player identity

[Periculi]

Non-story mode?

I fly, I shoot, I kill and loot... end of story.

Maybe I will try thinking about it more and see if an opinion forms...

[speedofsquid]

Am I the only one who liked the new story elements? The hints as to the nature of free will in a universe containing transcendent beings capable of affecting human minds weren't obvious enough, so I also considered the protagonist as fanatically religious. Actually, I preferred thinking of the protagonist choosing to sacrifice his child to seek Domina rather than him being compelled to do so. I enjoy the story and game elements in which actions have consequences other than increasing destructive power.

[FAD]

Perhaps a suggestion to appease everyone while allowing George to fulfill his dream and vision of his wonderful game, would be to implement more plot elements into Oracus, pre-heretic.

Meaning; If the "player" is being compelled by Domina to reach the core, and since Oracus and Domina are at ends with each other, why not have more Oracus influence or try to persuade the "player" away from Domina's "hold" on them?
But then, I must digress from further thought about this particular subject since it is George's masterpiece and I like how it's evolving as is.

But I will, however, say that it's a catch 22 with any game ever created. Some like it, some don't. Fix it so those who don't like it will, but consequence it in that those who did like it, won't.
Can't please 'em all....so please the majority.

[Betelgeuse]

Non-story mode?

I fly, I shoot, I kill and loot... end of story.

Maybe I will try thinking about it more and see if an opinion forms...

we have been basically playing a non story mode pre .99 and we have been doing fine and sandbox games are fun.

Meaning; If the "player" is being compelled by Domina to reach the core, and since Oracus and Domina are at ends with each other, why not have more Oracus influence or try to persuade the "player" away from Domina's "hold" on them?

I don't really see Oracus doing anything to solve the problem.
There are two main problems currently as I see it. The character is controlled from the inside by Domina. Doing that destroys any pretense of free will, while you can say they have the free will to do anything else but what is to stop Domina from stopping any other action the player would like to make. I do not want to play a game where the only thing stopping the game from running by itself is because Domina doesn't feel like it at the moment. I don't want to be controlled by a mystery and be given reasons of ignorance (ie you don't know what Domina really wants).

The other problem is by placing the Domina right at the start of the game the character is defined by Domina and not by the player or the characters actions. We have no chance to see if we should care about this person before "bad" stuff happens to them so they get defined by being taken over.

Just to make clear I think being taken over by a mysterious force is very handwavey and makes more problems for the game than the interest it would add to the game.

[schilcote]

Well, hero=loss of free will.
And I think a good solution to the problem is to simply have a custumisation screen where you can choose to turn off backstory. And possibly run Transcendence in windowed mode too.

[F50]

Am I the only one who liked the new story elements?

I enjoy them, as does Oddbob I believe.

what do people think of this?

I have said more on IRC, but I feel I should re-post my thoughts here.

I dislike the disappearing station for two reasons:

1. It means Domina has near-omnipotence in our galaxy, and the ability to move large numbers of people great distances against their will (George has suggested otherwise). This creates the (not unresolvable, but the solution is rather manufactured) problem of why the player is going whisked away to the core him/herself and told to get there the hard way.

2. It removes the moral question/assertion that I liked so much of George's plot.

I don't know if that makes it better or worse, but it is one of the most important plot elements, so that part will not change. However, I am interested in how best to communicate those plot elements to the player.

An idea:

The player starts compelled away from his/her home apparently without reason (as is now) and the player finds out later (in the Rigel Arena perhaps) that he/she is physically incapable of performing an action because of some mysterious force. This may or may not be revealed to be Domina at the time, but eventually the player realizes that Domina has completely overridden the player's will (St. K, residentials?).

[george moromisato]

...sandbox games are fun.

I agree completely. But all sandbox games have a backstory (even if it is just "You have been chosen by your god to retrieve the amulet of Yendor")

There are two issues:

1. Does the backstory restrict the sandbox?
2. Is the backstory appealing?

For Transcendence, I would like to argue that the answer to #1 is "no". I believe some of you are arguing that the answer to #2 is "no".

I totally understand if some people don't find the backstory appealing. That's a matter of taste and very hard to defend or alter. All I ask is that people give the game a chance until the whole story is revealed (which won't be for a while).

But I want to make sure that the game continues to be a sandbox, and I want to make sure that the story does not "restrict" the sandbox.

[Atarlost]

Perhaps the problem is that you're putting in the worst bits of the backstory first. Evil Manipulative Domina is a lot easier to stomach when it can be resolved satisfactorily. That would be when part 3 is out.

Right now you've published the first third of a mystery. It's better to not publish the mystery at all until you can publish the whole thing.

[Betelgeuse]

...sandbox games are fun.

I agree completely. But all sandbox games have a backstory (even if it is just "You have been chosen by your god to retrieve the amulet of Yendor")

There are two issues:

1. Does the backstory restrict the sandbox?
2. Is the backstory appealing?

For Transcendence, I would like to argue that the answer to #1 is "no". I believe some of you are arguing that the answer to #2 is "no".

I totally understand if some people don't find the backstory appealing. That's a matter of taste and very hard to defend or alter. All I ask is that people give the game a chance until the whole story is revealed (which won't be for a while).

But I want to make sure that the game continues to be a sandbox, and I want to make sure that the story does not "restrict" the sandbox.

I think the major problem I have is that it can be argued that number one is yes. Wait until the whole story is reveled doesn't to be a good answer because if I feel that if it doesn't let me define my character now I am not going to care what the back story says later because my character was already defined (and that is a very bad thing for this kind of game).

Maybe I am just listening to the wrong people in terms of defining the character. How would you argue that number one is no? We don't seem to be able to define a pace or reason of our own.

Even a strict mind control of F50's would be preferable (though still would fail number 2 to me) than what we have now.

Just had a new thought. Are you depending on the back story to do all this stuff? I think that may be the problem. If you are going to be doing this make it part of the story and leave the back story open for the player to decide.

[george moromisato]

Some people just don't like the backstory that I've come up with. That's OK. Everyone has different taste and I can't convince people to like it.

Nevertheless:

One reason why people might not like the backstory is because it seems too "magical" or "religous". My goal is to explicitly walk a fine line. My intent is that there is a rational (physical) explanation for everything that Domina (and Oracus) can do. [Of course, I mean "rational" in a scifi way.] At the same time, in the game, the powers that Domina and Oracus have "appear" to be magical to the inhabitants of the world. [Insert obligatory Arthur C. Clarke reference here.]

Another reason why people might not like the backstory is because it seems too "creepy" (to quote Atarlost). I understand that too. Not everyone likes slasher films or disturbing material. In this case, I think, the scene with the crying child is important to the theme (though not the plot). Part of the theme of the game is sacrifice. When do you sacrifice something to gain something else? When do you sacrifice someone to save someone else? And what does sacrifice mean if you have no choice? Is sacrifice only meaningful if you have free-will? What is free-will and how do we know that we have it?

Yet another reason why people might not like the backstory is because they want a different backstory. If you want to be a Han Solo-type smuggler then you might think this whole "compelled by Domina" thing is a drag. I actually think the current backstory is flexible enough. The game is never explicit about your relationship to the crying child. Are you the father? The step-father? The brother? The uncle? The neighbor? The only thing that is important is that you have left your home behind. Sounds like something Han Solo would do.

As for Domina: the game never says explicitly that you are being "compelled". In fact, I imagine that to the character, it feels like he/she is acting of his own free-will. "I want to leave my life behind and be an adventurer. No one is making me." You are free to believe that.

Finally, of course, if none of the above helps, then I recommend a mod. The whole point of Adventure extensions is that you can create your own backstory. You can change the opening screen. You can change the station in Eridani. Depending on how much work you want to do, you can even remove Domina from the game.

[speedofsquid]

hmm Domina should make the station disappear.

You mean as a flashback, right? I got the impression from the game that the protagonist is one of many called by Domina. I think the residents of the Transcendence universe would be fighting the Iocrym a little harder, if stations were disappearing all over the place.

[Betelgeuse]

Some people just don't like the backstory that I've come up with. That's OK. Everyone has different taste and I can't convince people to like it.

Nevertheless:

One reason why people might not like the backstory is because it seems too "magical" or "religous". My goal is to explicitly walk a fine line. My intent is that there is a rational (physical) explanation for everything that Domina (and Oracus) can do. [Of course, I mean "rational" in a scifi way.] At the same time, in the game, the powers that Domina and Oracus have "appear" to be magical to the inhabitants of the world. [Insert obligatory Arthur C. Clarke reference here.]

Another reason why people might not like the backstory is because it seems too "creepy" (to quote Atarlost). I understand that too. Not everyone likes slasher films or disturbing material. In this case, I think, the scene with the crying child is important to the theme (though not the plot). Part of the theme of the game is sacrifice. When do you sacrifice something to gain something else? When do you sacrifice someone to save someone else? And what does sacrifice mean if you have no choice? Is sacrifice only meaningful if you have free-will? What is free-will and how do we know that we have it?

Yet another reason why people might not like the backstory is because they want a different backstory. If you want to be a Han Solo-type smuggler then you might think this whole "compelled by Domina" thing is a drag. I actually think the current backstory is flexible enough. The game is never explicit about your relationship to the crying child. Are you the father? The step-father? The brother? The uncle? The neighbor? The only thing that is important is that you have left your home behind. Sounds like something Han Solo would do.

As for Domina: the game never says explicitly that you are being "compelled". In fact, I imagine that to the character, it feels like he/she is acting of his own free-will. "I want to leave my life behind and be an adventurer. No one is making me." You are free to believe that.

Finally, of course, if none of the above helps, then I recommend a mod. The whole point of Adventure extensions is that you can create your own backstory. You can change the opening screen. You can change the station in Eridani. Depending on how much work you want to do, you can even remove Domina from the game.

...

I would even accept a much worse story if it wasn't so constrained. The first think you see is you obeying Domina and not caring about your family. I can't make my own story after hearing that. I can't be Han Solo now because I can only do that after the game starts but you already defined the story of the player. Please understand this is not about me not liking the story this is about the story not allowing me to define my character. The game doesn't define the character after that so you are trying to have it both ways (both defining the character and not defining the character) this is the worst of both worlds.

Also please don't tell us make our own mod. While this is your game and you are free to do whatever you want I want to help the game grow and develop and if I am forced to mod just to play the game I will not be to do that.

[Betelgeuse]

something came out of IRC this might be a conflict between a sandbox based game and a character based game. I would like a sandbox based game where I define the back story and motives but if you do that you can not have the character develop through the story events.

You can not mix the two types because all you have then is a character that is already defined but never gets developed (due to it being part sandbox).
What kind of game do you intend Transcendence to be a character based game or a sandbox based game?

[Periculi]

Geez, Betel, try give it a rest.

It's not like the storyline is thrust down your throat every time you enter a new system or a new 'chapter' like in some games. It's very very minimal and doesn't take much effort to ignore altogether, or even miss:

It took me four or five times playing the new version before I found the little storyline bit that you seem to be agonizing over.

It has absolutely NO affect on my ability to pretend I am whatever I am pretending to be in the game.

I am interested in finding out what George intends from the story.

And I don't really understand your position. Maybe you need a vacation.

[Betelgeuse]

I am just not being clear?

I think the story line is fine. What I don't like is the giving the character a back story.

I don't want to leave the community but it seems some people are focusing on a thing that isn't even true (that I don't like the story or that I am offended by it).