Nothing I Did Mattered in the End #rant #review (Major Spoilers)

[Starwars]

It's a shame about Thaos being a forced fight I think, though I guess he does seem rather... sure of himself and what he's doing.

 

Still, with the dialogue system being what it is (no insta-win speech skills), there could've been a place for a very elaborate dialogue "mine-field" there I think where you could accomplish something in my opinion. I know you can't talk the final bosses down in the majority of the IE games but it would've been nice to have that take from Torment.

 

EDIT: And with the game being open as it is, have a bit of Fallout 1-ness in that you had to figure out certain things during the game to use as arguments against him.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Starwars

[Primislas]

I've read somewhere that the Throne Lady in your stronghold can also inform you of this quest, but I haven't verified this.

 

That's correct. And I have a strong suspicion that Gilded Vale folks give the Watcher heads up should he choose to revisit. (E.g. to rest at an inn while after some bounties.)

 

3) If you make a very good case, some animancers get saved (by a member of the Dozens, no less), and they get to rebuild in the ending.

 

I have played Act 1 and 2 two times for that reason, but it seems like animancy can't really be saved.

 

 

 

 

[Sonntam]

 

I've read somewhere that the Throne Lady in your stronghold can also inform you of this quest, but I haven't verified this.

 

That's correct. And I have a strong suspicion that Gilded Vale folks give the Watcher heads up should he choose to revisit. (E.g. to rest at an inn while after some bounties.)

 

3) If you make a very good case, some animancers get saved (by a member of the Dozens, no less), and they get to rebuild in the ending.

 

I have played Act 1 and 2 two times for that reason, but it seems like animancy can't really be saved.

 

 

 

 

 

Does one have to pass a certain amount of checks during the hearing to achieve this ending? Or are there other requisites for it?

[aimlessgun]

I appreciated the unpredictability of some results. And I don't think that there should be a 'correct' or best way to go through a story. I got some happy endings (including a couple happy endings for companions I didn't even help, which was cool!), some bad ones, and some unresolved. 

 

If you were roleplaying as a control freak megalomaniac you might expect to control all these outcomes, but I'd imagine that most characters one might roleplay would not expect a correct path either, just some successes and some failures and a bunch of things they really don't deeply care about.

 

Killing Thaos certainly mattered in that he didn't return Woedica to power, and that the world would be freed of his neverending, atrocity-filled meddling. 

 

I agree that the Trial was dumb. Even though apparently my testimony got people to blame the Leaden Key for the assassination, suprize Thaos kills Aevar after 2 minutes of screen time was...bleh.  

 

And when it comes to unpredictable endings and actions not mattering, just seeing little blurbs at the end of a story rarely going to be a satisfying way to tie your actions to outcomes, especially for complex things like who controls Defiance Bay. That would require a whole book to really show how your actions played a part in all the stories that made up fate of Defiance. So maybe it is more effective to stick to simpler cause > effect outcomes that can be conveyed easily in credit blurbs. But I'm glad Obsidian tried it this way. 

[julle]

A lot of your anger I do not understand. Your decisions have unintended consequences, I don't see that as a negative thing I see it as how life works. It would be boring if the effects of your decisions were clear and predictable. 

[Primislas]

 

 

I've read somewhere that the Throne Lady in your stronghold can also inform you of this quest, but I haven't verified this.

 

That's correct. And I have a strong suspicion that Gilded Vale folks give the Watcher heads up should he choose to revisit. (E.g. to rest at an inn while after some bounties.)

 

3) If you make a very good case, some animancers get saved (by a member of the Dozens, no less), and they get to rebuild in the ending.

 

I have played Act 1 and 2 two times for that reason, but it seems like animancy can't really be saved.

 

 

 

 

 

Does one have to pass a certain amount of checks during the hearing to achieve this ending? Or are there other requisites for it?

 

 

I wish I knew. The images are taken from the wiki, wiki itself having no definitive answer yet. Vehemently defending animancy during the hearing didn't help in my case. Being sent as a Dozens representative I lied that they supported my investigation. End result: animancy survives as an underground endeavor.

[mph]

 

 

 

I've read somewhere that the Throne Lady in your stronghold can also inform you of this quest, but I haven't verified this.

 

That's correct. And I have a strong suspicion that Gilded Vale folks give the Watcher heads up should he choose to revisit. (E.g. to rest at an inn while after some bounties.)

 

3) If you make a very good case, some animancers get saved (by a member of the Dozens, no less), and they get to rebuild in the ending.

 

I have played Act 1 and 2 two times for that reason, but it seems like animancy can't really be saved.

 

 

 

 

 

Does one have to pass a certain amount of checks during the hearing to achieve this ending? Or are there other requisites for it?

 

 

I wish I knew. The images are taken from the wiki, wiki itself having no definitive answer yet. Vehemently defending animancy during the hearing didn't help in my case. Being sent as a Dozens representative I lied that they supported my investigation. End result: animancy survives as an underground endeavor.

 

 

I've got the linked ending. I sided with the Knights, did all quests in a pro-animancy way, and was a playing a dialogue character (Int, Per, Res all at 20 or higher, high lore, also high honesty) and used that to my advantage when supporting the animancers.

[Aron Times]

I think I got the good animancy ending because I had a high Honest reputation (either Honest 2 or Honest 3, probably the latter). When you spill the beans about the Leaden Key to the trial, someone asks (probably the Dozens rep), "Why the **** should we believe you?" and I answered, "My word/honor is my life." and then the reaction text was [Honest 2/3] Although most people would consider what you said to be utterly ridiculous, your reputation for honesty made the people at the trial actually take you seriously.

[MReed]

I think I got the good animancy ending because I had a high Honest reputation (either Honest 2 or Honest 3, probably the latter). When you spill the beans about the Leaden Key to the trial, someone asks (probably the Dozens rep), "Why the **** should we believe you?" and I answered, "My word/honor is my life." and then the reaction text was [Honest 2/3] Although most people would consider what you said to be utterly ridiculous, your reputation for honesty made the people at the trial actually take you seriously.

 

This isn't the only way to get the pro-Animinacer ending -- I got it with Honest:0.  I think it is just a matter of carefully selecting the right dialogs -- I played through this scene twice (because I didn't advance Eder's personal quest the first time, and was unsure of whether or not it would be possible to do so), and once I got the Duc starting to make an anti-Animinancy ruling and once he started to make a pro-Animancy ruling, even though in both cases I was attempting to protray a pro-animiancy position.

 

So...

 

I think it is just very sensitive to your path through the trial dialog.

[Aron Times]

You get to affect the lives of people you encounter along the way depending on how you act. They don't get mentioned in the ending, but simply appear as background characters as you progress through the game.

 

Nonton and Ingroed (he killed Ingroed's abusive husband in Gilded Vale) - If you took the benevolent option and let them go and let them keep their money so they could move out of Gilded Vale, they later show up in the Brackenbury Inn. They thank you for your kindness, and how it has allowed them to start a new life together.

 

Seren (the high class hooker) - If you paid her the full price for the Glanfathan amulet, without using any of the persuasion options, you later find her in Brackenbury, having quit her job and moved to the fancy neighborhood.

 

Gordy (the kid who wanted the March Steel dagger) - If you handed over the dagger without having Survival 4, the town crier later mentions a tragic accident involving a kid who lost several fingers because he played with a very sharp dagger. If you teach him how to properly handle a dagger (Survival 4), you later encounter him and his father, with the latter asking Gordy where he found the dagger. Gordy tells him that he got it from you, and his father rightfully gets angry at how irresponsible you've been to give his son the equivalent of a Damascus Steel blade in real life. I took the Diplomatic route and convinced Gordy's father that I was in the right, though he did tell the kid that he was going to keep the dagger until Gordy grew up so he wouldn't accidentally kill or maim himself (which is exactly what happens if you didn't have Survival 4 when you gave it to him).

 

Danielle/Danica/Whatever her name is Doemenel (the woman that wants you to kill Vicenzo the shady Vailian merchant) - If you defend Vicenzo, she'll attack you and you'll probably kill her. Much later, you encounter her fiance, who is rightfully furious that you killed his love. IIRC, he doesn't say anyting about how you shouldn't have messed with the Doemenels, simply that he's going to kill you for killing the woman he loved. That's right, even evil has loved ones.

 

Remember, folks, it's not just the destination that matters, but the journey as well. The game reacts very well to your choices all throughout. They just don't get mentioned in the ending because they're no longer relevant by then.

[sparklecat]

I think I got the good animancy ending because I had a high Honest reputation (either Honest 2 or Honest 3, probably the latter). When you spill the beans about the Leaden Key to the trial, someone asks (probably the Dozens rep), "Why the **** should we believe you?" and I answered, "My word/honor is my life." and then the reaction text was [Honest 2/3] Although most people would consider what you said to be utterly ridiculous, your reputation for honesty made the people at the trial actually take you seriously.

 

I did this and animancy was still driven underground.  I also spoke in favour of continuing animancy research, but in controlled, restricted conditions, so perhaps you have to be pro-animancy.

[Wulfram]

I got the bad animancy ending.  Maybe because my character still reckoned the guy in charge of the inmates in the sanitarium was kind of reckless

[Vaeliorin]

Gordy (the kid who wanted the March Steel dagger) - If you handed over the dagger without having Survival 4, the town crier later mentions a tragic accident involving a kid who lost several fingers because he played with a very sharp dagger. If you teach him how to properly handle a dagger (Survival 4), you later encounter him and his father, with the latter asking Gordy where he found the dagger. Gordy tells him that he got it from you, and his father rightfully gets angry at how irresponsible you've been to give his son the equivalent of a Damascus Steel blade in real life. I took the Diplomatic route and convinced Gordy's father that I was in the right, though he did tell the kid that he was going to keep the dagger until Gordy grew up so he wouldn't accidentally kill or maim himself (which is exactly what happens if you didn't have Survival 4 when you gave it to him).

Actually, I didn't have Survival at all, the town crier mentioned the kid cutting off his fingers, but I still encountered the father, with no mention of finger removal. I just assumed it was a bait and switch type thing, with me feeling bad because of the crier, but it turning out it was actually another kid. May have been a bug, though.

 

Interestingly, I was also attacked by assassins in Brackenbury, who killed Serel (I couldn't stop them fast enough/didn't realize they were going to attack her.)

[SpitefulOne]

 

Gordy (the kid who wanted the March Steel dagger) - If you handed over the dagger without having Survival 4, the town crier later mentions a tragic accident involving a kid who lost several fingers because he played with a very sharp dagger. If you teach him how to properly handle a dagger (Survival 4), you later encounter him and his father, with the latter asking Gordy where he found the dagger. Gordy tells him that he got it from you, and his father rightfully gets angry at how irresponsible you've been to give his son the equivalent of a Damascus Steel blade in real life. I took the Diplomatic route and convinced Gordy's father that I was in the right, though he did tell the kid that he was going to keep the dagger until Gordy grew up so he wouldn't accidentally kill or maim himself (which is exactly what happens if you didn't have Survival 4 when you gave it to him).

Actually, I didn't have Survival at all, the town crier mentioned the kid cutting off his fingers, but I still encountered the father, with no mention of finger removal. I just assumed it was a bait and switch type thing, with me feeling bad because of the crier, but it turning out it was actually another kid. May have been a bug, though.

 

Interestingly, I was also attacked by assassins in Brackenbury, who killed Serel (I couldn't stop them fast enough/didn't realize they were going to attack her.)

 

 

 

I don't think they're meant to attack her, I actually reloaded so that I could intercept the assassins before they killed Serel. I think she's just not in their 'faction' so the AI decides she's valid target.

 

But I disagree with the main post. What you do does matter to all of the people you interacted with in the course of the game. You actually do shape the fate of the nation with many of your choices, it just isn't as blatant or didn't turn out exactly the way you wanted it to.

Edited April 12, 2015 by SpitefulOne

[SEngeven]

 

 

Gordy (the kid who wanted the March Steel dagger) - If you handed over the dagger without having Survival 4, the town crier later mentions a tragic accident involving a kid who lost several fingers because he played with a very sharp dagger. If you teach him how to properly handle a dagger (Survival 4), you later encounter him and his father, with the latter asking Gordy where he found the dagger. Gordy tells him that he got it from you, and his father rightfully gets angry at how irresponsible you've been to give his son the equivalent of a Damascus Steel blade in real life. I took the Diplomatic route and convinced Gordy's father that I was in the right, though he did tell the kid that he was going to keep the dagger until Gordy grew up so he wouldn't accidentally kill or maim himself (which is exactly what happens if you didn't have Survival 4 when you gave it to him).

Actually, I didn't have Survival at all, the town crier mentioned the kid cutting off his fingers, but I still encountered the father, with no mention of finger removal. I just assumed it was a bait and switch type thing, with me feeling bad because of the crier, but it turning out it was actually another kid. May have been a bug, though.

 

Interestingly, I was also attacked by assassins in Brackenbury, who killed Serel (I couldn't stop them fast enough/didn't realize they were going to attack her.)

 

 

 

I don't think they're meant to attack her, I actually reloaded so that I could intercept the assassins before they killed Serel. I think she's just not in their 'faction' so the AI decides she's valid target.

 

But I disagree with the main post. What you do does matter to all of the people you interacted with in the course of the game. You actually do shape the fate of the nation with many of your choices, it just isn't as blatant or didn't turn out exactly the way you wanted it to.

 

 

  Not always, I've gotten ambushed before and they didn't go after non-combatants.  When I was confused by that, I checked Serel's stance and it looked like she was actually aggressive towards the enemy.  So somehow, her character is actually your "ally" and would attempt to fight the enemy, hence why she's targeted.  Perhaps it's a bug, I like to think that she likes me after I got her out of prostitution.

 

  Additionally, what's something to look into if/when you play again is to follow up with characters after you've assisted them.  It's not in the journal or required by the request but it does spark some unique dialogue.  Whether it's following up with the three related victims following the "Last Act" quest or finding people you helped leave a given area (e.g. Eorn in Dyrwood), it's the smaller touches which make the game feel a bit more organic.

[Legbiter]

What you did mattered, and not only that, your choices had consequences, both foreseen and unforeseen. If you play the game again and make different choices you will get completely different endings, maybe ones you will like better. That is essential to the replayability of these games. Sometimes doing things for what you think are the right reasons causes harm. Sometimes there are no good options. Sometimes things are counter-intuitive and confusing and unjust. I say bravo to the designers for making it so realistic.

Aye, for instance using your Watcher powers to help Grieveing Mother by erasing her bad memories results in her going back to the desolate village near the Birthing Bell and just vegetating there. Hah, serves my goody two-shoes right. 

 

Edér became mayor in Dyrford village in my playthrough which was nice and Sagani went back happy to her village and took up her duties as an elder. Hiravias had a bath. 

[sparklecat]

 

Edér became mayor in Dyrford village in my playthrough which was nice and Sagani went back happy to her village and took up her duties as an elder.

Wow.  For me, Eder joined and was an influential figure in that group of underground Eothas worshippers, while Sagani became massively depressed after going home and eventually disappeared on a long hunt.

 

Yeah, I think what you do has plenty of consequences.  My poor Sagani

[Exyll]

haha, this guy..."I made some decisions, they were bad / I didnt know everything there is about the game yet, and the game held a mirror to me at the end of the game I didnt like what I saw/done. I blame the game"

Whatever happened to learn from your mistakes or try again? Now its, 'No gold star for just launching the game? Time to blame someone'

 

There is someone who tells you of Raedrics return, if you didnt find them, not the games fault.

 

The Machine in Heritage Hill gets re-activated, that crushed me in the recap, because like you I thought as the game go on, maybe I would learn a new 'Watcher Power' to do right by those souls, plus destroying what you dont fully understand is what savages do. But hey, I learned something.

 

But as for you making a decsion and then that person or place dies anyway...so WHAT? That has nothing to do with the decsion you made earlier.

Oh I told the rogue to rest and then he died- so what?

You thought because you told him to take a nap he was going to be with you saving the world at the end of the game?

You make no sense, just seem made cause you ran through a game one time and didnt get the 5 star ending that you yourself admit to taking a hands-off approach to.

[Blovski]

1. Um, the difference is one of choice and characterisation rather than result? And there's an impact on how that first dungeon plays.

2. Doesn't mean there's no difference, especially if you go back to finish off corpse Raedric.
3. Yeah, the reactivity on this is kinda underdone for the plot point.
4. Um, obviously the option to destroy the machine was there and the machine really doesn't appear to have any function other than the one that was there. I think you're mad that the game DID respond to you rather than that it didn't.
5. It was kind of obvious the Paladins intended to do that with their pet animats, I figured?
6. I'm fine with the plot twist, kinda miffed that your rather great conversation there doesn't convey the nuance of responsiveness I'd like. Maybe it's just that taking muted careful options isn't enough.
7. The world is not one where you magically fix things by being protagonist mcsquarejaw and telling everyone to play nice. It'd be a lousy choice if Pallegina's moral choice was one where the nice option for her was also the nice one for the Dyrwood AND for the Republics. By letting her take a moral compromise you're also taking a geopolitical compromise.
8. Eh, um, this is kind of the point of the game. That getting the answers you wanted isn't going to solve all your problems but you still need to make decisions based on them.

[Ichthyic]

I just got to the riots in Defiance Bay.

I played totally to character all the way, full diplomacy and honesty on every interaction, honesty and diplomacy both at 4 by the time I did the debates at the palace....

not only did what I said there make ZERO difference to anything, but I also note that EVERY time I had the opportunity to use diplomacy as a skill before a fight started... it started anyway.

I don't know who wrote the dialogues and interactions, but whoever it was must have been a huge cynic, who very clearly wants to make it know to anyone who plays this game that your actions, especially good ones,  mean absolutely squat.

OTOH, if you're a complete evil douche, you have a much larger impact on almost everything, albeit in a usually negative way.

I kept waiting for diplomacy to you know... diplomatize... things.  but nope, I can't recall any time it had a positive effect.  it was just another random dialogue choice.

honesty had a *slighty* more effective usage, whenever it had a usage, but again, those were pretty rare.  Usually, as with diplomacy, it was just a random dialogue choice.

Also noted, most of the companion stoylines end in what I would call... "nebulous disappointment", meaning they weren't necessary *bad*, but just as much not definitive in a postive direction either.

I can't recall ever playing a game where all the dialogue, both story and companion-wise,  was so... flattened?  is there a better word to describe it?

very strange.


 

[Ichthyic]

 

The world is not one where you magically fix things by being protagonist mcsquarejaw and telling everyone to play nice.

so.. the part where everyone is telling you that you MUST go to the palace and present your case, because it will change everything!

 

that kinda implies that yes, you are supposed to indeed magically fix things by being protagonist mcSquarepants. 

 

You must have forgotten that part.

 

 

[Sonntam]

 

 

The world is not one where you magically fix things by being protagonist mcsquarejaw and telling everyone to play nice.

so.. the part where everyone is telling you that you MUST go to the palace and present your case, because it will change everything!

 

that kinda implies that yes, you are supposed to indeed magically fix things by being protagonist mcSquarepants. 

 

You must have forgotten that part.

 

You went there to get Defiance Bay on your side to pursue Thaos. Animancy was more of an afterthought. The people in the hearing may care about it more, but it's implied that your character is here purely for Thaos. 

 

Also, I personally found it a nice touch to persuade the rules of Defiance Bay in favor of animancy... only to have Thaos come in and ruin everything. That was a real punch in the guts, I loved it.