I love the game, but the Sean Hampton decision blows (spoilers)

[wyrdplace]

I've been forced to play THREE times to that point, in order to get it right. It wouldn't be an issue, if I had save points I could back up to, but being forced to go all the way back to the beginning SUCKS. Especially, since I didn't MAKE the wrong decision - the game FORCED me to make the wrong decision, even though I didn't want to do that. Why? Because I couldn't remember where to get a detail about his past from a completely unrelated character by asking a question you would never expect to give you information like that. The detail in question is pretty much IRRELEVANT to the choice, anyway, but that option is hidden, because I didn't get it.

I also didn't remember that ALL CHOICE IS TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU at a certain point, long before you actually have to make the decision. So basically, the moment I entered the sewers was the moment I should have stopped wasting my time playing, because the game was over. When Sean dies, the district collapses and two possible endings (the only ones I like) are sealed off from you. Therefore, there is no point in playing the rest of the game. I'll hate every minute of it.

[Sneaky Fox]

I got the perfect ending with jean dead. I killed him myself after the event.
stop complaining and play the game.

[wyrdplace]

Originally posted by Sneaky Fox:

I got the perfect ending with jean dead. I killed him myself after the event.
stop complaining and play the game.

That was... almost helpful. But, no, I don't think I'll continue. I'll put the damned thing aside for a while. I was TRYING, on this playthrough, to save both Sean and Swansea. I wasn't able to save Sean the first time (or I thought I had, but he turned evil and I had to kill him), and I thought I needed to let Swansea die on the second playthough. That turned out to be wrong. This playthrough was mucked up by bad game logic, imo. The dialog that gives you Sean's second hint is completely out of left field, arrived at by selecting a dialog option you have no reason to believe will do anything but end the conversation: "I respect your refusal." or something like that.

[Sneaky Fox]

tbh, if you think your game is broken because of this, you have not understood why you are able to make these decision.

[wyrdplace]

Originally posted by Sneaky Fox:

tbh, if you think your game is broken because of this, you have not understood why you are able to make these decision.

No, you don't understand why decisions need to be logical. Preventing a player from making an intelligent decision because he didn't choose a dialog option which seemed like the wrong choice, at the time (i.e., ending the conversation, as opposed to getting information you need to continue) while talking to a character WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION (Seriously! Why the @$%! would he KNOW that about Sean, and why would he divulge it to a perfect stranger?!) is bad game design. It annoys me more for this than for me having to replay the whole game to get back to that choice. I'm a programmer. I don't like sloppy program design.

[Sneaky Fox]

the game design does not own you perfect explanation of the consequences. do you try to charm dorothea even though you have no idea what it will do, neither does Johnathan? do you believe Jean he can defeat the hunger with his faith? it does not matter what the consequence is that you want. You decide on your actions, not the consequences they bring.

[wyrdplace]

Sure, I don't know the consequences of my choices (assuming I'm playing for the first time). But when confronted by Sean, there are three things I'd obvious want to do:

1. Let him go free and do his own thing.

2. Kill him.

3. Make him a vampire and therefore somewhat bound to me.

On a first playthrough, I wouldn't know the consequences of any of these choices, but they're all blatantly obvious. Even knowing absolutely NOTHING about Sean.

What irritates me is having one of these options blocked, simply because I didn't talk to Throgmorton. That's just dumb. I still can't imagine why THAT guy would have the information he has, and why he'd go around telling strangers about Sean's deepest childhood trauma.

[Al]

"That guy" is a regular of the community that Sean oversees... for whatever reason, Seam told him some of his backstory... maybe he told others as well and only 'that guy' is the one who is willing to share the info, rather than keep it confidential....

It never ceases to surprise me how often someone will tell me me something that either I think they really shouldnt have known, and/or that they shouldnt be telling me (great example, I was maybe 9 and my neighbour had to pick me up from school, and in some awkward attempt to make convo with e NINE YEAR OLD, said "So, I hear your dad's a real animal in bed"... rest of the carride was total silence. but really, WTF? Just like you are WTF about 'that guy' knowing/sharing Sean's 'secret'. PEOPLE ARE NOT LOGICAL!

yet we must get as much info from people/NPCs as possible to get thru the game, because That is what it is! This must be grasped, to grasp the game itself

[Al]

Swansea is also a nutcase - and letting him 'live' in the only way that he can, is rather questionable. There's a good reason he's the last community Pillar to have all the secretes learned about before you can make a decision on to eat him, turn him, or leave him to his fate

[wyrdplace]

Originally posted by Alan:

Swansea is also a nutcase - and letting him 'live' in the only way that he can, is rather questionable. There's a good reason he's the last community Pillar to have all the secretes learned about before you can make a decision on to eat him, turn him, or leave him to his fate

That's the point though. Turning him is the only logical thing to do, even NOT knowing that final piece of the puzzle. If I turn him, I might have some control over him. Maybe. I'm not sure. But killing him is obviously wrong, because what's going to happen to everyone in the shelter now? They'll be MUCH worse off. Which is what happens, and why the entire district starts collapsing. I know that will happen without leadership, so killing him is wrong. But letting him remain a ghoul is wrong. So I'd like to turn him and take my chances. But no. Not allowed.

[wyrdplace]

But my main point is, the player doesn't have a good reason that would lead him to this information. We ask Throgmorton, "Where can I find Sean Hampton?" He says "Go talk to Tom." We do, and Tom tells us where to go. There is no reason whatsoever to go BACK to Throgmorton and ask him more about Sean, at that point. And once we find Sean, there is no reason to do so either.

[Al]

Originally posted by wyrdplace:

But my main point is, the player doesn't have a good reason that would lead him to this information. We ask Throgmorton, "Where can I find Sean Hampton?" He says "Go talk to Tom." We do, and Tom tells us where to go. There is no reason whatsoever to go BACK to Throgmorton and ask him more about Sean, at that point. And once we find Sean, there is no reason to do so either.

If you look at each NPC's 'profile card' so to say, it tells you how much of their secrets (import ones to the story at least) you have learned. If you talk to Throggie, then talk to Tom, then check Sean's profile card thingy, you will see you are still missing info.... the LOGICIAL thing to do then is to keep going around and asking people questions- even the SAME people, because they may open up more once they know you know something that another erson told you.... or because they may have more info on some other NPC you will need to know about later one, whatever.
Bottom line is that you can check if you have all the hints/clues/secrets about a character before you confront them (or eat them). If you don't - you know to keep looking. The dev's spell it right out for you, It might seem odd to you who to talk to, ok, but the fact that you dont have all the info- that is something that you as the player / Dr Jonathan always know- always to the exact percentage, "I know X# of Y# of secrets about person Z". you EVEN will know if a secret is "cut off" from you due to say a dialogue with another NPC gone wrong, or having eaten the NPC that would have told you that info.... thus, you will also always know if the missing info is still out there to 'discover', or if you should give up looking for the clues.

[Al]

Originally posted by wyrdplace:

Originally posted by Alan:

Swansea is also a nutcase - and letting him 'live' in the only way that he can, is rather questionable. There's a good reason he's the last community Pillar to have all the secretes learned about before you can make a decision on to eat him, turn him, or leave him to his fate

That's the point though. Turning him is the only logical thing to do, even NOT knowing that final piece of the puzzle......

You realise I was talking about SWANSEA , and NOT Sean Hamtpton?

I dont want to spoil anything for you or others if you havent reached the point where you can, if you want to, turn Swansea, but arguing the logic of it would be.... a ....very.... interesting..... discussion, to say the least IMHO. And also probably ideal for another thread that warned of spoilers in the subject header itself.

[wyrdplace]

I've already played the game through a few times, so nothing is spoiled for me, though others might get too much info from this thread.

[wyrdplace]

But no, I thought we were still talking about Sean. :-p