This is a really interesting concept that I have a lot to say about.
Undertale did a lot of very cool things which largely are to thank for its popularity (beyond the regular such as enticing characters etc): the ability to be a complete pacifist, new game+ being built into the story, the game reacting to decisions made in prior loops. And, in a way, its success with that is also a sort of failure, not so much on the game's part but on the fandom's part. You HAVE to play it in a certain order, make decisions in a certain order. How DARE you not have a full pacifist playthrough etc. It takes the really interesting situation of so much player agency, and through that fandom osmosis, the player can also lose that agency. It's really interesting.
I like the idea that Deltarune is riffing on what Undertale did, as a sort of anti-choice mechanism. I suspect, like you, that being a pacifist in this run may become problematic: he's not going to pull the same thing twice, and I think he fully attends to play upon the expectations of his audience. I look forward to seeing how he does it.
That theme of choice versus a lack of agency in other games is also interesting. One thing that the Persona games do, starting with three, is they get the player to sign a contract agreeing that you accept the consequences of whatever choices you make, which I always thought was quite a cool thing. It's never really quite used to its potential: choice in this case is frequently more of a choice what you're doing on specific days, and when you want to do certain things that you have to do... your basically choosing your schedule for the main plot, rather than whether or not to do things. With the minor decision points (social links, stat raising etc), you can pick and choose what you want to do. But it never 100% delivers on that contract business... except perhaps the big choice toward the end of Persona 3, as well as the "true ending" of that game very much being a "this is what you agreed to accept". Again, though, that's really plot driven more than player driven.
I mentioned Unavowed on here a few months ago, right? I don't think I said much more than that it's a game where you control somebody who has spent a year possessed and murdered a bunch of people. It lends itself really nicely to this discussion, but that requires spoilers. I'll mention it anyway as I think it's unlikely that you'll play the game (and you can of course stop reading if you ever plan to).
There are segments of Unavowed that play very much with this idea of agency and lack thereof. Take the opening for instance: you choose the gender of your character, and you can take a choice of three professions. This, in many ways, is an illusion of choice: whether you're male or female, whatever your job, you're going to be possessed and murder a bunch of people. What changes, really, is potentially the relationship with certain members of your crew. (If you're a cop, Vicki's pissed at you because you did shoot her and leave her for dead. If you're a bartender, you murdered Logan's brother, but he's slightly more relaxed about it having a clearer picture than most of what had happened aka possession.)
Unavowed has a number of twists. Perhaps the most effective plays very much on expectations. Between cases, your character wakes up and wanders around the house, chatting to people and prepping for next mission. At one stage, you wake up in this very familiar way, and you don't get up. And then you do get up. And then the silent protagonist - the only unvoiced character in the game - starts to speak. And move. All without any input. They don't respond to your dialogue prompts. You've been possessed again - and it's very interesting (also fascinating to watch in blind LPs) because it uses the dynamics of a game very effectively. We're conditioned to expect our character in a game to respond to us, and it's very disconcerting when they don't. But that's the point, since that is exactly what the protagonist is going through - a total lack of control. It's far cooler if you see it in action.
(It also does some very Undertale things regarding name selection, for that matter.)
(If you're curious about the referenced moment: https://youtu.be/jsuJkjlfYOM?t=3034 It's really cool. I deliberately used a blind LP here to show the effect.)
no subject
Undertale did a lot of very cool things which largely are to thank for its popularity (beyond the regular such as enticing characters etc): the ability to be a complete pacifist, new game+ being built into the story, the game reacting to decisions made in prior loops. And, in a way, its success with that is also a sort of failure, not so much on the game's part but on the fandom's part. You HAVE to play it in a certain order, make decisions in a certain order. How DARE you not have a full pacifist playthrough etc. It takes the really interesting situation of so much player agency, and through that fandom osmosis, the player can also lose that agency. It's really interesting.
I like the idea that Deltarune is riffing on what Undertale did, as a sort of anti-choice mechanism. I suspect, like you, that being a pacifist in this run may become problematic: he's not going to pull the same thing twice, and I think he fully attends to play upon the expectations of his audience. I look forward to seeing how he does it.
That theme of choice versus a lack of agency in other games is also interesting. One thing that the Persona games do, starting with three, is they get the player to sign a contract agreeing that you accept the consequences of whatever choices you make, which I always thought was quite a cool thing. It's never really quite used to its potential: choice in this case is frequently more of a choice what you're doing on specific days, and when you want to do certain things that you have to do... your basically choosing your schedule for the main plot, rather than whether or not to do things. With the minor decision points (social links, stat raising etc), you can pick and choose what you want to do. But it never 100% delivers on that contract business... except perhaps the big choice toward the end of Persona 3, as well as the "true ending" of that game very much being a "this is what you agreed to accept". Again, though, that's really plot driven more than player driven.
I mentioned Unavowed on here a few months ago, right? I don't think I said much more than that it's a game where you control somebody who has spent a year possessed and murdered a bunch of people. It lends itself really nicely to this discussion, but that requires spoilers. I'll mention it anyway as I think it's unlikely that you'll play the game (and you can of course stop reading if you ever plan to).
There are segments of Unavowed that play very much with this idea of agency and lack thereof. Take the opening for instance: you choose the gender of your character, and you can take a choice of three professions. This, in many ways, is an illusion of choice: whether you're male or female, whatever your job, you're going to be possessed and murder a bunch of people. What changes, really, is potentially the relationship with certain members of your crew. (If you're a cop, Vicki's pissed at you because you did shoot her and leave her for dead. If you're a bartender, you murdered Logan's brother, but he's slightly more relaxed about it having a clearer picture than most of what had happened aka possession.)
Unavowed has a number of twists. Perhaps the most effective plays very much on expectations. Between cases, your character wakes up and wanders around the house, chatting to people and prepping for next mission. At one stage, you wake up in this very familiar way, and you don't get up. And then you do get up. And then the silent protagonist - the only unvoiced character in the game - starts to speak. And move. All without any input. They don't respond to your dialogue prompts. You've been possessed again - and it's very interesting (also fascinating to watch in blind LPs) because it uses the dynamics of a game very effectively. We're conditioned to expect our character in a game to respond to us, and it's very disconcerting when they don't. But that's the point, since that is exactly what the protagonist is going through - a total lack of control. It's far cooler if you see it in action.
(It also does some very Undertale things regarding name selection, for that matter.)
(If you're curious about the referenced moment: https://youtu.be/jsuJkjlfYOM?t=3034 It's really cool. I deliberately used a blind LP here to show the effect.)
-timydamonkey