![]() ![]() I can't believe I'm saying this, but not ALL decisions HAVE to have vastly different and far-reaching consequences. I must have scanned through that dialogue. She does? I have made all three and do not remember her commenting. As it stands, you just say "huh, what did that do?" And never face any consequences, really. It can be reflected in writing - for example, maybe when you talk to Od Nua he knows about your treatment of Maerwald through their common binding to the Keep and thereby condemns you in words so on and so forth. It doesn't even have to be consequences in terms of loot or bonuses. so that your keep becomes as secure as an extra 40 Gold guard. You are going to enslave a tortured soul for eternity. As Achilles says, it helps people actually roleplay and live with their choices, instead of sit there not giving a rat's ass about Maerwald and just going "which one gives me the bonus I want".īut +1 prestige and +2 security or whatever are virtually useless consequences. I'm actually OK with sometimes obfuscating the C-C relationship. The problem is that a lot of players find that "unfair" and thus it is extremely rare to see in games, which is why we have things like Skyrim where people can't even lie to you unless it's an unavoidable part of the rigid questline. I'd rather have the effects of the choice play out much later, with unforeseen consequences. Which is exactly how this particular choice plays out, sadly. I really prefer having exactly what you describe, rather than having very clear cut "choose A, B, or C" with instant (or near-instant) effects, or knowledge of which exact effects there were. That has nothing to do with this particular issue, nor with the issue of overall reactivity or "C&C" (which I hate as a hard concept anyway). ![]() They want players to make decisions based on the information they have available at the time and live with the.consequences. Why? Because they don't necessarily want people to know when X was caused by Y. Oh and just so I can crap on your parade a little more, a lot of devs are moving away from drawing a direct line between a choice and its outcome. Also, adding some sort of tiny perk (be it +1 to a defence, +1 to some sort of niche DR like Corrosion or whatever) would give you both a place to *show* you that the choice matters and some consequence for your character throughout the game, however small. Making it really pronounced (say, +10 Security, -8 Prestige and vice versa or the like) would help. It's a problem because the game never clearly shows you what the results are (and, indeed, with the room in Od Nua Level 13, never tells you why you can't access it) and because the stronghold bonuses are completely trivial either way (compared to, say, getting a hireling). After 11 years, you'd think that Obsidian would understand what real Choice & Consequenses looks like in a true RPG. Option 3 should have given 1 million copper pieces and unlocked a merchant who sells vorpal swords and +10 armor. Option 2 should have given +10 armor and a vorpal sword. Option 1 should have resulted in a vorpal sword and +10 armor. There aren't enough consequences in the game that really makes you feel responsible for your choices.I agree. But those are mostly pretty crappy consequences. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |