I feel like the choices I made in the turn based strategy game Banner Saga (2014) did contribute a sense of meaningful interactive moments. When I was younger and had no clue how to beat an enemy, I would mash the buttons and attack without thinking. I kind of had the same approach in this game where I straight off the bat would attack the enemy. This isn't a good strategy for the game.Banner Saga though.
The choices made between attacking the opponent or damaging their armor, sometimes, made a big difference in the outcome of the battle. When I first started playing, I would attack straight away to quickly exterminate the opponent, but as tougher enemies arose, I realized that I would need to deal with the armor first to finish them off more efficiently. Due to the choice of blindly attacking, I died quite a few times which was frustrating. Once I realized that damaging the armor would benefit my playable characters to defeating the enemies, I found the duels easier.
Although a lot of the time I made the choice to blindly attack, there were consequences for the characters I was playing, as in dying - or so I thought. One battle I played, a character did die in the battle and in the story. In another battle a character died, but was still alive in the story. This inconsistency caused me to realize that the choices I made weren't entirely bad, that is if the character was actually alive in the end of it. With this, it does feel like there's less stress on the choices I make as the deaths in battle and outcome don't affect the story too much.
In Fraser's spectacular lecture, there is a quote by Sid Meier saying "A game is a series of interesting choices." This applies in many games and definitely Banner Saga as what ever choice /move I make in a battle can lead to failure or success.
Also choosing what the playable character gets to say to another character. This doesn't change the flow of the story too much In the first story playing as Ubin, I chose to say to Gunnulf that he looks like a frog, thinking I'd offended him (I picked this because it was funny) when he replied 'better than an eggplant'. I did not imagine this response, but it helped show that not every choice you make in the game is as intense as in battling. The story didn't change as the conversation had simply ended.
In terms of battling, the choices I made were important as it could possibly result in a character dying. I feel like the writers of the game would've wanted these characters to die so the enemy could've been coded to target them. I would definitely have to play the games a few times to be sure though!
The choices made between attacking the opponent or damaging their armor, sometimes, made a big difference in the outcome of the battle. When I first started playing, I would attack straight away to quickly exterminate the opponent, but as tougher enemies arose, I realized that I would need to deal with the armor first to finish them off more efficiently. Due to the choice of blindly attacking, I died quite a few times which was frustrating. Once I realized that damaging the armor would benefit my playable characters to defeating the enemies, I found the duels easier.
Although a lot of the time I made the choice to blindly attack, there were consequences for the characters I was playing, as in dying - or so I thought. One battle I played, a character did die in the battle and in the story. In another battle a character died, but was still alive in the story. This inconsistency caused me to realize that the choices I made weren't entirely bad, that is if the character was actually alive in the end of it. With this, it does feel like there's less stress on the choices I make as the deaths in battle and outcome don't affect the story too much.
In Fraser's spectacular lecture, there is a quote by Sid Meier saying "A game is a series of interesting choices." This applies in many games and definitely Banner Saga as what ever choice /move I make in a battle can lead to failure or success.
Also choosing what the playable character gets to say to another character. This doesn't change the flow of the story too much In the first story playing as Ubin, I chose to say to Gunnulf that he looks like a frog, thinking I'd offended him (I picked this because it was funny) when he replied 'better than an eggplant'. I did not imagine this response, but it helped show that not every choice you make in the game is as intense as in battling. The story didn't change as the conversation had simply ended.
In terms of battling, the choices I made were important as it could possibly result in a character dying. I feel like the writers of the game would've wanted these characters to die so the enemy could've been coded to target them. I would definitely have to play the games a few times to be sure though!
No comments:
Post a Comment