Technically Morrowind is the same. You can kill literally every NPC in the entire game but 1, fail every quest there is but 1 if you want to “beat” the game. Even that’s arguable. You could still just kill that 1 NPC thus not needing any quests at all.
Just smart abuse of magic, potions and you can just go kill God.
Beating the entire game with 0 quests done, and 100% of all NPCs killed.
They didn’t say it’s meaningless, just suggested that failing every quest leads to some type of conclusion to the game’s plot. It might not be a good conclusion, but the story ends.
To me, this just sounds like failing a quest doesn’t mean the game is over or that you need to reload a previous checkpoint or save to keep playing.
This to be honest is the correct way to handle choices. Like Baldur’s Gate of Pillars of eternity games where they list down the conclusion of all the choices player made at the end of the game.
I’d say this is debatable. Listing all choices and their conclusion (I did not play that game, so don’t know how it is presented) can take away the mystery and exploration of those choices. Some people might not like this and none way is wrong or right. I compare this to the “numbers popping up” in Action RPG games, when you hit enemies. Some like to see it, others don’t want to.
Other games do the same, just without the freedom to do whatever you want. I mean I prefer a game that let’s me “kill an NPC permanently”, even if there are no further effects to the world and story. Would be nice to have those effects, but we all understand that it is probably an unrealistic request. So I prefer this over games, that does not let me kill NPCs permanently.
“Your actions in no way affect the world of the game so you can do whatever you want!”
Is this supposed to be a selling point? Giving such freedom so as to make all of your choices meaningless?
Technically Morrowind is the same. You can kill literally every NPC in the entire game but 1, fail every quest there is but 1 if you want to “beat” the game. Even that’s arguable. You could still just kill that 1 NPC thus not needing any quests at all.
Just smart abuse of magic, potions and you can just go kill God.
Beating the entire game with 0 quests done, and 100% of all NPCs killed.
Prisoner gets off the boat, hops a wall before even doing any paperwork, robs an apothecary and does god in with a single right jab.
Thats the shenanigans I lived for
They didn’t say it’s meaningless, just suggested that failing every quest leads to some type of conclusion to the game’s plot. It might not be a good conclusion, but the story ends.
To me, this just sounds like failing a quest doesn’t mean the game is over or that you need to reload a previous checkpoint or save to keep playing.
this sounds like baldurs gate. There is little to nothing that actually ends the game.
This to be honest is the correct way to handle choices. Like Baldur’s Gate of Pillars of eternity games where they list down the conclusion of all the choices player made at the end of the game.
I’d say this is debatable. Listing all choices and their conclusion (I did not play that game, so don’t know how it is presented) can take away the mystery and exploration of those choices. Some people might not like this and none way is wrong or right. I compare this to the “numbers popping up” in Action RPG games, when you hit enemies. Some like to see it, others don’t want to.
Other games do the same, just without the freedom to do whatever you want. I mean I prefer a game that let’s me “kill an NPC permanently”, even if there are no further effects to the world and story. Would be nice to have those effects, but we all understand that it is probably an unrealistic request. So I prefer this over games, that does not let me kill NPCs permanently.