Instalar o Steam
Iniciar sessão
|
Idioma
简体中文 (Chinês Simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês Tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol de Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol da América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Brasil)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar problema de tradução
I feel like that actually added something interesting. Most games with various paths and endings just drag you along for the ride, telling the story of these charcters and expecting you to feel for them. This, though... when I was first presented with the question "Did I find my Rachel?", I literally sat at that screen for... I dunno, 20 minutes, just piecing together the things I had learned and trying to come up with my own answer. I /loved/ it. It really was my story, even though I was playing as another person. All the things I had learned led to my own conclusion. True, the way things were worded with those choices sort of broke the pre-established form of writing, but I thought that set it apart from the rest of the game.
The problem is not that I chose what happened in the end. Giving the player the freedom to create the story that he/she built in his/her head during his/her playthrough is indeed awesome.
However, the issue that I talked about is not this "freestyle ending", but how that was executed. Let me try to explain it in another way.
When I played the game for the first time, I had as many doubts as the character. I wanted to know what the hell was going on, why there was so many corpses in my path, where was Rachel, etc. I was investigating the environment, and, while I did that, I empathized with the character. Partly because I needed the awnsers just as bad as him, and partly because I was controlling him (and that's VERY important point).
But suddenly, when I was about to get one big answer (climax), the game tells me: "Ok, the rules have changed. From now on, YOU tell me what happened. The investigation part is over."
And THAT broke the immersion. The sudden switch of game mechanics/rules messed my head up. It brought me out of the game, to my room, to my desk, to my partial notes, so that I could adapt my brain to another game: a game where I give the answers, and not the questions.
But maybe - just maybe - I tried too hard to get into the game, and the fact that it didn't gave me the answers I was looking for left me frustrated. There were TOO many things that were unknown to me - even after I played it the second time with extensive notes and researched the forums - that the first thing I thought when the game asked me if Rachel was there was: "well, how the ♥♥♥♥ should I know?". Not only that, but the some of the subsequent questions hardly touched some things I were sure that happened, so I couldn't really give all that input after all.
The "big answer" you speak of and how it was handled was very deliberate. The only thing I want to add to the discussion here (and then I'll bow out, because it's better for you folks to discuss) is that for the whole game, you (the player) were the one explaining what happened. This choice often comes as a shock, but it is not incongruous with the rest of the game.
Okay, that's all I wanted to say! You folks have fun!
But, since my role here is to be that boring guy that keeps complaining, I will argument the following:
It is completely true that the game text/writing implies that I, the player, am (re)building the past through a recollection of my memories. However, I disagree that the game itself behaves in that direction.
For example: if I said yes, I would have picked up the gun; if I said no, I would have left it behind. In this case, I was explaining what Rachel's husband did in the past - I am, in fact, controlling his actions -, and not what happened around him. Every single question I answered until that ending point was about his personal actions, not his surroundings.
The issue in this particular point, I think, is that this would be perfectly normal and adequate on an non-interactive media, like a movie where the main character keeps trying to remember past events, and we are brought to his mind through some sort of narrative tool. Since we're talking about a game, the approach seems problematic, because the character and the environment are two completely distinct entities.
If the player were able to somehow control both the character AND the environment (to a lesser extent, obviously), the immersion would be maintained in the end.
Well, that's it.
Thank you for reading and replying! Sorry if i bothered you in any way.
I am very anxious to know If you have any other game in the making! =)
Ps.: I still don't know what happened in that first house where I woke up! Damn!