Do not forget the happy endings ;)

[Fearabbit]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rga4rp4j5TY#t=1m13s

 

"Everything we love, will be ripped from us while we suffer for all Eternity! No more happy endings."

 

*drama music*

 

 

I just wanna say thank you to this thread and especially you, Fluffle, for introducing me to Once Upon A Time. What a great show! 

[Malekith]

 

I disagree because that's simply not the type of game we're looking at.

 

In Tides of Numenera? Totally. I expect an introspective journey, no slaying of dragons, or whatever Numenera has.

 

What type of game is that?

Planescape:Torment was an introspective journey. KOTOR2 as well. MotB as well.IWDs were very localized, nothing world shatering. BG was the only EPIC, but that was Bioware. From what we know BG3 from Black Isle would be much more personal journey. Everything Obsidian has made was personal. I don't see why they would change that now.

[lolaldanee]

well, MotB is a world shattering game if ever there was one, with slaying gods and attacking the city of the dead and almost tearing down the wall of the damned (in my opinion it's one of the most epic games ever, and one of the very few that ever did epic right, that's what makes it so damn great), although quite personal at the same time, there is no denying that

the same is true for Alpha Protocol

what about New Vegas? didn't play that one

i don't think BG was much less personal than an obsidian game either, it's mostly the story of the Bhaalspawn, everything else is coming later

the only game that's really personal through and through is Torment

Edited October 1, 2013 by lolaldanee

[Sacred_Path]

 

I disagree because that's simply not the type of game we're looking at.

 

In Tides of Numenera? Totally. I expect an introspective journey, no slaying of dragons, or whatever Numenera has.

What type of game is that?

Planescape:Torment was an introspective journey. KOTOR2 as well. MotB as well.IWDs were very localized, nothing world shatering. BG was the only EPIC, but that was Bioware. From what we know BG3 from Black Isle would be much more personal journey. Everything Obsidian has made was personal. I don't see why they would change that now.

 

Correction: A protagonist with a personal motivation doesn't necessarily mean a personal story. It's about dimensions, obviously; if the outcome of the quest is confined to your personal sphere (and maybe those closest to you), it's a personal quest.

 

IWD's were kinda limited geographically but definitely fit my definition of an epic adventure - they didn't touch on personal issues very much. BG1 was about taking down a murderous, powerful villain, much like BG2. Again, the fact that you have a personal motivation doesn't mean that introspection is a great part of your questing, unless you find the small scenes between chapters in BG where you receive your special powers to offer deep psychological insights.

 

Of all the IE games, I'd only place PS:T in the "non-epic adventure" category.

[Malekith]

 

 

I disagree because that's simply not the type of game we're looking at.

 

In Tides of Numenera? Totally. I expect an introspective journey, no slaying of dragons, or whatever Numenera has.

What type of game is that?

Planescape:Torment was an introspective journey. KOTOR2 as well. MotB as well.IWDs were very localized, nothing world shatering. BG was the only EPIC, but that was Bioware. From what we know BG3 from Black Isle would be much more personal journey. Everything Obsidian has made was personal. I don't see why they would change that now.

 

Correction: A protagonist with a personal motivation doesn't necessarily mean a personal story. It's about dimensions, obviously; if the outcome of the quest is confined to your personal sphere (and maybe those closest to you), it's a personal quest.

 

IWD's were kinda limited geographically but definitely fit my definition of an epic adventure - they didn't touch on personal issues very much. BG1 was about taking down a murderous, powerful villain, much like BG2. Again, the fact that you have a personal motivation doesn't mean that introspection is a great part of your questing, unless you find the small scenes between chapters in BG where you receive your special powers to offer deep psychological insights.

 

Of all the IE games, I'd only place PS:T in the "non-epic adventure" category.

 

You ignore the other games by the same designers though. Both Ziets(formspring) and Adam (kickstarter comments) have said that it won't be a "fight the big bad" type of story.

http://spring.me/GZiets/q/488896341628450671 I expect something in the vein of PS:T/KotOR2/MotB mixed with faction gameplay ala New Vegas

[Sacred_Path]

Let me quote JES:

 

The three pillars are environment exploration, interactive story/dialogue, and tactical combat.

PS:T certainly wasn't about combat, and while it had interesting locations, "exploration" wasn't the focus (you didn't search every nook and cranny of PS:T's maps). So no, I wouldn't hold my breath for a game like PS:T, but that's not what they promised anyway, as PS:T is only 1/5th of the IE bunch.

[Malekith]

Let me quote JES:

 

The three pillars are environment exploration, interactive story/dialogue, and tactical combat.

PS:T certainly wasn't about combat, and while it had interesting locations, "exploration" wasn't the focus (you didn't search every nook and cranny of PS:T's maps). So no, I wouldn't hold my breath for a game like PS:T, but that's not what they promised anyway, as PS:T is only 1/5th of the IE bunch.

 

You can't imagine a personal story in a game where combat is a focus? Why? That the combat in PS:T was an afterthought doesn't mean that PE will have also.

I said that PE will have a story that is kind of introspective journey, like Torment, KOTOR2, MOTB, not that the game would be the same design wise.

 

You could have BG2 were Irenicus was a phychopath with terrible power, but who instead of wanting to steal your soul he just wanted to help you unlock your potential and study you and your power. As such he would be the antagonist only to a good player, while the evil one could use him and join forces with him. Or even completely remove him as the big bad and make him a side boss, like Nihilus in KOTOR, and have the strugle with your tainted blood be the game's focus.

 

Nothing in BG2 design forces you to have an EPIC adventure/save the world/smackdown the big bad main story.

[Sacred_Path]

You can't imagine a personal story in a game where combat is a focus? Why?

Because it's kind of counter-intuitive. If I want to tell a story about personal transformation, is monster-slashing the best way to achieve this?

 

That the combat in PS:T was an afterthought doesn't mean that PE will have also.

I said that PE will have a story that is kind of introspective journey, like Torment, KOTOR2, MOTB, not that the game would be the same design wise.

Like I said, the story can have a personal hook alright. But we also know that killing dragons in real time will happen often. So the result to me will be something like BG; you have a personal motivation to go adventuring and the narrative will allude to the protagonist often, but in the end it's about kicking monster butt.

 

Nothing in BG2 design forces you to have an EPIC adventure/save the world/smackdown the big bad main story.

The accumulation of EPIC magical items/ spells/ special abilities is actually quite central to BG2.

[Azrayel]

K. Let it be said that an ending that only resolves the premise (that you're personally affected by some extraordinary event) but has no ramifications for the rest of the world I don't consider satisfactory.

 

In a word:

 

why?

 

I understood the pitch as a personal journey rather than a "save teh world or **** it up trying" quest.  It was a refreshing pitch, and if the world is 

 

apathetic

 

unchanged

 

uncaring

 

towering above the player in cruel rigidity even as they spiral through personal cataclysm

 

is that not narratively interesting in and of itself, so long as it doesn't come across as poor design?

[Augusta Corvina]

well, MotB is a world shattering game if ever there was one, with slaying gods and attacking the city of the dead and almost tearing down the wall of the damned (in my opinion it's one of the most epic games ever, and one of the very few that ever did epic right, that's what makes it so damn great), although quite personal at the same time, there is no denying that

the same is true for Alpha Protocol

what about New Vegas? didn't play that one

i don't think BG was much less personal than an obsidian game either, it's mostly the story of the Bhaalspawn, everything else is coming later

the only game that's really personal through and through is Torment

Shame the ultimate good ending of MotB sucked though since the wall didn't get torn down due to... reasons(though I recall hearing that it wasn't Obsidians fault per se for that one). At least the ultimate evil ending shows the the forgotten realm deities receiving their just desert with more to come in the future.

[Tagaziel]

Super happy endings should be in... But only limited to the smaller sidequests, where you affect just one person or two. Like resolving the differences between two lovers, or saving a gal from bandits/a lad from human traffickers.

 

But for bigger quests? Supa-happy-kawaii-and-**** endings should be nigh impossible to get, simply because of the way the world works. Large, world-altering quests should never have happy resolutions, just shades of grey and different degrees of ****ing up. Say, if you're dealing with slavers that provide the workforce necessary to prop up a larger realm, then killing them off would help the lands they raid, but implode the economy of the realm and impoverish hundreds. Or when you're dealing with a high level political assassination and track down the assassin to the poorer parts of town. Do you reveal the fact the poor folk sheltered the assassin, leading to a crackdown and exile of the people? Do you side with the assassin and destabilize the city, screwing up the balance of power in the region? Or do you just kill him and let the city resolve its differences, leading to instability, unrest, and rioting?

 

These are just the broad strokes and two simple examples, but I'd really prefer for large quests that influence events in the world to present agonizing, hard choices.

[jethro]

These are just the broad strokes and two simple examples, but I'd really prefer for large quests that influence events in the world to present agonizing, hard choices.

Why should all large quests follow the same mould? WW2 had a "happy" ending too. The worst Obs can do is to limit the variation in quest structure and tone.

 

I played Witcher1 and my choice between the two warring factions was to not choose a faction because I didn't like both of them. If the choices are between pest and cholera the danger is that the choice becomes ulitmately meaningless to the player and he looses the incentive to choose at all. Hard choices are necessary but only as one ingredient of many.

Edited October 2, 2013 by jethro

[JFSOCC]

Yes, you shouldn't at the end of the main story have closed all lose ends and made the world a happy place for everest.

But you should be able to put it on the right track towards a better world. IE, brokering a peace doesn't immediately end mutual hatred, but it's a start for improving relations in the long term.

Setting up your keep may not immediately take the wild, but it allows for a safe place from which society can grow.

Destroying the dragon setting fire to the landscape doesn't end starvation, but it allows crops to be planted again, and have a reasonable chance of being harvested.

Etc.

On a personal level it could be a very happy ending. on the world level it should just nudge the world on a better path, imo

[Malekith]

Yes, you shouldn't at the end of the main story have closed all lose ends and made the world a happy place for everest.

But you should be able to put it on the right track towards a better world. IE, brokering a peace doesn't immediately end mutual hatred, but it's a start for improving relations in the long term.

Setting up your keep may not immediately take the wild, but it allows for a safe place from which society can grow.

Destroying the dragon setting fire to the landscape doesn't end starvation, but it allows crops to be planted again, and have a reasonable chance of being harvested.

Etc.

On a personal level it could be a very happy ending. on the world level it should just nudge the world on a better path, imo

My character want to make the world a better place...only for him.

[Sacred_Path]

towering above the player in cruel rigidity even as they spiral through personal cataclysm

which is expressed by slaughtering wichts and dragons left and right?

[Tagaziel]

Why should all large quests follow the same mould? WW2 had a "happy" ending too. The worst Obs can do is to limit the variation in quest structure and tone.

WW2? I assume you mean Witcher 2 and there is no happy ending in that game. Just degrees of ****ing up the world, with any happiness being derived from the player's own interpretation.

 

I played Witcher1 and my choice between the two warring factions was to not choose a faction because I didn't like both of them. If the choices are between pest and cholera the danger is that the choice becomes ulitmately meaningless to the player and he looses the incentive to choose at all. Hard choices are necessary but only as one ingredient of many.

That's life. You can only do so much to make people happy. Hard choices should be the only kind of choices available for large quests that change the world. Inevitably, someone will suffer as a result of your actions. Obsidian captured it quite well with Fallout: New Vegas. You can orchestrate events to create a least horrible scenario, but there is no way to save everyone or make them happy.

[lolaldanee]

flowers and rainbows people, flowers and rainbows

games without at least semi-happy endings always make me sad

flowers and rainbows!

[kabaliero]

happy endings should exist

but not without a bloody cost

 

 

one way or another

Edited October 3, 2013 by kabaliero

[Lephys]

All they have to do is copy Mass Effect 3's ending, and everything should be wonderful.

 

[lolaldanee]

All they have to do is copy Mass Effect 3's ending, and everything should be wonderful.

 

you're such an evil evil person

 

although, with dlcs the endings are somewhat bearable, especially the new refusal ending is quite ok

i don't think any character has ever annoyed me as much as godchild though.... even more annoying than the ending are those dream sequenzes with godchild... HATE.. PURE HATRED

 

thank god i've read everything about the endings before playing the game, at least i didn't have any expectations that way

Edited October 3, 2013 by lolaldanee

[okkoko]

well i dont know but sometimes movies get an emotion in me about holding tears back im almost parelized well its just thinking about that its undecipherable

[Archmage Silver]

Can't we all just agree that an RGB ending is the most artistically sound option?

[exodiark]

 

well, MotB is a world shattering game if ever there was one, with slaying gods and attacking the city of the dead and almost tearing down the wall of the damned (in my opinion it's one of the most epic games ever, and one of the very few that ever did epic right, that's what makes it so damn great), although quite personal at the same time, there is no denying that

the same is true for Alpha Protocol

what about New Vegas? didn't play that one

i don't think BG was much less personal than an obsidian game either, it's mostly the story of the Bhaalspawn, everything else is coming later

the only game that's really personal through and through is Torment

Shame the ultimate good ending of MotB sucked though since the wall didn't get torn down due to... reasons(though I recall hearing that it wasn't Obsidians fault per se for that one). At least the ultimate evil ending shows the the forgotten realm deities receiving their just desert with more to come in the future.

 

It's DnD canon, Obsidian (and/or maybe the publisher) doesn't want to mess with the canon too much to avoid fan rage.

Obsidian already took artistic liberty and violated the canon in a small way, like Myrkul's current whereabout and Gann the beautiful hagspawn.

Edited October 7, 2013 by exodiark

[exodiark]

Can't we all just agree that an RGB ending is the most artistically sound option?

Especially if it encourages lots of speculations from everyone.

Edited October 7, 2013 by exodiark

[Archmage Silver]

Even if it meant that half of insertname city got blown apart, I'd still be fine with a happy ending for the party members and charname. Or if they accidentally started a war, but somehow managed to escape on a ship into the sunset. I'm biased like that.