Can't help but be disappointed (story-wise)...

[Vulture]

So first things first, this is objectively, a great game (subjectively-objectively?). Just wanted to get that out of the way before anyone jumps down my throat about this.

I am disappointed with the lack of choice regarding the genocide route (the first, and only, route I've completed thus far). Why must we be made out as a schizophrenic nutjob whose only goal is to murder everything we can get out hands on. Now I know that sounds really weird as it is indeed called the genocidal route for a reson but how can it garner a name purely from the straightfoward, and rather bland, input that it demands. It just seems incredibly lacking from the rest of the game.

I understand that is part of what makes the route... appealing to many, the fact that you, as a player are not in control of... the protagonists... actions, but it just seems so... weak, forcing such an idle role upon the player and consequently, letting it fester into an inactive experience, keeping it not on par with the other routes where the player actively decides how the story will pan out...

It annoys me as the player to sit through actions not made by myself to achieve an undesireable end and as such, upon further investigation, discovering my ideal would not be realised within the confines of the game... although, it is worth noting, I very much enjoyed the lovely sessions with Undyne and Sans and also saying no at the end, getting warmer but altogether, alone and freezing.

P.S: Discussion on whether or not I'm mentally functional desptie writing this and having only "played" through the one route are undesireable and rather unwarrented...

TL;DR: I don't like, what I find to be, poorly written psychopaths...

[Vulture]

⎛⚙Odyessy⚙⎞ původně napsal:

Will you consider replaying the game, Stitches? On Neutral or Pacifism? Or was the dissapointment of Genocide that bad? It's perfectly understandable.

As well as having nothing to gain from it, replaying it would defeat the purpose of my actions, I get more enjoyment leaving it the way it is anyway. For what it's worth I had a blast.

Tenor Sounds původně napsal:

You say that the game isn't reacting to your (the player's) actions, but the things you're mentioning like your character doing things outside of your control are a direct result of your decision to kill all the monsters in the Underground. I'm not quite sure what else you want from it? The Genocide Run is exactly the way it is to get across its themes of progress for progress's sake, pushing a system to the edge despite it telling you it's a bad idea every step of the way, etc. It's not meant to be engaging, full-featured, or really even fun.

Basically, it's designed to be "lacking" from the rest of the game and I think it's a stronger message for it. It might be that the message didn't really resonate with you personally, but I wouldn't want it changed to have more choice for the player or anything.

I'm not entirely sure myself what I do, in fact, want from it. What I do know, however, is that it didn't feel like I was playing such a character and I also did not feel like the game (and the characters within it) were telling me it was bad (with the noticable exception of Sans), they gave me no reason to not continue, the game itself progressing without my input. Even if this is all by design, it does nothing to remedy my dissapointment with it.

I'm well aware my disappointment lies within myself and myself alone but... I can't help it, having enjoyed it immensely.

Cy-Kill původně napsal:

did you notice how some "narration" dialogs changed from the third to first person for genocide? easiest example is a mirror. in pacifist/neutral it returns "it is you, [playername]", but in genocide, it becames "it's me, [playername]"

im guessing the lack of player choice is related to that thematic choice. though genocide does make a lot of assumptions about you, the player. things like "you dont have time for puzzles" and such. i guess it's really supposed to represent your possession by chara. im guessing the real reason it is in the game is so you can get "the other side of the story" as it were.

but if you really wanna go down the rabbit hole, really read the sequence of flowey's dialog, and sans' dialog at the end. heh, people who reset for multiple pacifist runs arent much better than dirty genociders. or alphys for that matter.

I did see that, but as mentioned, I find it weak considering the lack of Chara in the other routes.

That's a good way to put it though, feeling left out with the assumptions the game makes about the characters choices when doing that route. That latter part was one of the better parts of the game and, as a whole, find it hard to imagine any variation of the game without that sequence in particular. It does, however, give more reason to replay the game but, from what I've seen of other endings, it would be greatly unfullfilling.

[Strider VM]

Sadly, people wouldn't really be able to explain why the genocide route feels so empty. Until you finish the game thru Neutral and then the True Pacifist routes.......

The game seems almost tailor made to be finished in order of Neutral > True Pacifist > Genocide. At least in sense of story progression.

For example, a lot of people cannot actually start a genocide run because their conscience stopped it. Because they probably just saw the True Pacifist ending. But since Genocide is your first route. There's no attachment to the characters you just murdered.

Lastly to be dense, genocide route has no different to a typical RPG, except encounters run out. So I also don't get your complaint in that sense as well.

[Crystalitar]

I would quickly more ask you for your motivations as to why you chose to do genocide first? Its generally accepted in the fandom that the genocide should be done last for more story impact and feel impact.

So. Why did you do genocide first? Assuming, that by knowing you could to genocide you already knew what could be done in tha game.

Lots of people have a lot of theories on what is happening in genocide wich makes more sense after having played the neutral and pacifist way, then first playing genocide and landing in a controlled wasteland.

[Tenor Sounds]

Stitches původně napsal:

I'm not entirely sure myself what I do, in fact, want from it. What I do know, however, is that it didn't feel like I was playing such a character and I also did not feel like the game (and the characters within it) were telling me it was bad (with the noticable exception of Sans), they gave me no reason to not continue, the game itself progressing without my input. Even if this is all by design, it does nothing to remedy my dissapointment with it.

I'm confused when you say you don't feel like you were playing "such a character". In the game's world, you're going out of your way to kill every monster, and the other remaining monsters are reacting to you in kind. To them, you're playing a genocidal maniac. In the game's story, this allows The Fallen Child to slowly gain more control over Frisk, the protagonist, which is why control is taken away from the player themselves.

As for other characters telling you it was 'bad'...well, I don't know what to say there. They clearly don't want you killing them all, so if that doesn't scream 'bad' to you I don't know what would. The game literally cannot progress without your input, you can stop doing a Genocide run at any point. Honestly I just can't quite get a grasp on where you're at with all this, it all seems pretty straight-forward to me. I'm not saying your disappointment is invalid or anything, but I just don't get it :\

[Zoracs]

Stitches původně napsal:

It annoys me as the player to sit through actions not made by myself to achieve an undesireable end and as such, upon further investigation, discovering my ideal would not be realised within the confines of the game...

The idea is the human is slowly being lead and taken over by Chara. They are losing control of who they were because they let the LOVE consume them, in more ways than one.

Stitches původně napsal:

I understand that is part of what makes the route... appealing to many, the fact that you, as a player are not in control of... the protagonists... actions, but it just seems so... weak, forcing such an idle role upon the player and consequently, letting it fester into an inactive experience, keeping it not on par with the other routes where the player actively decides how the story will pan out...

I actually felt the human to have more of a personality in this run because they actually do things themselves. It made the situation feel much more real as I felt them sink deeper and deeper into their hole.

and I'm not sure what you mean by 'the other routes let the player decide how the story pans out', because that's not true for Pacifist Oh god I did a funny. The story there is just as set in stone as it is for Genocide. If you mean "the world feels less lively when you kill its inhabitants", that's kinda the point of Geno -_-

[Vulture]

ストライダー VM původně napsal:

Sadly, people wouldn't really be able to explain why the genocide route feels so empty. Until you finish the game thru Neutral and then the True Pacifist routes.......

The game seems almost tailor made to be finished in order of Neutral > True Pacifist > Genocide. At least in sense of story progression.

For example, a lot of people cannot actually start a genocide run because their conscience stopped it. Because they probably just saw the True Pacifist ending. But since Genocide is your first route. There's no attachment to the characters you just murdered.

Lastly to be dense, genocide route has no different to a typical RPG, except encounters run out. So I also don't get your complaint in that sense as well.

Even after investigating the other endings I find it lacking, possibly more so considering the wide range of neutral endings. The genocide route remaining the most favourable outcome in my opinion.

I'd say I felt attachment to certain characters, Undyne, Flowey and Sans to be particular which is a shame that I didn't get to spare or actually kill Flowey and technically Sans.

I did not kill the characters for the stereotypical RPG reasons (well, Toriel and such at least), I killed them for access and little else, to be able to find, and understand the situation I was dropped in as a character discovering it was considered an unfavourable route part way. Although, I found little in reference to my goals so I s'pose it could be considered a bust, but at least it was fun.

Crystalitar - NYEH původně napsal:

I would quickly more ask you for your motivations as to why you chose to do genocide first? Its generally accepted in the fandom that the genocide should be done last for more story impact and feel impact.

So. Why did you do genocide first? Assuming, that by knowing you could to genocide you already knew what could be done in tha game.

Lots of people have a lot of theories on what is happening in genocide wich makes more sense after having played the neutral and pacifist way, then first playing genocide and landing in a controlled wasteland.

My motivations? In general, it started as gathering strength to defend oneself which was shown to be a necessity in that area.

Toriel was... unfortunate, not unwarranted though. One who refuses to share knowledge yet claims protection over those who asks? She made the mistake of believing in version of the character that was not in line with my goals. Noble, but pointless. In any event, there is a lot one can gain through corpses but living beings can stand to give more.

It was similar with Papyrus, although Sans had interested me giving an incentive to commit to the act. Although, I would have preffered to give Papyrus a fair shot rather than just killing him with no challange. I then discovered Sans was at the end of that route giving me a reason to continue further.

Undyne was enjoyable, although, it was regrettable when the game tried to kill that monster kid, I mean, I did owe him for his help. I still got to have fun with Undyne so I s’pose it worked out well enough. Having it serve as a testament to the distance travelled thusfar and thereforth. It would have been interesting to try an spare her but ultimately pointless.

I would have spared Muffet if it weren’t for the results but it matters little. Maybe the same with Mettaton, although he did not interest me to any great degree so...

And then Flowy popped back up, giving me what I could not find anywhere else which was an explanation (although, it still missed a few things but I digress), what I had been looking for. Shame I didn't get to fight him though... at least he retains his memories.

Sans was brilliant, I wish the game didn't kill him, the alternative just to sit there, forever killing each other being enticing but not necessary.

The point being, the path there is rather strict considering the neutral possibilities.

Tenor Sounds původně napsal:

I'm confused when you say you don't feel like you were playing "such a character". In the game's world, you're going out of your way to kill every monster, and the other remaining monsters are reacting to you in kind. To them, you're playing a genocidal maniac. In the game's story, this allows The Fallen Child to slowly gain more control over Frisk, the protagonist, which is why control is taken away from the player themselves.

As for other characters telling you it was 'bad'...well, I don't know what to say there. They clearly don't want you killing them all, so if that doesn't scream 'bad' to you I don't know what would. The game literally cannot progress without your input, you can stop doing a Genocide run at any point. Honestly I just can't quite get a grasp on where you're at with all this, it all seems pretty straight-forward in-game.

I didn't feel like I was playing a genocidal maniac, is that so wrong? I didn't feel like I was going out of my way for anything (minus hotland but it was necessary at that point) and any consequence of it was not found until the very end in the form of the Sans fight but even that felt like a reward. Maybe I'm missing something but where does Chara exist in the other routes? Not having any noticable impact beyond the genocide route it seems. This makes the ending seem rather weak, having some random entity assume control of what was a route that does nothing to notify of the fact without taking control and one or two lines of dialogue. Maybe I'm just annoyed at her (his?) presence and that alone, that could make sense.

It only seemed like Sans actively told me it was a bad "idea" but ultimately did nothing to stop me until the end, the rest of the inhabitants leaving out of fear of the unknown it seems.

[Thundercracker]

i wonder.... why do we have to be a soulless monster for genocide?

perhaps the protagonist grew up in a culture that remembered the war against the monsters, and that culture states that any monsters that are found must die. perhaps the legends tell of how the monsters will try to be your friend, and then steal your soul when your guard is down (like a certain flower at the beginning of the game, for example)

i mean, i can think of many examples of this sort of thing in real life. in longstanding conflicts against foreign cultures, both sides demonize each other as not even having the qualitys of humanity.

genocide is even halfway understandable, i mean, most of the underground either wants to imprison you there forever, or wants to flat out steal your soul.

[RangedSpider]

Cy-Kill původně napsal:

i wonder.... why do we have to be a soulless monster for genocide?

perhaps the protagonist grew up in a culture that remembered the war against the monsters, and that culture states that any monsters that are found must die. perhaps the legends tell of how the monsters will try to be your friend, and then steal your soul when your guard is down (like a certain flower at the beginning of the game, for example)

i mean, i can think of many examples of this sort of thing in real life. in longstanding conflicts against foreign cultures, both sides demonize each other as not even having the qualitys of humanity.

genocide is even halfway understandable, i mean, most of the underground either wants to imprison you there forever, or wants to flat out steal your soul.

Cus Charas influence maybe?

[Thundercracker]

RangedSpider původně napsal:

Cus Charas influence maybe?

a possibility, but it feels like a cop out because no influence is asserted in any other path.

kinda like the cop out in true pacifist where you are revealed to be frisk, and not you. kinda spoils the whole "projecting onto the protagonist" thing, especially when asriel says "[playername] was really not the best person". wow, i go through all that, and not only am i not me, but _I_ am not a good person. even though i made an effort to find and befriend everyone in the underground.

but yea, genocide: i'm an 8 year old child surrounded by monsters that want to imprison me or steal my soul. of course im going to fight. hell, studies show that altrueism isnt even learned till around 8 years of age. i dont know, that might just be a personal thing because i grew up in a warrior culture.

[Tenor Sounds]

Stitches původně napsal:

I didn't feel like I was playing a genocidal maniac, is that so wrong? I didn't feel like I was going out of my way for anything (minus hotland but it was necessary at that point) and any consequence of it was not found until the very end in the form of the Sans fight but even that felt like a reward. Maybe I'm missing something but where does Chara exist in the other routes? Not having any noticable impact beyond the genocide route it seems. This makes the ending seem rather weak, having some random entity assume control of what was a route that does nothing to notify of the fact without taking control and one or two lines of dialogue. Maybe I'm just annoyed at her (his?) presence and that alone, that could make sense.

It only seemed like Sans actively told me it was a bad "idea" but ultimately did nothing to stop me until the end, the rest of the inhabitants leaving out of fear of the unknown it seems.

I think your way of approaching this game is just so different than mine I can't empathize with understand your reasoning no matter how it's explained to me. I mean, it literally sounds like to me you're saying "Why should I be treated like a maniac just because I decided to go out of my way to kill everyone?" Your choice, as the player, is what starts your character on the path. To me, the Genocide route is perfect because of how unfulfilling it is, and how it deconstructs the disonance between our actions as a player playing an RPG, grinding for experience, etc., and the character's reactions (or lack thereof) to those actions. In Undertale, the characters react to them.

It sounds like you were killing everything because you knew you could, and whenever someone called you out for it in the game you had the attitude of "I'm killing for experience, not to be a psycho" or something and so when it had your character act like a psycho, you felt like it was unearned.

If that's the case, then I think it comes down to deciding to do the Genocide Route first and missing a lot of the pieces of the story, themes, and character dynamics that the Genocide route is playing off of. Yes, you can technically do the Genocide Run as your first but the game's story and themes do NOT flow well at all. I guess that can be considered a failing of the game, but there's a certain strength and impact to having a story that seems free-form but actually is inteligently layed out to guide the player through a particular set of experiences while not breaking that illusion of choice. Undertale does a good job of this by making the Genocide Route something that is nearly impossible to complete by accident and having it so that 99% of players hit one of the other endings first.

You might have just gotten unlucky by deciding to do a Genocide Run first, unfortunately. I know you've responded to others and said you looked into the other endings already, but I don't think you understand how much you missed. Not just in the plot, but in theme and character development.

[RangedSpider]

Cy-Kill původně napsal:

RangedSpider původně napsal:

Cus Charas influence maybe?

a possibility, but it feels like a cop out because no influence is asserted in any other path.

kinda like the cop out in true pacifist where you are revealed to be frisk, and not you. kinda spoils the whole "projecting onto the protagonist" thing, especially when asriel says "[playername] was really not the best person". wow, i go through all that, and not only am i not me, but _I_ am not a good person. even though i made an effort to find and befriend everyone in the underground.

but yea, genocide: i'm an 8 year old child surrounded by monsters that want to imprison me or steal my soul. of course im going to fight. hell, studies show that altrueism isnt even learned till around 8 years of age. i dont know, that might just be a personal thing because i grew up in a warrior culture.

You can still see influence in neutral paths. Chara is very associated with death. It's highly likely that killing everybody in your path leaves you susceptible to their control.

[MysticMalevolence]

Cy-Kill původně napsal:

RangedSpider původně napsal:

Cus Charas influence maybe?

a possibility, but it feels like a cop out because no influence is asserted in any other path.

kinda like the cop out in true pacifist where you are revealed to be frisk, and not you. kinda spoils the whole "projecting onto the protagonist" thing, especially when asriel says "[playername] was really not the best person". wow, i go through all that, and not only am i not me, but _I_ am not a good person. even though i made an effort to find and befriend everyone in the underground.

The first child isn't necessarily "you". The mirror in the neutral route simply reads "It's you", the fallen child isn't mentioned in this scenario.

I mean, yeah, there's the naming thing. But one could interpret it as Frisk being beyond your control, and taking control of their own life, at the end of a pacifist route; similar to Flowey's post-pacifist lecture.

[Tenor Sounds]

Realized I rambled for a bit in that last post; didn't mean to seem like I was going after you or anything.

The best way I can summarize what I'm trying to get across is this: the Genocide Run is less of a complete 2nd path in the game (like, say, the evil route of Soul Nomad) and/or a game where being the 'bad' guy mostly effects the story/dialogue and some gameplay mechanics (such as Knights of the Old Republic), it's more of a deliberate subversion of the other paths in the game. A subversion of something you've not experienced isn't going to have the same impact.

[Thundercracker]

EvilDylan původně napsal:

The first child isn't necessarily "you". The mirror in the neutral route simply reads "It's you", the fallen child isn't mentioned in this scenario.

I mean, yeah, there's the naming thing. But one could interpret it as Frisk being beyond your control, and taking control of their own life, at the end of a pacifist route; similar to Flowey's post-pacifist lecture.

i still think it shatters the whole projecting onto the protagonist thing. that's be like, at the end of a legend of zelda game the protagonist is revealed to be "link", not whatever you named your character as. oh, and then gannon turns out to be whatever you named yourself

[Xan42]

Stitches původně napsal:

I didn't feel like I was playing a genocidal maniac, is that so wrong?

Well, yes. You're hanging around areas killing absolutely everyone until nobody is left.

Stitches původně napsal:

I didn't feel like I was going out of my way for anything (minus hotland but it was necessary at that point)

The game gives you every opportunity to abbandon a genocide run. 1 spared monster, 1 missed kill, and you're back to a neutral run. The player has to go out of their way, grinding for kills, to see a genocide run through to completion.

Stitches původně napsal:

it was regrettable when the game tried to kill that monster kid, I mean, I did owe him for his help.

This one I don't understand. When you confront monster kid, the game gives you the option to spare him. He doesn't even attack you. It's you who attacks him, not the game. The game just gives you the option.

Stitches původně napsal:

It only seemed like Sans actively told me it was a bad "idea" but ultimately did nothing to stop me until the end, the rest of the inhabitants leaving out of fear of the unknown it seems.

This makes it sound like you didn't feel like a genocidal maniac because not enough people called you a genocidal maniac or that killing wasn't the preferred solution (Even though other characters did do that, just not to the extent in which sans did it). And as for "fear of the unknown", it was more "fear of something that going around killing everything"

Stitches původně napsal:

Maybe I'm missing something but where does Chara exist in the other routes? Not having any noticable impact beyond the genocide route it seems.

Chara is talked about a little bit towards the end of the neutral and pacifist runs. They don't really have any influence there because they're already dead by the time the story starts. Completing a genocide run brings them back, thus giving them influence.