I have always felt that RED LAND has a rather unique positioning. Compared to other large-scale exhibitions focused mainly on showcasing games, it leans more towards a "theme park" style experience. Not only does the official description call it a "2D Open World Adventure Island Event," but participants also immerse themselves as "protagonists," checking in, interacting, and collecting items, as if blending the virtual with reality. Naturally, under this interactive "theme park" theme, many exhibitors chose to set up various types of interactive mini-games at their booths, rather than simply placing a few computers for trial plays.
Among these, the booth for Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion stood out as particularly unique. They set up a sizable audio installation experience area, where audiences could investigate cases relying on hearing within four independent spaces connected by corridors. Simply put, players piece together the complete story by listening to plot recordings from different perspectives in different rooms while moving freely.
For players who have previously played Unheard, this experience is surely familiar—or rather, this unique puzzle-solving experience centered around sound, allowing players to seek the truth themselves, remains one-of-a-kind. It is precisely this uniqueness that makes it unforgettable.
As the spiritual successor to Unheard, can Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion, debuting in a unique format at RED LAND, continue this irreplaceable experience? We were fortunate to interview Loka, the producer of Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion. From this special offline audio detective experience to new scriptwriting, puzzle design, and the creative philosophy upheld over the past seven years... he shared many behind-the-scenes stories about Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion with us.
Below is the full interview transcript:
Q: At RED LAND, Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion did not offer direct game trials. Instead, the core gameplay was transformed into an offline immersive audio detective experience. Why did you choose this method to showcase the game?
Loka:There are two main reasons. First, our game demo had already been showcased at the Shenzhen stop of the Fusion Game Festival, and we were entering the voice-over production phase, so showcasing the demo again wouldn't add much value. Second, after arriving at RED LAND, we felt that attendees valued the on-site gameplay experience, similar to a theme park. Setting up computers for people to sit and play the demo with a mouse felt like a waste... It was better to immerse players in the park-like atmosphere, offering an experience different from controlling a mouse on a PC.
Moreover, this game is naturally well-suited for such live-action experiences—we simulate spaces of different rooms in the game. Players hear conversations between different people and control a small character moving around rooms to collect fragmented audio clues. If this system is built into a physical room, using your legs instead of a mouse, it might actually be more interesting.
For instance, I walk into one room and hear a strange sound; then I move to another room and discover that the two people I heard earlier were lying; moving further, I realize that someone might not be who they claimed to be, or that their statement didn't mean what I initially thought. This process creates a strong sense of discovery.
Another difference is that in online games, a painting or a safe is essentially just artwork rendered as scenery. But in a physical room, you can actually touch and pick up the paintings on the wall, and pick up items from the floor. For instance, if a character says, "Did you find the real painting?" and another replies, "No, they're everywhere on the ground."
Players on-site will genuinely see paintings scattered across walls and floors. Since the characters in the story are searching, players naturally think, "I should try looking too." Even when the plot mentions that "only the painting with 14 petals is the real one," players will actively search for which painting has exactly 14 petals, creating a synesthetic experience.
Q: So, do you think this is the biggest difference between this live-action experience and the online game?
Loka:Correct. The biggest difference is that you can physically interact, and there are fewer obvious boundary restrictions.
In online games, separated by a screen, your primary interaction is limited to a mouse. But here, you can do whatever the characters in the drama are doing—if they are counting petals on a painting or searching for the real artwork, you can do the same. You encounter the same confusions they do, which makes it very interesting.
We don't have NPCs on-site, only speakers. The time experienced by the characters in the speakers flows at the same rate as the players' real-time. For example, while characters are talking, one might suddenly say, "You scared me! Where did you come from?" and another replies, "I came through the front door." In that moment, players feel as if someone really appeared behind them in the room and spoke. So, beyond spatial immersion, there is also a sense of temporal synchronization.
Of course, calling it a "script murder mystery" isn't entirely accurate. Script murder mysteries typically involve reviewing past events through text and having players assume specific roles. Our approach is different: you are directly investigating a crime, essentially returning to the crime scene. Whatever happens to the characters in the next second, you experience in that same second—what they discuss in the first minute, what they discover in the third minute, players progress through this timeline sequentially.
Q: Are the puzzles in this live-action experience taken directly from the game, or were they redesigned specifically for the offline event?
Loka:At first, we considered directly porting an online level, as done in some previous game exhibitions. But we later realized it wasn't suitable, because in a live-action experience, human interaction and information acquisition methods differ significantly from online gameplay.
The advantage is that players can truly touch exhibits and walk between rooms, deciding where to go with their own legs. However, the disadvantages are obvious—you lack the ability to manipulate the timeline, and there is no UI to view. Hints that would normally be provided to online players are entirely absent offline, actually increasing the difficulty significantly. Therefore, to leverage the strengths of the offline format while avoiding these issues, we tried various approaches and ultimately concluded that a dedicated script had to be redesigned.
Additionally, offline experiences require physically building rooms. High-rise buildings or large theaters that might appear in the game are unsuitable for replication at exhibitions. Puzzles in the game that are overly complex or heavily reliant on timelines are difficult to express offline, yet they cannot be made too simple. If players wait in line for a long time only to finish a level quickly with no follow-up content, their experience suffers. Therefore, the difficulty, character movement speed, and even character voices and accents for the offline version must be redesigned.
For example, online, different characters can be represented by different colored halos and labeled with names. But offline, without a UI, you can only determine "is this person the same as the one before?" through sound. Therefore, distinct vocal timbres are crucial. Differences such as gender, accents, dialects, stuttering, or other unique speech patterns must be pronounced enough so that players can distinguish between four or five people solely by voice. This is actually quite challenging to achieve.
Finally, we customized Everythinggj, conducted tests, made revisions based on those tests, and adjusted the script accordingly. Essentially, it amounted to creating a completely new gameplay system.
Q: Have you observed the players' experiences on-site over the past few days?
Loka:Yes, I basically stayed behind the players the whole time, observing their reasoning processes, analysis, and especially their expressions. I was secretly pleased when I saw their expressions change dramatically.
Some players frown deeply while listening, appearing very distressed. Then, upon hearing a key detail, they go "Ah!", lean their heads back, and their brows instantly relax. At that moment, I feel secretly delighted—because it means they understood the puzzle I wrote, achieving the satisfaction of solving it, thus fulfilling the game's objective.
Q: Did players' actual exploration methods match your design expectations? Were there any unexpected choices?
Loka:Yes. Initially, we anticipated that players might move according to the characters' actions in the plot, such as when to scatter or regroup. However, once offline, we found that players exercised great creativity. If they intuitively suspected someone was the culprit, they might follow that person around the entire venue, investigating along the way.
His investigation method is completely unrestricted by level designers, aligning more closely with the feeling of "being a detective oneself," which I find more satisfying. Traditional detective puzzle games are often constrained by plot progression—if you don't unlock the previous lock, you won't see the next one; if you can't guess the previous password, you might not even know what the next puzzle is. However, since the offline experience is fully open-ended, players even create puzzles for themselves. Among four or five people, you can choose whom to identify or suspect first. I decide whom to follow with my own legs; if I suspect a room, I keep watching it.
Once, there was absolutely no sound in a certain room, yet two players stayed there, refusing to leave. They said, "We've investigated all the other rooms, and we believe the key clue is in this restroom." I told them there was no one in the restroom currently, and the subsequent plot events were taking place in other rooms. They insisted, "It doesn't matter. We've figured it out. The key clue will definitely appear in the restroom in three minutes." They were that certain.
Q: Did they guess correctly?
Loka:They guessed correctly. Because they had connected all the clues from the other rooms, they were certain that the remaining characters would eventually come to the restroom.
Q: Does this level of agency also mean the script is harder to write?
Loka:Exactly. You must ensure that no matter how a player interprets things, they won't completely miss information due to different movement paths, nor end up with a completely wrong conclusion. However, during their journey toward the final goal, everyone can take different routes.
One person might suspect you first, another might suspect me, and a third might suspect someone else—it's all possible. Who is suspected first or last doesn't matter, as long as everyone eventually reaches the correct conclusion. This ensures that each player has a unique experience.
Q: Will the feedback from this offline event influence the development of Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion?
Loka:There will be some mutual benefit. Some aspects are universal across online and offline platforms—for instance, when players first obtain a fragment of information, they feel, "Hey, I got a new piece of info." That feels good. Then, interpreting second and third layers of meaning from that information provides another layer of satisfaction.
When creating online demos previously, you couldn't see players' expressions, know where they would actually go, or hear real-time conversations among friends.
For example, two people analyzing together: one says, "I think Person A is suspicious." The other immediately responds, "I think Person B is problematic too. Neither of them is good—didn't you notice? There was something off about what he said earlier."
This kind of real-time interaction was hard to obtain in previous online tests, where you could only ask after they finished playing: "Did you enjoy it?" And they would simply reply, "Yes."
This feedback is actually quite vague. But offline, you can see them listening, suddenly exchanging glances, and then rushing to another room. You immediately know: their information aligned at that moment, and their understanding of the plot converged here. This type of feedback is universal.
Of course, there are aspects that don't translate universally. For instance, in offline scenarios without a UI, determining how characters disperse or gather, or whether a room is currently occupied, can lead to misjudgments. A player might think someone is inside when there is no one, or think there are two people when there are actually three. These are unique narrative design challenges for offline experiences.
Therefore, if we continue to create live-action experiences in the future, I believe online and offline versions will likely gradually develop into two distinct logical frameworks. Online versions will follow online narrative design, challenges, and experiences; offline versions will specifically target physical interactions, human movement speeds, and the difficulty of receiving information without a UI, taking a different route. Including this current offline version, it will not be directly inserted into the main storyline of the online game.
Q: Let's return to the game itself. It has been seven years since Unheard, and many players consider it an irreplaceable work. What do you think is the core experience of the predecessor that Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion must not lose?
Loka:I believe the most essential element to retain is fragmented narrative puzzle-solving—allowing players to obtain fragmented information through their own efforts and free actions, piece them together, uncover the truth, and gain a sense of achievement from the process.
Additionally, there are two other aspects:
From my perspective as an author, I want to maintain certain authorial traits, including grounded voice acting, natural character speech patterns, and the variability of interpersonal relationships.
From the player's experience perspective, I want them to feel a sense of "god-like overview" of this world. They can investigate in their own imagined way, rather than being confined to a lock-picking-style procedural investigation. This should also distinguish it from other puzzle games.
Q: As a game heavily reliant on auditory cues, players may use headphones, speakers, or various other devices. How do you design audio clues to prevent device differences from affecting player deduction?
Loka:This has been one of my principles since the initial puzzle design phase.
When I first started making audio detective games, many people suggested playing with "audio gimmicks." For example, hearing a needle drop on the floor serves as a clue, or distinguishing between two people approaching—one wearing high heels and the other leather shoes—based on their footsteps.
But upon further reflection, I realized I shouldn't test players in this way. If I truly missed the sound of a needle dropping, or if I'm just less sensitive to audio details and can't distinguish between high heels and leather shoes, the entire puzzle might become unsolvable.
Later, when someone tells me, "Didn't you hear that the sound was different?" I realize that was the test point, and the sense of frustration becomes very strong.
Therefore, although it is an audio puzzle game, I prefer not to use extremely subtle sound differences as key clues, because the frustration they cause players likely far outweighs the sense of achievement.
Players originally came for the story, but missing an extra piece of audio midway ruined their entire narrative experience. Therefore, I embed most clues within the plot and dialogue, often repeating important information two or three times as hints.
Some people suggested that since it's an audio puzzle game, we could naturally incorporate Morse code. For example, someone in a room emits sounds like "beep, beep-beep, beep-beep-beep," which players record and decode to reveal hidden plot points. I would absolutely never do this—in my games, I will never use Morse code because it starts testing players' additional knowledge reserves. Some people don't understand Morse code at all; they might not even know how to record long and short tones properly. Should they record based on the length of the "beep" or the gaps in between? Many people don't know. Therefore, I avoid testing knowledge reserves; this is a matter of authorial integrity.
If others making similar games choose to do so, that's fine; I won't judge right or wrong. But for my own works, I won't include such elements. I prefer scenarios where, for example, a player first hears someone say, "You must be Master Shao, the painter, right?" and the other replies, "Huh? Who are you?"
Upon first hearing it, you might think this person has already admitted to being Master Shao. But after listening to other parts of the plot and returning to this segment, you suddenly realize: he never actually admitted to being Master Shao; he just went along with the assumption. At this point, players only need basic life experience to realize, "So this person is lying."
The switch between truth and lies is something everyone can understand through life experience. Similarly, whether using $100 headphones or $10 ones, it's unlikely anyone would mistake a gunshot for a door slam. We rely on such common knowledge reserves, aiming to keep the difficulty at this accessible level.
Q: Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion sets its story background within a TV variety challenge show—why did you come up with the idea of a "variety show"?
Loka:We considered what kind of scenario would make the appearance of the "Voice Detective Machine" interesting. Personally, I enjoy watching unusual variety shows, so combining the Voice Detective Machine with a variety show felt natural. Variety shows inherently contain elements of truth and deception, along with a strong competitive nature. Therefore, we felt that incorporating a variety show into the game would create an atmosphere particularly suited for the Voice Detective Machine and its gameplay mechanics.
Q: Is the "variety show" merely a story background, or will it participate more deeply in the script, puzzles, and gameplay?
Loka:I hope players initially perceive the game just as an idea, leaving further judgments to their own discretion after playing.
If you still interpret it as "just a variety show" after playing... well, continuing further would involve spoilers.
Before playing, just treat it as a variety show; there's no need for excessive concern.
Q: Voice Detective: Cloud of Suspicion mentions "Dongshan" again, including the TV station where the program is located, called "Dongshan TV Station." How will you expand the "Dongshan" worldview this time?
Loka:I was born in Taiyuan, Shanxi, and grew up in the Dongshan (East Mountain) area of Taiyuan, so the name "Dongshan" had a significant impact on my childhood. Later, when writing Unheard, I needed a location for a police station explosion case. It suddenly occurred to me that setting it in Dongshan might be a good idea.
The name "Dongshan" (East Mountain) doesn't seem to point explicitly to a specific real-world location, but upon reflection, it isn't entirely fictional either. So, I casually used "Dongshan" as the background. However, as I wrote more, I realized it gradually constructed a worldview, becoming a stage. Unfortunately, I didn't have the opportunity to fully develop it at the time. Now, with an independent IP, I hope to make the "Dongshan" worldview more complete.
Of course, players do not need to know what happened in the previous work, nor should they feel pressured to do so. The new installment can be treated as a fresh start, allowing players to get to know the people of Dongshan and the events that occurred there from scratch. Thus, "Dongshan" is merely a symbol and a stage within this worldview, upon which many more interconnected elements will be added in the future.
Q: The map structure in this installment is more complex than in Unheard, incorporating side views and maps with depth. What new possibilities does this bring to puzzle design?
Loka:Actually, when making Unheard, I considered implementing a side view, but I couldn't find suitable puzzles to match it at the time. If the plot and puzzles don't require a side view, changing the perspective merely shows off technical skills unnecessarily. Players learn from the tutorial that it's a top-down game and continue playing that way. Their main focus is on the story, not the perspective itself. So, this time, I wanted to make up for past regrets. Later, we finally conceived some plot points that genuinely required a side view and vertical space, allowing us to truly implement it.
Q: How will these map changes affect scriptwriting?
Loka:It should be said that the map design followed the needs of the script. Because once the map allows vertical movement, characters are no longer restricted to entering through doors and exiting through windows as in previous flat maps. When characters can move vertically, many new possibilities naturally emerge for connecting plot points.
Therefore, we didn't decide "we want to make a side-view game" and then force the plot into it. Rather, certain plot points required this type of movement, leading to such a map design. We created many discarded drafts and attempts before finally finding a suitable application point, which led us to break this limitation.
Q: For you, what is the biggest difference between creating scripts for this type of game and creating ordinary films or novels?
Loka:Traditional detective novels usually feature a great detective who arrives at the scene, finds clues, and receives true or false testimonies from various characters during the investigation. In classic deductive reasoning, readers often experience 90% of the story before entering the final 10% dedicated to solving the mystery. At this point, the great detective steps forward and says, "I already know the truth." In a sense, it's an intellectual competition with the reader. The reader might wonder, "How did he suddenly find the truth?" Then the detective explains, "All the clues were there all along." He then highlights the previously mentioned elements, and everyone exclaims, "The detective is so brilliant; he noticed all these details."
But in my game, there is no such "great detective" character because the player is the detective. Why can the great detective in traditional novels solve mysteries? Often, it's because they possess extraordinary knowledge. For example, Holmes sees a footprint and determines the shoe size; noticing the left imprint is deeper than the right, he deduces the person might be lame; seeing red clay on the sole, he knows it only exists on a construction road one kilometer away. Readers think, "Holmes is amazing."
But in a game, what if players don't have this knowledge? How would they know what a deeper left footprint means? How would they recognize that specific red clay? Therefore, I prefer to embed both the clues and the solutions within the game itself.
Moreover, the game features a draggable timeline that players can scrub directly to the last minute to listen. This approach would be almost unacceptable in traditional detective novels or dramas. Imagine skipping to the final minute of a detective show—the screenwriter would probably say, "How can you watch it like that? Holmes is already solving the mystery." Once the solution is revealed, there's no point in watching the rest.
But our storyline isn't like that. You can absolutely skip to the last minute. I've seen many streamers play "Unheard" this way—they listen to no clues initially, just jump to the end: "Oh, the police station exploded." That's fine because even if you know the result beforehand, you still don't know the truth. You'll still need to go back and review, perhaps thinking, "Who is the culprit? It can't be this person; they were blown up too."
Q: So, compared to simply knowing the outcome, is the game more about understanding why things happened?
Loka:Exactly. The key is to embed the question of "why did this happen" throughout the process, letting players discover it themselves.
This is also the biggest difference from films and TV shows—so, when creating something like this, it's difficult to draw direct inspiration from traditional detective dramas or novels.
Q: During creation, how do you ensure that no matter which thread players listen to first, which character they follow, or even if they skip to the end, the final mystery still holds together?
Loka:During this creative process, I have to induce a kind of "schizophrenia" in my mind, roughly divided into two types:
The first approach is to embody the characters. I ask myself: What is this person experiencing right now? What do they see? What are their life goals? What do they want to achieve in this story? For example, do they want to steal a painting, frame someone, uncover a truth, kill someone, or just make some money? Will their goals change throughout the story? Do they ultimately achieve them?
For example, his accomplice might appear to be there to steal a painting, but is that really their goal? Perhaps they're pretending to steal the painting while actually aiming for something else, like killing someone. So, I need to step into each character's shoes and consider their life goals to see if their presence in the story makes sense. If it doesn't, that character shouldn't exist in the script and should be removed. Then, I look at how different characters' goals conflict with each other and weave those elements together.
This is the first type of "schizophrenia."
The second approach is to embody the player. After entering the game, players must choose a thread to follow. Some might start by eavesdropping in the bathroom, others in the living room. Players have their own legs and, considering themselves detectives, will have their own investigation methods. So I have to consider: If they arrive here first, what will they see? Will seeing certain key information too early significantly diminish the subsequent narrative experience? If so, I need to make changes.
So, while adjusting the logic of the characters, I also have to adjust the order in which players receive information. I can't restrict how players move; I can only modify the script and the placement of clues.
Q: When designing these characters, were their dialogue lines, tone, and rhythm already planned during the scriptwriting phase?
Loka:For me, tone comes first. For example, when designing an interview scene, I first consider what the interviewer's life goal is. Do they genuinely want to interview the other person? Are they trying to extract information to frame them? Or are they deliberately stalling to allow someone else to steal their car?
With different goals, their words during an interview will naturally carry hidden meanings. For example, they might suddenly ask, "Teacher, did you come alone today? Is there anyone else in the car outside?" On the surface, it sounds like a casual question, but if their real intention is to steal the car, then the word "alone" becomes the key point.
So, I first simulate the character's mindset in my head to find their tone. Only once the tone feels right do I start writing. In fact, the written script serves more like a memo for me. When we reach the actual recording session, I'll reiterate the tone I initially imagined to the voice actors, ensuring they don't just read the text flatly.
If it were just a text-based game, you might have to highlight the words "alone" in red, bold, or with emphasis so players notice the issue on the first read. But with audio, you might not think anything is wrong with "Did you come alone?" the first time you hear it. Later, when that person's car is stolen, you suddenly realize, "Wait, why did that reporter specifically ask if they came alone?" Then you go back and listen again, thinking, "Ah, so that reporter was suspicious."
This satisfaction is achieved by the players themselves—"I finally understand why he asked about 'alone' at that time." If the keyword were highlighted in red in the first minute, saying "this is an important clue," it wouldn't be interesting. This kind of realization must come later, upon reflection, to be truly engaging.
Behind-the-scenes of "Voice Detective: Suspicion" voice recording, with Loka explaining the script in the recording studio
Q: Will you invite the voice actors from the previous game to return? Will old players hear some familiar voices?
Loka:I've discussed this with the voice actors from the previous game, but I believe it's more important for players to remember the characters themselves rather than who voiced them.
For example, there's a hospital nurse who has her own way of speaking. I prefer players to hear her and immediately think, "This is a nurse," rather than realizing, "This nurse is voiced by the same actor as so-and-so from the previous game," which could actually break immersion.
The voice actors feel the same way. They prefer that the nurse they portray sounds like a nurse, rather than reminding people of other characters they've voiced before. A nurse is a nurse, an actor is an actor, and other characters are other characters.
Q: At what stage is the overall development of "Voice Detective: Suspicion" currently?
Loka:We're in the final stages. The script is basically polished, and the next step is voice recording. After integrating the voices into the game, we'll conduct testing. If any issues arise, we'll do additional recording.
Right now, we're basically in a phase of continuous polishing.
Q: Has the script been the most time-consuming part of the entire development process so far?
Loka:Yes, the script. We've been polishing the script for a year and a half. We started in March 2025 and have been refining it ever since.
Q: When can players expect to play the demo? What content will it include?
Loka:We expect to complete the demo before the end of this year. It will include the first one or two levels of the game, and the rest of the story will be available in the full version.
Q: What is the release plan for the full version?
Loka:We are working with our publishing partners to advance the release plan. Currently, there are two main tasks: voice testing and level tuning, as well as preparations for overseas distribution, which are taking more time than anticipated.
In short, I estimate the official launch might be around February or March 2027.
Q: Previously, "Unheard" gained popularity largely through live streams and videos, but mystery games are naturally vulnerable to spoilers. How do you view the contradiction between live streaming promotion and spoilers when making "Voice Detective: Suspicion"?
Loka:I've always considered my work to be a niche game. It's not the type that naturally generates massive traffic. If some people like it and are willing to play, I'm quite happy.
When more people appreciate the work and laugh while playing, I already feel a sense of accomplishment. I don't worry too much about potential buyers being deterred because streamers spoiled the plot.
For a niche game like this, having people willing to stream it is definitely a good thing.
Q: Old players have been waiting for this type of game for seven years. What part of the new work are you most worried might not meet their expectations for a "spiritual successor"?
Loka:What I fear most is losing that authentic experience. I'm terrified that players will finish the game and say, "It's not like before," or feel that the overall experience is somehow off. That's what I want to avoid. So, I hope this work stays as true to the original flavor as possible.
Actually, I've made many other games over these seven years and had plenty of other ideas. People have offered me lots of suggestions. For instance, someone suggested dropping a pin and using that sound as a suspenseful clue; or having a room that won't open until you solve a combination lock to enter and listen to the sounds inside... All these ideas were proposed, but I rejected them because I wanted to preserve the authentic experience.
I can explore other ideas in different works. For example, some suggested adding visual elements. After listening to a room, a photo could pop up, providing players with additional visual clues, as listening to audio alone might become tedious... I rejected this suggestion too, as I believe it's essential to maintain the original flavor.
Q: Why have you persisted with this audio-based mystery direction for seven years?
Loka:Because when I create and write these things, I still feel a strong sense of accomplishment. For example, if I write a character who is funny, and later their facade is exposed by others, I find myself laughing while writing. It's like an author crafting a joke and then discovering that others truly get it—I feel happy and motivated to keep creating such content.
I might be different from other game developers. I care more about whether others understand my humor. This sense of accomplishment is very important to me. I want to communicate with players and hope to find a group of people who resonate with me. This is the joy of creation and the motivation to keep going.
Q: Finally, do you have any words for the players who have been waiting for "Voice Detective: Suspicion"?
Loka:I hope everyone will wait patiently and be a bit more forgiving. After all, this is a relatively niche indie game. Various errors and trials are inevitable during development, so we hope for your understanding.
Of course, we also welcome your suggestions. I pay attention to feedback on Xiaohongshu and QQ groups, watch videos on Bilibili—not just my own, but also other streamers' broadcasts—and read comments under videos. So, please feel free to communicate with me.
If you have any good suggestions or stories you'd like to hear, please feel free to share your feedback with me.
