Java Lilith's Throne [v0.4.10.7 Hotfix] [Innoxia]

[joeys88]

You don't stumble into those by accident, but there are players who rush the game that would likely end up rushing into the Vengar fight or the imps and the fortress isn't the only challenging part there, there's also the random imp gangs that CAN overwhelm an unprepared player.

Cool. Live with the consequences. ID didn't remove dying from Doom because the doomslayer is supposed to be some demon slaying prodigy. Play a JRPG and skip leveling up as much as possible and then complain when a boss beats your ass too. If you rush into something like Vengar or the Imp Fortresses you deserve every bit of whats coming to you. Ignoring warnings is entirely on you. Bad judgement is entirely on you. Poor saving habits is entirely on you.

I have had this happen on multiple occasions, not a game over fight, but one that ultimately set me back quite a bit.

If consequences of a fight bother you then why have combat at all. Maybe they can make a mode for you called alpha mode where everyone is just so enamored by you they submit instantly.

I'm just stating a simple fact, this game is not meant for the player to play the slave, it is meant for the player to get rid of the ruling power and free the people or to take over as the new ruler, which is the opposite of what you are suggesting, especially if the master who buys the PC is a loyalist as that means the PC will never be allowed to remain in opposition to Lilith.

So when we do eventually fight lilith, losing the fight will just result in us getting tossed out and nothing bad happens, because "it is not meant for the player". That certainly isn't immersion breaking at all. Glad to hear she'll just give us a pat on the back and say "better luck next time".

Doomslayer isn't meant to die, so the demons shouldn't be able to kill you. Recette isn't meant to lose her family shop, so failing to pay off the loan shouldn't be possible. Luka will unite the humans/monsters, so getting raped and kidnapped by a monster is against the purpose of the game.

The game has plenty of material that doesn't play into the conflict between the PC and Lilith. Children are completely unnecessary to the story but are in the game anyway. Transforming the character is unnecessary to the story yet is in the game anyway. Turning lilaya's mansion into the multibillion flame franchise McMilkers is unnecessary, but thats there too. Your vision of the game conflicts with Inno's, who obviously made what you said the game isn't "meant" to have. The game was originally a sandbox, with main storyline added on later. The meaning of the player in games is up to the creator. Why is it a foregone conclusion that the player will defeat Lilith? Why is it a foregone conclusion that the player wants to defeat Lilith? In the Zelda timelines, one of the games is set in a timeline where Link was defeated by Ganon. In Cave Story, you can decide to abandon the island to its fate and flee instead, which allows the Doctor to continue with his plan unopposed.

While I'm not a fan of the Vengar slave end(Our character has the ability to enchant/disenchant things and transform themselves, they should be able to escape given time), I don't see how its against the themes of a game where slavery is commonplace.

 

[NoStepOnSnek]

So let me get this clear. We shouldn't add any more bad ends what-so-ever, even with all the warnings, safety nets in the form of auto and manual saves, and content settings; on the off chance that someone someone might, while transferring saves -an inherently risky proposition- on a blue moon, suffer game breaking bug.

Not even over a bug in this case, but the classic 'forgot to turn enchant cap back off before loading a character with hilariously OP gear'

 

[BigBiggieBig]

Is there any way to change gender preferences half-way through the game? I have some genders around that I'd prefer weren't there, it's my fault for not realizing it at first, but I can't figure out where to adjust the settings for it.

 

[NoStepOnSnek]

Is there any way to change gender preferences half-way through the game? I have some genders around that I'd prefer weren't there, it's my fault for not realizing it at first, but I can't figure out where to adjust the settings for it.

Main Menu->Options->Gender Preferences
You can pretty much change all options at any time but any existing NPC's will obviously stick around unless you go and dismiss them.

 

[Lady_Yvraine]

Pencil8526 joeys88 Just ignore the guy. He's detached at best, dangerously unhinged at worst.
Some pages ago he was raving about how Inno "betrayed" him and planned to pay someone to mod in murdering Nyan in horrible ways just on the assumption that he was owed something. After that, he had a stupidly long discussion about fastraveling and world size with someone else, repeating the same things over and over.
Click on his profile pic to open up a menu, there'll be an Ignore button in it.

 

[BigBiggieBig]

Main Menu->Options->Gender Preferences
You can pretty much change all options at any time but any existing NPC's will obviously stick around unless you go and dismiss them.

lmao I did not think changing things from the main menu would affect an on-going savefile, thanks.

 

[NoStepOnSnek]

lmao I did not think changing things from the main menu would affect an on-going savefile, thanks.

Well, you get the same menu by hitting esc or that button on the bottom left in the game.

 

[BigBiggieBig]

Well, you get the same menu by hitting esc or that button on the bottom left in the game.

Oh, for some reason I never clicked 'Options', only 'Content Options'. Woops.

 

[alex2011]

1.) What? That's nonsense. You get an autosave every time you enter an area. If you continued on and got into a fight you couldn't win, then autosave would set you right back to when you first entered. At which point you can just turn around and leave.
2.)You can disable game over scenarios. I don't know what you're failing to understand about this. You can disable game overs. So even if you find yourself in a situation where you lose its not going to be game over unless you specifically set it so game overs could happen.
3.) Again, how? How do you not manual save prior to to entering dangerous areas when it tells you its a dangerous area?




So you just... don't ever feel like manual saving? Or something?


Not if game over is disabled. Like seriously, turning off a setting isn't rocket science. In fact, I'm pretty sure its off by default.


1.) Autosave still works, despite your claim of uselessness. For instance, if the player loses to an Imp gang, loading the autosave will revert the player right back to when they entered submission. No problem.
2.) Most players are cautious enough to use manual saves, especially if they're rushing content.
3.) Again, the game literally showers them in warnings. If they decide not to heed those warnings that's up to them.
4.) Once more with the disabling bad ends. If you want bad ends, you need to enable the setting, otherwise you physically can't get a bad end. Like at all, its impossible.
5.) You're acting as if I want every single loss to instantly enslave the player. You did read the part where I told you I didn't want to shift the core of the game, right? It'd work just fine if enslavement was restricted to bosses, or even a specific boss, kinda like, oh I don't know... what Inno did with Vengar.

Like man, we have a bad end in game already, and shockingly, it hasn't destroyed the game's themes, or ruined its content, or resulted in mass outrage, or whatever catastrophe you seem to think adding another bad end will cause. It can be done, because you know, it already has been.


So let me get this clear. We shouldn't add any more bad ends what-so-ever, even with all the warnings, safety nets in the form of auto and manual saves, and content settings; on the off chance that someone someone might, while transferring saves -an inherently risky proposition- on a blue moon, suffer game breaking bug.



To be frank, that is the most ridiculous chain of logic I've ever heard. You're reaching. Really reaching.


...So have slavery be gated behind the game over toggle as well. I feel like that should be fairly obvious? To be honest I was under assumption that that's what we were discussing in the first place?

Again, I'm not seeing how a player that has enabled bad ends would be outraged at finding bad ends. That's kinda the whole point of enabling bad ends.


And Marrowind is not meant for the player to fail the main quest, but the people working on the game were kind enough to add the option to do so anyway. So if the player wanted to be a serial killer who attacked anyone they saw, they could, even if it went directly against the game's theme of the player being the titular hero.

And yeah, most games are meant for something and have their own specific theme, but to insist that that means you're is not allowed to experience extra content, even if its 'against the grain' so to speak, is rather close-minded.

1.) What? That's nonsense. You get an autosave every time you enter an area. If you continued on and got into a fight you couldn't win, then autosave would set you right back to when you first entered. At which point you can just turn around and leave.

Autosave frequency depends on a player setting, which because it can interrupt smooth gameplay due to occasional lag spikes, means that some set it to as infrequent as possible.

2.)You can disable game over scenarios. I don't know what you're failing to understand about this. You can disable game overs. So even if you find yourself in a situation where you lose its not going to be game over unless you specifically set it so game overs could happen.

You're also not going to be enslaved in this case. I actually wouldn't mind having player slavery, the problem is what that means for the main quest. In order to get ANY event that involves player slavery, you have to enable game overs. It is literally meant as a game over scenario, that's why it is gated by that toggle.

3.) Again, how? How do you not manual save prior to to entering dangerous areas when it tells you its a dangerous area?

1. Forgetfulness happens

2. There is no indication in game of how prepared you should be, so it is very easy to go in unprepared and think you aren't.

3. The case that happened to me, I knew very well I was fully prepared for any content the game threw at me, so I logically would have been able to beat it with or without a save. I was SEVERELY overleveled at the point the bug occurred. When a player has been prepared for a quest and then a bug silently creeps in, they won't know it happened until it is too late.

I'm pretty sure its off by default.

I guess that's why I have to go in and disable it myself every time I update.

So let me get this clear. We shouldn't add any more bad ends what-so-ever, even with all the warnings, safety nets in the form of auto and manual saves, and content settings; on the off chance that someone someone might, while transferring saves -an inherently risky proposition- on a blue moon, suffer game breaking bug.

I never said that, in fact, my entire point is Inno should treat it like what it is, game over.

...So have slavery be gated behind the game over toggle as well. I feel like that should be fairly obvious? To be honest I was under assumption that that's what we were discussing in the first place?

Again, I'm not seeing how a player that has enabled bad ends would be outraged at finding bad ends. That's kinda the whole point of enabling bad ends.

The thing is bad ends are supposed to do one thing, end the game. They give a scene that details what happens to the PC as a result of whatever caused it, but they are called a bad END for a reason.

And Marrowind is not meant for the player to fail the main quest, but the people working on the game were kind enough to add the option to do so anyway. So if the player wanted to be a serial killer who attacked anyone they saw, they could, even if it went directly against the game's theme of the player being the titular hero.

I'm pretty sure your Morrowind example falls flat because they fixed this in Skyrim. I don't think they ever meant to allow important NPCs to be killed, which they cannot be in Skyrim. Important NPCs in Skyrim are set to essential for as long as they are necessary to the plot, which means they can be downed, but they cannot be killed. How long an NPC remains essential is dependent on what their role is in the game. A quest important NPC might only be essential until there is no threat of locking progress, but children NPCs are permanently set to essential to disallow killing of children.

And yeah, most games are meant for something and have their own specific theme, but to insist that that means you're is not allowed to experience extra content, even if its 'against the grain' so to speak, is rather close-minded.

There was no insistence on this, I even gave a way it could work several times, roleplay. If it isn't actual slavery, it doesn't get in the way of the main quest and could actually work.

Cool. Live with the consequences. ID didn't remove dying from Doom because the doomslayer is supposed to be some demon slaying prodigy. Play a JRPG and skip leveling up as much as possible and then complain when a boss beats your ass too. If you rush into something like Vengar or the Imp Fortresses you deserve every bit of whats coming to you. Ignoring warnings is entirely on you. Bad judgement is entirely on you. Poor saving habits is entirely on you.


If consequences of a fight bother you then why have combat at all. Maybe they can make a mode for you called alpha mode where everyone is just so enamored by you they submit instantly.


So when we do eventually fight lilith, losing the fight will just result in us getting tossed out and nothing bad happens, because "it is not meant for the player". That certainly isn't immersion breaking at all. Glad to hear she'll just give us a pat on the back and say "better luck next time".

Doomslayer isn't meant to die, so the demons shouldn't be able to kill you. Recette isn't meant to lose her family shop, so failing to pay off the loan shouldn't be possible. Luka will unite the humans/monsters, so getting raped and kidnapped by a monster is against the purpose of the game.

The game has plenty of material that doesn't play into the conflict between the PC and Lilith. Children are completely unnecessary to the story but are in the game anyway. Transforming the character is unnecessary to the story yet is in the game anyway. Turning lilaya's mansion into the multibillion flame franchise McMilkers is unnecessary, but thats there too. Your vision of the game conflicts with Inno's, who obviously made what you said the game isn't "meant" to have. The game was originally a sandbox, with main storyline added on later. The meaning of the player in games is up to the creator. Why is it a foregone conclusion that the player will defeat Lilith? Why is it a foregone conclusion that the player wants to defeat Lilith? In the Zelda timelines, one of the games is set in a timeline where Link was defeated by Ganon. In Cave Story, you can decide to abandon the island to its fate and flee instead, which allows the Doctor to continue with his plan unopposed.

While I'm not a fan of the Vengar slave end(Our character has the ability to enchant/disenchant things and transform themselves, they should be able to escape given time), I don't see how its against the themes of a game where slavery is commonplace.

Cool. Live with the consequences. ID didn't remove dying from Doom because the doomslayer is supposed to be some demon slaying prodigy. Play a JRPG and skip leveling up as much as possible and then complain when a boss beats your ass too. If you rush into something like Vengar or the Imp Fortresses you deserve every bit of whats coming to you. Ignoring warnings is entirely on you. Bad judgement is entirely on you. Poor saving habits is entirely on you.

I didn't, but there are players who would. There has already been one who admitted to rushing Brax before being ready. There ARE people who will do that and they WILL complain when they suffer the consequences unless they knew perfectly well that they went in too weak.

There is also the unpredictable threat of a bug that means going in thinking you are prepared, because you actually should be, only to find out your stats are now under what you started at when you first began. I had this happen with a random encounter, my stats were fine until I did a battle and got instant killed, then they reverted to 1. This means there were absolutely no signs I was in danger of losing before I actually did. At this point, I was leveled so high that any and all content was child's play. However, because the bug reset everything to 1, I would have lost even though I should have been guaranteed to win.

If consequences of a fight bother you then why have combat at all. Maybe they can make a mode for you called alpha mode where everyone is just so enamored by you they submit instantly.

They don't bother me and the player can already make NPCs almost instantly submit with a little bit of buggy spawn menu work to get the arcane spells that are restricted to a quest that has not been implemented. Lilith's Command can instant kill literally anything once it gets built up to maximum upgrades.

So when we do eventually fight lilith, losing the fight will just result in us getting tossed out and nothing bad happens, because "it is not meant for the player". That certainly isn't immersion breaking at all. Glad to hear she'll just give us a pat on the back and say "better luck next time".

Oh no, I can almost guarantee that will be a bad end just like in the Rat Warrens on the fact that you're talking about the final boss alone. What is not meant for the player is for them to be completely locked out of the main quest, your entire purpose of being in this demonic realm is to defeat Lilith, which you can't do if you are enslaved. If you were to be locked out, you character might as well have stayed in their world because that accomplishes literally the exact same thing, absolutely nothing.

Doomslayer isn't meant to die, so the demons shouldn't be able to kill you. Recette isn't meant to lose her family shop, so failing to pay off the loan shouldn't be possible. Luka will unite the humans/monsters, so getting raped and kidnapped by a monster is against the purpose of the game.

All examples of game over scenarios. You cannot revive infinitely in any Doom game, you WILL eventually get a game over.

The game has plenty of material that doesn't play into the conflict between the PC and Lilith.

There's a difference between not playing into and going completely against. Having children falls under not playing into, being enslaved falls under going completely against. You can have literally hundreds of children in the game with no negative effect on the main quest, but getting enslaved bars you from ever completing it.

While I'm not a fan of the Vengar slave end(Our character has the ability to enchant/disenchant things and transform themselves, they should be able to escape given time), I don't see how its against the themes of a game where slavery is commonplace.

I'm not sure where you're getting that it's against the theme, it isn't. It denies the player the ability to complete the main quest, that is the issue. The main quest is the whole point of the game, or any RPG for that matter.

Not even over a bug in this case, but the classic 'forgot to turn enchant cap back off before loading a character with hilariously OP gear'

I always turn the enchant cap off when updating, I found out a while ago that I have to redo most settings. It also did not help to unequip the gear and my stats were already high by themselves without the gear. It literally converted them to 1 with no logical explanation.

Pencil8526 joeys88 Just ignore the guy. He's detached at best, dangerously unhinged at worst.
Some pages ago he was raving about how Inno "betrayed" him and planned to pay someone to mod in murdering Nyan in horrible ways just on the assumption that he was owed something. After that, he had a stupidly long discussion about fastraveling and world size with someone else, repeating the same things over and over.
Click on his profile pic to open up a menu, there'll be an Ignore button in it.

I never said betrayed, do not put words in my mouth. What I said was Inno lied, which they did. It is the textbook definition of a lie when someone says something is almost ready, as Inno did in August, and then months later reveals that things were never actually put into implementation.

 

[anon707]

Lol holy shit you have no idea what you're talking about

1. Forgetfulness happens

2. There is no indication in game of how prepared you should be, so it is very easy to go in unprepared and think you aren't.

Your fault on both. If you forget then thats on you. If you cant change a simple autosave setting there is no saving you. And its not the game's responsibility to tell you what areas are challenging and how prepared you need to be, you're suppose to do that yourself. You just want your hand held, in which case, you can change the difficulty settings to Human (easy) and turn off the enchantment cap, but if you cant even figure out the autosave setting then....

You're also not going to be enslaved in this case. I actually wouldn't mind having player slavery, the problem is what that means for the main quest. In order to get ANY event that involves player slavery, you have to enable game overs. It is literally meant as a game over scenario, that's why it is gated by that toggle.

What it means to the main quest is zilch. If you get enslaved, either escape or just take the game over on the chin. The player getting enslaved doesnt suddenly throw the story out of whack.

I'm pretty sure your Morrowind example falls flat because they fixed this in Skyrim. I don't think they ever meant to allow important NPCs to be killed, which they cannot be in Skyrim. Important NPCs in Skyrim are set to essential for as long as they are necessary to the plot, which means they can be downed, but they cannot be killed. How long an NPC remains essential is dependent on what their role is in the game. A quest important NPC might only be essential until there is no threat of locking progress, but children NPCs are permanently set to essential to disallow killing of children.

This is where you truly shine in showing you know nothing. Morrowind letting you kill any NPC was INTENTIONAL. Not a "bug" not an oversight, intentional. When you kill a essential NPC, the game throws a prompt on the screen telling you EXACTLY that an NPC you killed was part of the main qust that was needed and you DOOMED the world because you broke the prophecy. They didnt """"""""fix"""""""" this in Skyrim, the most babified Elder Scrolls there is that isnt ESO or Blades. And children being set to essential has nothing to do with plot important (that has more to do with laws disallowing violence against children in media) so idk why you brought that up.

I didn't, but there are players who would. There has already been one who admitted to rushing Brax before being ready. There ARE people who will do that and they WILL complain when they suffer the consequences unless they knew perfectly well that they went in too weak.

Welcome to failure, you know, the thing we all have to deal with in video games. Oh no, they rushed into a fight they were ready for? Oh those poor babies... Im sure after that horrific defeat they'' need hugs and kiss and lots of head pats. Like, wtf is the point of this? Ok, people lose, so what? If they complain, they can either try again, change the difficulty, or just quit playing. The game has option that can tailor their experience. If they cant change simple options thats on them. If they cant beat a boss thats on them. If they go bitching to Inno about it they're pathetic.

I'm not sure where you're getting that it's against the theme, it isn't. It denies the player the ability to complete the main quest, that is the issue. The main quest is the whole point of the game, or any RPG for that matter.

LOL WHAT!? Okay, so all you do in skyrim is the main quest right? So when you beat the main quest you just uninstall? Not explore the rest of the world? Do all the other big quest in the game? Try to get all the collectable unique items? You dont mod the game and add new shit in? Nothing? Just the main quest? You're a really strange guy.

 

[Zethin]

LOL WHAT!? Okay, so all you do in skyrim is the main quest right? So when you beat the main quest you just uninstall? Not explore the rest of the world? Do all the other big quest in the game? Try to get all the collectable unique items? You dont mod the game and add new shit in? Nothing? Just the main quest? You're a really strange guy.

The problem isn't that the content vanishes. It's that, as a slave, you don't have the ability to access said content. So comparing Morrowind to LT isn't really applicable here, because in Morrowind you still have access to the entire world. As a slave, you'd be entirely isolated and at the whim of someone else. Sure, it's unique for all of 5 minutes, but it's just a more complex gameover screen.

I don't think slavery should be used as a gameover screen either. Game overs disrupt the flow of a story and tells the player "you've reached a dead end, you should not be here." Despite the eccentric nature of his games, I agree with David Cage's stance on this particular design flaw:

Discussing "game over" scenarios, he said, "It's like creating an artificial loop saying, 'You didn't play the game the way I wanted you to play, so now you're punished and you're going to come back and play it again until you do what I want you to do.'" He continued, "In an action game, I can get that - why not? It's all about skills. But in a story-driven experience it doesn't make any sense."

 

[alex2011]

Lol holy shit you have no idea what you're talking about

Your fault on both. If you forget then thats on you. If you cant change a simple autosave setting there is no saving you. And its not the game's responsibility to tell you what areas are challenging and how prepared you need to be, you're suppose to do that yourself. You just want your hand held, in which case, you can change the difficulty settings to Human (easy) and turn off the enchantment cap, but if you cant even figure out the autosave setting then....



What it means to the main quest is zilch. If you get enslaved, either escape or just take the game over on the chin. The player getting enslaved doesnt suddenly throw the story out of whack.



This is where you truly shine in showing you know nothing. Morrowind letting you kill any NPC was INTENTIONAL. Not a "bug" not an oversight, intentional. When you kill a essential NPC, the game throws a prompt on the screen telling you EXACTLY that an NPC you killed was part of the main qust that was needed and you DOOMED the world because you broke the prophecy. They didnt """"""""fix"""""""" this in Skyrim, the most babified Elder Scrolls there is that isnt ESO or Blades. And children being set to essential has nothing to do with plot important (that has more to do with laws disallowing violence against children in media) so idk why you brought that up.



Welcome to failure, you know, the thing we all have to deal with in video games. Oh no, they rushed into a fight they were ready for? Oh those poor babies... Im sure after that horrific defeat they'' need hugs and kiss and lots of head pats. Like, wtf is the point of this? Ok, people lose, so what? If they complain, they can either try again, change the difficulty, or just quit playing. The game has option that can tailor their experience. If they cant change simple options thats on them. If they cant beat a boss thats on them. If they go bitching to Inno about it they're pathetic.



LOL WHAT!? Okay, so all you do in skyrim is the main quest right? So when you beat the main quest you just uninstall? Not explore the rest of the world? Do all the other big quest in the game? Try to get all the collectable unique items? You dont mod the game and add new shit in? Nothing? Just the main quest? You're a really strange guy.

And its not the game's responsibility to tell you what areas are challenging and how prepared you need to be, you're suppose to do that yourself

Except there's only one way to know how much you still have to do before attempting it and expecting to succeed without the game specifically spelling it out, that's to go in multiple times and building up between each attempt until it is done. That is extremely tedious, more so than necessary for a game like this.

You just want your hand held

No, actually I enjoy challenge. What I don't enjoy is unexpected surprises like a bug that didn't even show up until I had already lost, at which point I would have fallen into slavery if I had lost in the Rat Warrens content because of it. I was lucky this was only a random encounter I lost to.

What it means to the main quest is zilch. If you get enslaved, either escape or just take the game over on the chin. The player getting enslaved doesnt suddenly throw the story out of whack.

Actually, what it means to the main quest, and actually the entire game for that run, is game over. There is no escape, there is no opposing Lilith. If you can't defeat Lilith because you lost and are now a slave, it throws the entire game out of whack.

This is where you truly shine in showing you know nothing. Morrowind letting you kill any NPC was INTENTIONAL. Not a "bug" not an oversight, intentional. When you kill a essential NPC, the game throws a prompt on the screen telling you EXACTLY that an NPC you killed was part of the main qust that was needed and you DOOMED the world because you broke the prophecy. They didnt """"""""fix"""""""" this in Skyrim, the most babified Elder Scrolls there is that isnt ESO or Blades. And children being set to essential has nothing to do with plot important (that has more to do with laws disallowing violence against children in media) so idk why you brought that up.

As I said, a mistake they fixed in Skyrim. I never said it was unintentional, what I said was it was a mistake. Mistakes can come from intentional acts. I mentioned children as a second reason for NPCs to be marked essential, I never said they were plot important.

LOL WHAT!? Okay, so all you do in skyrim is the main quest right? So when you beat the main quest you just uninstall? Not explore the rest of the world? Do all the other big quest in the game? Try to get all the collectable unique items? You dont mod the game and add new shit in? Nothing? Just the main quest? You're a really strange guy.

Nope, I'm still playing the side stuff even now. I never said anything about not doing side content, so I'm not sure how you came to any of this conclusion. With the exception of Nyan, I am doing side content in this game as well. In fact, absolutely none of this debate was about side content, it was completely about how player slavery, unless only roleplay, would get in the way of the main quest, which is why all current examples of it are locked behind the toggle for game overs. It is game over content as intended by Inno themself based on that fact alone.

The problem isn't that the content vanishes. It's that, as a slave, you don't have the ability to access said content. So comparing Morrowind to LT isn't really applicable here, because in Morrowind you still have access to the entire world. As a slave, you'd be entirely isolated and at the whim of someone else. Sure, it's unique for all of 5 minutes, but it's just a more complex gameover screen.

I don't think slavery should be used as a gameover screen either. Game overs disrupt the flow of a story and tells the player "you've reached a dead end, you should not be here." Despite the eccentric nature of his games, I agree with David Cage's stance on this particular design flaw:

it's just a more complex gameover screen.

Well said, that's why Inno locked it behind a toggle specifically for game overs. I also couldn't agree more on what you quoted at the end.

 

[anon707]

The problem isn't that the content vanishes. It's that, as a slave, you don't have the ability to access said content. So comparing Morrowind to LT isn't really applicable here, because in Morrowind you still have access to the entire world. As a slave, you'd be entirely isolated and at the whim of someone else. Sure, it's unique for all of 5 minutes, but it's just a more complex gameover screen.

I don't think slavery should be used as a gameover screen either. Game overs disrupt the flow of a story and tells the player "you've reached a dead end, you should not be here." Despite the eccentric nature of his games, I agree with David Cage's stance on this particular design flaw:

Im not sure why my last part is the quote when i think you meant to quote something else.

Anyways, I half agree and half disagree. Slavery content can be done well, but most of time its just used as a hard wall. When all you do is just throw the player in a tiny room with nothing to do with just a scene or two that repeats, yeah that gets boring real quick. Its all about execution and not really a problem the concept itself. And like I said before, you have escape options in LT,and they're really hard to miss or not be able to do. If you get caught and decide (yea im just gonna stay here), you have to do that deliberately. Its essentially a choice thats playing as BDSM.

Slavery doesnt have to be game over if the writer doesnt make it so. Again its all about execution, how the writer makes it to be. If you get caught and you get broken to the point you're jus ta mindless fuck zombie who's brain turned into cum, there's no coming back from that. But if it never reach thats point then it doesnt have to be a game over.

As for David Cage's quote, this is coming from the guy who essentially makes 3d VNs and I dont mean that in a bad way. Game Over in a primarily story game (so little regards to gameplay, IE telltale games and David Cage's own games, just choice what to say in a timed prompt and walk to your next cutscene and QTE) is antithetical to the concept of that genre. A game over in most video games is punishment, but there's no need for punishment in a genre where it's literally all about the story. David Cage's quote is completely right... in the context to the kind of game's he plays. Just choosing a certain dialogue option shouldnt slam the player in the face with a game over. Why punish them for that? There are exceptions though. For example, Ace Attorney would be pretty lame if it didnt let you fail and get a game over in a court case. You have to prove your skills in deduction and reading in between the lines and figuring out lies, all while restrained by the bs that is the court system. Thats the whole point of game. So its not so universal even for this genre, but I get the point.

All im saying is is that slavery can work for players as well and should be treated for what it is, punishment, because the game is is not a VN, it is in the business of dealing out failure.

 

[anon707]

As I said, a mistake they fixed in Skyrim. I never said it was unintentional, what I said was it was a mistake. Mistakes can come from intentional acts. I mentioned children as a second reason for NPCs to be marked essential, I never said they were plot important.

Its a "mistake" in your opinion, not as an empirical fact. Just because you think its best not to allow that doesnt mean everyone feels that way or that all games must bow to the example of skyrim as if its a gold standard of rpgs when it is far from the case.

 

[alex2011]

Slavery doesnt have to be game over if the writer doesnt make it so

Except the kind of slavery portrayed in LT is inherently permanent unless the master chooses to free the slave, which is a player only ability so far. If the master knows you oppose Lilith and is a loyalist, freedom is unlikely to happen.

Its a "mistake" in your opinion, not as an empirical fact. Just because you think its best not to allow that doesnt mean everyone feels that way or that all games must bow to the example of skyrim as if its a gold standard of rpgs when it is far from the case.

Except characters are not that hard to kill by complete accident, especially when the AI decides to put them right in the line of fire. That's why it was a mistake, not because I think so, because the player could, by complete accident, throw off the entire main quest just like they can do here under some very specific circumstances.

 

[anon707]

Except the kind of slavery portrayed in LT is inherently permanent unless the master chooses to free the slave, which is a player only ability so far. If the master knows you oppose Lilith and is a loyalist, freedom is unlikely to happen.

So whats stopping Inno from making escape options again? Cause I didn't see any of that in your post. In all the times slavery of the player was a thing, escape has always been possible. If there's no way to escape, it is only because inno did not make an escape route.

Except characters are not that hard to kill by complete accident, especially when the AI decides to put them right in the line of fire. That's why it was a mistake, not because I think so, because the player could, by complete accident, throw off the entire main quest just like they can do here under some very specific circumstances.

.......................Then reload your save. Like, what is so hard about this that you're not getting? Just reload the save. No seriously, just reload the save. Its not that hard and hardly takes any time at all. Thats literally what they were thinking in morrowind. Just reload the save. Its not a complicated process. Just reload the save. The game isnt locking you to a single save file. Have I mentioned reloading the save?

 

[portrapoodle]

I'm confused. How do you get enslaved by Vengar. I thought one gets enslaved by Murk, admittedly in Vengar's tunnels

 

[Zethin]

Slavery doesnt have to be game over if the writer doesnt make it so. Again its all about execution, how the writer makes it to be. If you get caught and you get broken to the point you're jus ta mindless fuck zombie who's brain turned into cum, there's no coming back from that. But if it never reach thats point then it doesnt have to be a game over.

I agree, and like I mentioned earlier, this is something I'm currently considering as a workaround for Illeton. A slavery side quest of sorts where you're given the opportunity to escape and continue the story.

 

[SordidDreams]

I'm pretty sure your Morrowind example falls flat because they fixed this in Skyrim. I don't think they ever meant to allow important NPCs to be killed

If that were true, there would've been no message informing you that an important NPC has been killed and no backdoor path to completing the main quest.

 

[anon707]

If that were true, there would've been no message informing you that an important NPC has been killed and no backdoor path to completing the main quest.

i actually dont remember that path. how did it go again?