Don't have time to read? Jump straight in to creating! Try Multic Free

January 21, 2025 12 min read

How to Make a Mystery Visual Novel: Design Compelling Investigations

Learn to create mystery visual novels with satisfying puzzles, fair clues, and branching investigations. Master the art of interactive detective stories.

Mystery visual novels face a unique challenge: you’re designing a puzzle where the reader actively participates. Get it right and players feel like genuine detectives. Get it wrong and they feel either cheated or bored.

Why Mysteries Work in Visual Novels

The format offers something mystery novels can’t:

Active Deduction: Instead of watching a detective solve the case, players gather clues, question suspects, and draw conclusions themselves. The “aha” moment belongs to them.

Branching Investigations: Different investigation choices reveal different information. Miss a clue, get a different picture. Players feel the weight of their detective work.

Multiple Truths: Mysteries can have wrong solutions that still make sense—and the story can explore what happens when you catch the wrong culprit, or miss crucial evidence.

Core Mystery VN Systems

Investigation Structure

Most mystery VNs use one of these structures:

Linear with Branches:

Crime occurs
    ↓
Investigation Phase (Player choice on who/where to investigate)
    ↓
Clues gathered (different based on choices)
    ↓
Confrontation/Accusation
    ↓
├── Correct Solution → True Ending
├── Partially Correct → Partial Ending
└── Wrong Solution → Bad Ending

Episode Structure:

Case 1 → Solution
Case 2 → Solution
Case 3 → Solution (connects to cases 1-2)
Final Case → All threads converge

Open Investigation:

Suspects/Locations available
    ↓
Player chooses investigation order
    ↓
Discoveries open new options
    ↓
Player can accuse when ready
    ↓
Ending depends on evidence gathered + accusation

Clue Systems

How you handle clues defines your mystery VN:

Automatic Collection:

Clues found automatically through story progression
Player focuses on interpretation
Lower frustration, less investigation feeling
Good for narrative-focused mysteries

Active Search:

Players must examine scenes, ask right questions
Miss clues = miss information
Can frustrate, but more satisfying when it works
Good for puzzle-focused mysteries

Hybrid Approach:

Essential clues found automatically
Optional clues require active investigation
Optional clues improve outcomes but aren’t required
Best of both worlds for most players

Deduction Mechanics

How players prove their solutions:

Accusation System:

Players accumulate evidence
Choose who to accuse
Result depends on evidence quality
Simple but can feel arbitrary

Logic Puzzle:

Players must connect clues
“Present evidence when asked”
Wrong answers have consequences
More engaging but complex to design

Debate/Trial System:

Back-and-forth with suspect or in court
Present evidence to counter claims
Wrong evidence weakens your case
Highly engaging but most complex

Designing Fair Mysteries

The Knox Decalogue (Adapted)

Ronald Knox’s rules for fair mystery fiction, adapted for VNs:

The criminal must be mentioned early - They should appear before the player can accuse
No supernatural solutions - Unless established as part of the world
No hidden passages without setup - Physical clues must be discoverable
No undiscovered poisons/tech - Tools of the crime must be established
No stereotyped culprits - Don’t let players solve it through genre savvy alone
No lucky accidents for the detective - The player’s choices should matter
The protagonist shouldn’t be the criminal - Unless that’s explicitly the game
Clues must be shown to the player - No secret observations
Sidekick perspective is honest - Don’t hide things the viewpoint character sees
Twins/doubles require setup - No surprise identical people

Clue Visibility

Players should be able to solve the mystery before the reveal:

First-Time Solvability:

All necessary clues must be available
Clues must be recognizable as significant (even if meaning isn’t clear)
Red herrings must be distinguishable with careful thought

Testing Fairness:

Have playtesters attempt to solve
Track where they accuse and why
If everyone fails or everyone succeeds immediately, adjust

The “Aha” Moment

Design for the moment of realization:

Building to “Aha”:

Present clues that seem unconnected
Let player pursue wrong directions
Add the final piece that recontextualizes everything
Player realizes the truth before accusation
Confirmation feels earned

Common “Aha” Triggers:

A clue that connects two unrelated observations
A contradiction in testimony
Realizing the timeline doesn’t work
Understanding a character’s hidden motive

Character Design for Mysteries

Suspects

Every suspect needs:

Motive: Why would they commit the crime? Means: Could they have done it? Opportunity: Were they able to?

Suspect Variety:

Suspect	Surface	Hidden Truth	Role
A	Obvious motive, seems guilty	Actually innocent	Red herring
B	No apparent connection	Secret connection to victim	Dark horse
C	Helpful, assists investigation	Actually guilty	The culprit
D	Suspicious behavior	Hiding unrelated secret	Complication

The Detective/Protagonist

Your viewpoint character needs:

Skills That Matter:

How do they investigate?
What’s their specialty?
What are they bad at?

Personal Stakes:

Why do they care about this case?
What happens if they fail?
Connection to victim, suspects, or crime?

Limitations:

Can’t know things players can’t know
Must have realistic blind spots
Shouldn’t solve it before players can

Supporting Cast

Essential Roles:

The Assistant/Sidekick:

Discusses clues with player
Can ask questions player might have
Sometimes sees things differently

The Authority:

Police, organization, whoever has power
Creates pressure/time limits
May oppose or support protagonist

The Information Source:

Knows context about setting, people
Helps explain background
May have own agenda

Writing Mystery Dialogue

Interrogation as Gameplay

Questioning suspects should feel active:

Interrogation Structure:

Initial statement (suspect’s version)
Player asks questions (choice-based)
Responses reveal information
Contradictions can be pressed
New questions unlock based on evidence

Question Types:

Open Questions:

“Tell me about the victim”
Reveal character perspective
Good for establishing baseline

Direct Questions:

“Where were you at 9 PM?”
Seek specific information
Can be lied about

Evidence Questions:

“How do you explain this?” (present clue)
Confront with discovered information
Most interactive, most rewarding

Making Testimony Interesting

Dialogue-heavy investigation needs variety:

Testimony Techniques:

Contradiction Watching:

"I was home alone all evening."
[Later, from another witness]
"I saw their car in the parking lot at 8 PM."

Revealing Character Through Response:

// Different suspects, same question
"How did you feel about the victim?"

SUSPECT A: "We were... colleagues. Professional relationship."
SUSPECT B: "Everyone loved him. I can't imagine who would... why?"
SUSPECT C: "What kind of question is that? Are you accusing me?"

Hidden Information: What suspects don’t say often matters more than what they do.

Red Herrings Without Frustration

Misdirection should be fun, not annoying:

Good Red Herrings:

Make sense in retrospect
Don’t waste excessive player time
Reveal something interesting even when dismissed
Could be true based on available information

Bad Red Herrings:

Rely on player ignorance of genre
Require arbitrary choices to dismiss
Lead nowhere at all
Are obviously false to careful players

Visual Design for Mystery VNs

Scene Investigation

How players search scenes:

Point-and-Click:

Players click on objects of interest
Most interactive, requires art consideration
Each clickable element needs content

Menu-Based:

“Examine bookshelf / desk / window”
Simpler to implement
Less immersive, but clearer options

Hybrid:

Key scenes use point-and-click
Minor locations use menus
Balances engagement and development time

Evidence Presentation

How clues are tracked and shown:

Evidence Screen:

Collected clues displayed
Can be reviewed anytime
Often include descriptions/notes
Essential for complex mysteries

Visual Design:

Each clue needs clear art
Important details visible
Consistent presentation style
Consider: notebook aesthetic, police file, character memory?

Character Expression in Mysteries

Suspects need readable expressions:

Mystery-Specific Expressions:

Neutral (baseline for comparison)
Nervous (hiding something)
Confident (telling truth or good liar?)
Surprised (genuine or performed?)
Angry (at accusation or at being caught?)
Sad (grief or guilt?)

The Challenge: Expressions should help observant players without making solutions obvious. Nervous doesn’t always mean guilty.

Branching and Endings

Investigation Consequences

Player choices during investigation should matter:

What Choices Affect:

Which clues are found
Suspect relationships (cooperative or hostile)
Time available for investigation
Which ending paths are accessible

Meaningful Investigation Choices:

You have time for one more interview before the deadline.
> Talk to the witness again (reveals alibi inconsistency)
> Search the victim's office (reveals hidden document)

[Both valuable; different evidence enables different accusations]

Ending Structures

Standard Mystery Endings:

True Ending:

Correct culprit identified
All evidence supports accusation
Complete understanding of motive/method

Partial Ending:

Correct culprit, incomplete evidence
Or: wrong culprit, but logical conclusion
Consequences for incomplete solution

Bad Ending:

Wrong culprit entirely
Might include “and then the real killer…”
Should feel like failure player could have avoided

Advanced Structures:

Multiple Viable Culprits:

Evidence supports more than one solution
Player chooses who to accuse
Each accusation leads to different “truth”
Philosophical: is there one truth or many?

Wrong Culprit Route:

Full route exploring wrong accusation
Shows consequences of mistake
Eventually reveals real culprit
Longer investment in failure state

Common Mistakes

The Impossible Solution

If players can’t reasonably solve the mystery, they feel cheated:

Problems:

Crucial clue hidden in missable content
Solution requires knowledge players couldn’t have
Leap of logic too large

Fixes:

Multiple paths to essential information
All knowledge available before accusation
Clear thread connecting clues to solution

The Obvious Solution

If everyone solves it immediately, there’s no game:

Problems:

Culprit acts too suspiciously
Not enough viable alternatives
Genre savvy easily identifies pattern

Fixes:

Legitimate red herrings
Culprit has apparent alibi/lack of motive
Subvert genre expectations

Pixel Hunting

Point-and-click investigation shouldn’t be frustrating:

Problems:

Important clues in illogical locations
Tiny clickable areas
Required items hidden in cluttered scenes

Fixes:

Clues in logical places
Generous click detection
Highlight system for interactive elements
Alternative paths to information

The Lecture Solution

Long explanation scenes kill pacing:

Problems:

Detective explains everything in monologue
No player participation in reveal
Information dump at the end

Fixes:

Players piece together explanation
Accusation scene involves interaction
Spread revelation across confrontation

Technical Implementation

Evidence Management

Track clues effectively:

Data to Track:

Clue ID
Where/when discovered
Categories (physical, testimony, circumstantial)
Who it implicates
Connections to other clues

Player Interface:

Evidence review accessible anytime
Filter/sort options for large inventories
Notes system for player theories

Conversation State

Track dialogue for consistency:

Track:

What each character has said
What topics have been covered
Relationship changes from interactions
Contradictions found

Testing Mysteries

Mystery VNs need extensive testing:

Test For:

Solvability (can players reach correct solution?)
Fairness (is necessary information available?)
Pacing (do players engage throughout?)
Red herring effectiveness (do wrong paths interest without frustrating?)

Getting Started

Your mystery VN action plan:

Design the crime first
- What happened?
- Who did it and why?
- How can this be discovered?
Work backward for clues
- What evidence would exist?
- Who would know what?
- What can and can’t be hidden?
Add misdirection
- Who else had motive?
- What innocent explanations exist for suspicious evidence?
- What unrelated secrets complicate investigation?
Map investigation flow
- What’s the critical path?
- What’s optional but helpful?
- How do choices affect outcomes?
Test ruthlessly
- Fresh players, no hints
- Track where they succeed and fail
- Adjust difficulty accordingly

For collaborative mystery development—where writers, puzzle designers, and artists need to coordinate complex branching investigations—Multic offers visual story tools that help teams track how clues connect across different investigation paths. The node-based system is particularly useful for mapping the logic of interactive mysteries.

The perfect mystery gives players everything they need to solve it—then makes them work for the solution. What crime will you design?