Some thoughts on replaying escape rooms
- H
- 4 days ago
- 2 min read

As at the date of this blog post, I've played two escape rooms twice: The Dame and the Diamond at Studio Escape in Osaka, and Intruders at Mission Escape in Sydney. Both times, it's because a member (or members) of the family missed out on it the first time, and I felt the room was so good that they ought to play it.
Replaying an escape room is not something I had expected to do because it's expensive enough just to play a room once, though a second play-through does offer a very different kind of experience and some insights. Here are my thoughts:
A second play-through is never as fun as the first. It made me realise that one of the main determining factors of how good I think an escape room is lies in the surprises and "wow" factor. When you've seen something before — even though it can still impress you the second time around and make you see details you might have missed the first time — it saps a lot of the excitement and adrenaline. This is especially so for horror-themed rooms.
The presence of a player who has already played the room before affects other players negatively as well. For The Dame and the Diamond, E was the only one playing it for the first time, and even though we tried to let her do as much as possible, the kids were probably too eager and inadvertently assisted more than they should have. For Intruders, I was the only one who had played it before, and though I tried to be as passive as possible, I may have also unconsciously given away things just from my reactions.
The second play-through feels really fast. Though the times we spent in the rooms the second time around was probably only marginally longer than the first time, the experience felt super quick, likely because we already knew what was coming next. The immersion definitely takes a big hit.
The GM plays a huge part in the player experience. This was not something I believed in the past. For The Dame and the Diamond, our GM the second time was the same GM who messed up For Queen and Country for us last time, and he was indeed a little slow (and loud) in activating certain things. Consequently, our first play-through definitely felt like a smoother experience. For Intruders, our second "director" was not as good as the first one. There was a distinct lack of enthusiasm that detracted from the immersion, and let's just say she's not going to win any Oscars for her ability to "act scared". Moreover, the other live actor in the second play-through was smaller in stature than the first, and thus less imposing and terrifying. We also had 5 people the second time around compared to just 2 the first time, and that made a noticeable difference in the scare factor too.
In other words, I hope I don't have to replay an escape room again. Intruders is probably the only one I would say was worth it, because it's more an immersive theatre experience that relies less on puzzles.
Comments