. Rather than navigating a completely open ended setup of interviews and evidence gathering, there is a focusing structure at play. Find artifacts that directly speak to motive and culpability, then use those to elicit a confession. One without the other is just too deniable to hold water. These two developments feel like a deliberate maturing and refining of the series, a welcome evolution, blunting the more challenging portions present in the previous entries.

Blunting, but not eliminating. At several points, I still fell into the trap of knowing what the game wanted to happen, but being unable to get the game to understand my efforts. In one particularly egregious instance, the game could not progress until I committed an act that, even in the logic of Candyland, felt (Spoiler - click to show)jarringly cannibalistic. At other points, I envisioned multiple alternate solutions to puzzles that were rejected for unconvincing reasons. Honestly, notwithstanding the VERY WELCOME gameplay adjustments mentioned above, I floundered a few times with puzzle solutions that did not satisfy once revealed. If you happen to encounter this review before the walkthrough or hints are available, here are few FULL ON SPOILERS: (Spoiler - click to show)To stop the motorcycle, you must >EAT RED. To block the confessional you must >INSERT BAR. To get the keys (after retrieving TAFFY and SKEWER), you must >LICK TAFFY to get it sticky enough. The latter was particularly vexing as a completely different action was necessary to accomplish essentially a similar effect elsewhere. Nor, despite being surrounded by a WORLD OF CANDY that included soda rivers, syrup rain(!) and nougat everywhere, was there any other way to make something sticky.

Here’s the thing though. These kinds of opaque gameplay artifacts have been part of the series from day 1. If you enjoy this series as much as I do, you have already made your peace to continue to play in this wonderfully goofy, fun space. Cost of doing business in Sugar City, cupcake. It’s a cost I was ALREADY glad to pay, but now you have refined gameplay with its new soft prompts and more satisfying mystery structure? Are these my membership bonuses? MHIP I guess, cause I was already a satisfied customer!

Yeah, I was fully Engaged in this third visit to Sugar City. Though it did not completely address the gameplay glitches that characterize the series, it absolutely DID add gameplay elements that elevated the mystery solving. This is a case where the cold math of my rubric does not actually reflect the glee of playing it. It also very ably integrated settings and characters from previous entries in a way that was more organic and satisfying than “Hey, remember this?” This entry is the most enjoyable yet. <your pun here, about how sweet that is!>

Played: 11/9/25
Playtime: 2.25hrs, two false accusations (one correct but premature), solved
Artistic/Technical ratings: Engaging/Notable implementation gaps.
Would Play After Comp?: No, experience feels complete

Artistic/Technical ratings:
Artistic scale: Bouncy, Mechanical, Sparks of Joy, Engaging, Transcendent
Technical scale: Unplayable, Intrusive, Notable (Bugginess), Mostly Seamless, Seamless