Hunam_ Hunam_

Main storyline quest. Will we have RGB explosions in the end?

▼

Main storyline quest. Will we have RGB explosions in the end?

from StarControl Forums

I'm slightly concerned with this issue since ME was brutally butchered by the last 5 minutes of the game.

The questions are:

a) will we have categorically different multiple (at least 3) endings?

b ) will there be fail ending(s)? (SC2 had it in a form of an ugly time limit)

c) will it be banal good vs evil or something interesting?.. (like ME, but not entirely like SC2)

 

Here's an example of a main quest tree:

Cool things about it:

a) you CAN fail

b ) even after your first couple of choices you can still return to the opposite side of "spectrum"

c) even after you're through the half of the Red storyline you still can achieve the Green ending

d) having chosen "positive" actions through the half of the Green storyline will not guarantee your win

e) one of the choices "l" presents you with an opportunity to make all 5 available final choices, 2 of which will make you fail (not that the player would know)

 

If half of the storyline choices will be "gray" (not clearly positive or negative) then it'll make the player think about his decisions a little more than I'll click green, 'cause I'm paragon or red 'cause I'm renegade. If you got really creative writers then some choices can be made to look negative when presented and the end would reveal them to be positive and otherwise. Ex.: some bad bad race lost their war and you have a choice to dearm and leave them to themselves (positively gray choice), subjugate them (negatively gray choice) or kill them off (negative choice). So, the first choice isn't necessarily "good" as they can potentially "close-up" for future revenge with guierilla tactics. Second is also not necessarily "bad" as they realize their "bad" way and reform their mentality making them a good good race. Third option will prevent any future negative outcomes, but is a very negative act in itself (from humanity standpoint). The way player predicts his choice outcome when choosing can be realized in form of verbal nudges from other characters preceding the choice event. If Tywom and Mukay both say that you better kill off that bad race, but Tywom are your enemies and Mukay are your allies, than maybe Mukay are wrong and you should keep that race alive since the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Something like that.

268,739 views 81 replies
Reply #51 from StarControl Forums Top

It just seems whiny to me to complain just because you lost. 40+ is so light. Completion isn't as important as substance within completion. Substance > all else. And losing is part of that formula, or you're better off not gaming at all.

Reply #52 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Volusianus, reply 51

It just seems whiny to me to complain just because you lost. 40+ is so light. Completion isn't as important as substance within completion. Substance > all else. And losing is part of that formula, or you're better off not gaming at all.

 

This is why I think you are actually in the minority when it comes to losing. (And that's okay for you to think that.) Most PCMRs don't have your diligence and tenacity. If they get a losing ending, they will rage. Or they will load an older save. Or they will watch a video of the successful endings (and still rage). Or they will shelve the game, intending to play it again but never getting around to it. There are only a few people like you that would persevere and reinvest that 40+ hours. 

 

Also remember that while losing is a part of certain genres of gaming, it does not have to be part of every game (apart from a game over screen, but even that is debatable). Would you honestly enjoy a story driven game less if there was no way to fail?

 

I wouldn't... There was no way for me to fail in Tales from the Borderlands or in mad max, but I enjoyed the ride nonetheless. I enjoyed... the substance. ;)

Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #53 from StarControl Forums Top

It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die, mistakes are made. Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending. Fury Road is one of my favorite films of the past 2 decades, but I still feel like the ending was ruined by time constraints that more or less forced Miller to make a shitty happy ending that was a COMPLETE about face in terms of tone and logic. Also, please don't mention Telltale "games" are not games, they are interactive media (which are still a valid form of entertainment, just not the same as a proper game).

Reply #54 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Volusianus, reply 53

It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die, mistakes are made. Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending.

That may be why games were initially created, but that isn't the main reason why people play them. Games, books, and movies are escapism. Escapism is avoiding consequences. They are also entertainment, something to pass the time.

People aren't playing to fail. They are playing to be entertained. (And I understand that you are the tenacious and diligent gaming minority that likes to fail and retry 40+ hours. I know you are different.)

 

Quoting Volusianus, reply 53

Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending. Fury Road is one of my favorite films of the past 2 decades, but I still feel like the ending was ruined by time constraints that more or less forced Miller to make a shitty happy ending that was a COMPLETE about face in terms of tone and logic.

Go take a look at the posts I had with Hunam. This is exactly what I'm talking about. I want satisfying endings. They don't need to be happy. It just needs to have narrative support to make me feel satisfied when the credits roll.

 

Quoting Volusianus, reply 53

Also, please don't mention Telltale "games" are not games, they are interactive media (which are still a valid form of entertainment, just not the same as a proper game).

They are games. They may not have hours of mindless killing in between the cut scene segments, but they offer a narrative just like many other games do.  I'm including them, and you're going to have to live with it. :P

Reply #55 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Volusianus, reply 53

It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die, mistakes are made. Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending. Fury Road is one of my favorite films of the past 2 decades, but I still feel like the ending was ruined by time constraints that more or less forced Miller to make a shitty happy ending that was a COMPLETE about face in terms of tone and logic. Also, please don't mention Telltale "games" are not games, they are interactive media (which are still a valid form of entertainment, just not the same as a proper game).

Reply #56 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 55


Quoting Volusianus,
reply 53

It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die, mistakes are made. Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending. Fury Road is one of my favorite films of the past 2 decades, but I still feel like the ending was ruined by time constraints that more or less forced Miller to make a shitty happy ending that was a COMPLETE about face in terms of tone and logic. Also, please don't mention Telltale "games" are not games, they are interactive media (which are still a valid form of entertainment, just not the same as a proper game).


Game designers are not scientists, they are illusionists.  Most games you have played, it was not possible for you to lose.  You just haven't noticed that because game design is largely about creating illusions and tricking the player into believing the game is more than it is.

 

Reply #57 from StarControl Forums Top

Most Casual* games. I design games myself, I understand the man behind the curtain. The fact that death in a game is nothing more than a mild inconvenience is a problem.

Quoting IBNobody, reply 54



They are games. They may not have hours of mindless killing in between the cut scene segments, but they offer a narrative just like many other games do.  I'm including them, and you're going to have to live with it. :P

I never said killing was what made a game a game, that's ignorant and asinine. There's plenty of GAMES that involve no action, that hold the same value of consequences that I hold dear. However, Telltale stories are no more games than "The Mountain" was a game. Playing games that aren't mainstream, you'll find actual non-combat games all over the place. Decent ones too. And a lot of these have $5-$15 pricetags. 

But you know what? That's not the point of this thread. I agree with Hunam's original sentiments that the various endings should matter, and not just be three flavors of the same garbage. Now, to be fair, the (spoiler-FREE :D You're welcome) endings weren't particularly BAD they were just...very disappointing with all of that build-up over 3 games.

Reply #58 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Volusianus, reply 57

I never said killing was what made a game a game, that's ignorant and asinine. There's plenty of GAMES that involve no action, that hold the same value of consequences that I hold dear. However, Telltale stories are no more games than "The Mountain" was a game. Playing games that aren't mainstream, you'll find actual non-combat games all over the place. Decent ones too. And a lot of these have $5-$15 pricetags. 

I never said that killing made a game either. That's you jumping to conclusions in your haste to exclude these games with strong narratives from the discussion. They are valid in this discussion, especially because they show how to support a tragedy.

 

Quoting Volusianus, reply 57

But you know what? That's not the point of this thread. I agree with Hunam's original sentiments that the various endings should matter, and not just be three flavors of the same garbage. Now, to be fair, the (spoiler-FREE You're welcome) endings weren't particularly BAD they were just...very disappointing with all of that build-up over 3 games.

The conversation is starting to become cyclical here, so I'll just summarize. You, Hunam, and I all want choices to matter. We all want to have satisfying endings. The difference is that you want non-satisfying failure endings because you feel that a game isn't worth playing unless you can screw it up somehow and lose. I disagree with that vehemently because I want to play a game the way I want*, beat it, and feel satisfaction for completing it.

Does that about cover it?

 

 

(*realistically speaking... I don't expect to beat the game if I intentionally crash my flagship into a sun.)

Reply #59 from StarControl Forums Top

Ahhh. The battle of the eternal, all knowing, game gods commences. :jafo: :jafo: :jafo: :banhammer: :borg: :borg: :borg:

 

Xenove, I agree with you.    I like the multiple paths and opportunities. I reflects better on your choices and makes replay ability real high. 

Reply #60 from StarControl Forums Top

Yup. Don't worry, we'll have this conversation again. And again. And probably again, but maybe not a xth time. (Totally on the zth time, though.)

 

Reply #61 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Volusianus, reply 60

Yup. Don't worry, we'll have this conversation again. And again. And probably again, but maybe not a xth time. (Totally on the zth time, though.)

 

Ha, maybe not with me.  I try not to rehash stuff unless I have something new to bring to the table. I'd rather have people reference my collected body of work. 

Reply #62 from StarControl Forums Top

Dancing Deadpool

I prefer to refer to this body of work.

 

 

 

Reply #63 from StarControl Forums Top

Will the game nessecarily have multiple endings? I'm not sure thats totally nessecary to the Starcontrol experience unless I've missed something, I'm for evil being punished as well, I mean you were penalised for selling crew to the druuge in 2 and such, I'm articulating badly I think. I suppose we're all on a quest for satisfying ending(s) I find it satisfying when evil is penalised.

Reply #64 from StarControl Forums Top

I don't know about you guys, but I like to play games were risk is real and you CAN lose. I honestly don't get why "everyone's a winner" games are enjoyable. I like to bowl without the gutter rails, I like to watch a sports game were my team has a very real risk of LOSING. In order to win you have to outsmart your enemy, out gun them, out diploma them, etc. If all my choices lead to a win, why strategize? Why outsmart the enemy? Why not chose stuff at random? The point I am attempting to make can be simply stated as thus, LOSING MUST BE ALLOWED! Or the game simply loses its purpose. If you lose simply go back to a save! This is not Mario were if you lose right before the boss level you go to square one. You wont lose all "40 invested hours" just one or two and you'll still be intrigued by the intriguing ending. We should stop comparing this to ME. It is not ME and it will (I hope) not be even remotely related except for the fact that both happen in space. Don't take the fun and the challenge out of a game just because you like to play with the gutter rails on. If everyone's a winner, what is actually won? 

+2 Loading…
Reply #65 from StarControl Forums Top

^ But you can't ignore the fact that ME was massively influenced by SC2. ME is a bastard child of SC2 and Star Wars in my book.

Reply #66 from StarControl Forums Top

But it is a story driven adventure game.  I can't think of any that have been made that you could actually lose and be forced to start over.  I like games like that, when they are made and meant to be that way.  Like NetHack or Faster Than Light.  But an adventure game is about... the adventure.  You don't want to interrupt it and make the player start over from the beginning, you want to let them live the adventure you have created for them.

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #67 from StarControl Forums Top

I can confirm that you will be able to lose playing Star Control. 

+4 Loading…
Reply #68 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Vaelzad, reply 67

I can confirm that you will be able to lose playing Star Control. 

Awesome and makes sense.  There is no premise of victory without the possibility of defeat.

+2 Loading…
Reply #70 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Hunam_, reply 65

^ But you can't ignore the fact that ME was massively influenced by SC2. ME is a bastard child of SC2 and Star Wars in my book.

I did not know that. Can you provide some proof? I am just curious. I don't necessarily think you are wrong 

Reply #71 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 66

  You don't want to interrupt it and make the player start over from the beginning, you want to let them live the adventure you have created for them.

 
Quoting TheUr-quanMaster, reply 64

. If you lose simply go back to a save! This is not Mario were if you lose right before the boss level you go to square one. You wont lose all "40 invested hours" just one or two and you'll still be intrigued by the intriguing ending. 

Did you read my full post? You don't go back to the beginning!

Reply #72 from StarControl Forums Top

Yes, "losing" and being able to just load the last save is common in this type of game.  A "hardcore" loss that makes you start over from the beginning would make 90% of players quit and not try again.

Reply #73 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting TheUr-quanMaster, reply 70


Quoting Hunam_,
reply 65

^ But you can't ignore the fact that ME was massively influenced by SC2. ME is a bastard child of SC2 and Star Wars in my book.



I did not know that. Can you provide some proof? I am just curious. I don't necessarily think you are wrong 

 

Well, here's some obvious ones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlniKcFFwI8 - main storylines are about 80% in  line.

http://wiki.uqm.stack.nl/Bukowski = ME2 mission Freedom's Progress. Bukowski = Veetor.

Precursors = Prothean.

Syreen = Asari.

Not saying that SC didn't borrow from anywhere... >_>

Reply #74 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Hunam_, reply 65

^ But you can't ignore the fact that ME was massively influenced by SC2. ME is a bastard child of SC2 and Star Wars in my book.

+ many other sci-fi things, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fire_Upon_the_Deep and many other things. Btw I strongly recommend that you, guys, read books by Vernor Vinge - they are great.

I do not care about the influences if the implementation is good. In my opinion - ME was just a mix of sci-fi cliches but mixed and implemented so good that obvious and subtitle references just made me smile and that is great.

I would not mind at all if SCR is made of old-new good Sci-Fi ideas-cliches. But what I have found to be most appealing -recently  Game of Thrones type of thing - no black and white. Some actions might lead not to the things intended. Like I adore Starks but their paragon approach has led them to lot of of ^&#%$ and we cannot be sure that they recover. So if SC manages to capture this "gray" approach (i.e. real life approach when good guys do not always win, some things are not what they seem, good intentions might lead to bad outcomes, friends turn out to be enemies and etc. )... then it would be super-cool.

Reply #75 from StarControl Forums Top

Sry for typos and etc.  - I am a bit drunk and have to leave for a business trip tomorrow. It will take me 10 hours in the plane alone to reach the place of destination :)