Undertale May Be This Year's Best Written Game

[MiskWisk]

Read this while listening to the Spider Dance track

*MiskWisk does a synchronised dance with the spiders*

I'll admit the game has its flaws. For someone with as little patience as me, the opening segment is practically torture. Getting a hang of the mercy system is a little difficult and led to a little save-scumming before I figured out regular enemies need talking down and boss monster should just be stalled until it lets you go.

*MiskWisk claps along to the music*

Despite that though, I really do love the characters and writing. The story is well written and really jabs at your heartstrings if you allow yourself to get attached.

Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to look up and see if the Dreemur-reborn page has updated yet.

 

[Kahani]

Fair question - is "best written game" enough to qualify as "best game"?

I'd have to say absolutely not. The story and writing in Undertale might be OK (although I certainly don't think it deserves as much praise as it's had), but the actual gameplay is incredibly boring and repetitive. You can't walk around a room without having to fight the same couple of monsters 20 or so times, and every single fight is exactly the same "press either talk or attack then dodge bullets for a couple of seconds, repeat". Even the boss fights are little more than different patterns to dodge. If you happen to enjoy that kind of gameplay, great, but endless identical encounters with a very basic and repetitive combat system is hardly something that deserves to be called one of the best games ever. Bad graphics and interface, passable but nothing special sound, extremely repetitive encounters and combat - it could have the best writing the world has ever seen and still not come close to being a great game overall. And given that the writing is more of the usual quirkiness for the sake of it, and all good or all bad moral choices, it's not exactly amazing on that front either.

Why? It's still the exact same thing mechanically speaking. The only difference is that it doesn't necessarily end with killing everything that comes across.

This is actually exactly my problem with it. If the mechanics are identical, there's no difference between a pacifist run or any other. A game like Deus Ex gets pacifism right - sneaking around or talking to people are both different from running in all guns blazing. In Undertale, and similarly in Spore and other games, the difference between different kinds of combat are in name only.

 

[loa]

Fair question - is "best written game" enough to qualify as "best game"?

I'd have to say absolutely not. The story and writing in Undertale might be OK (although I certainly don't think it deserves as much praise as it's had), but the actual gameplay is incredibly boring and repetitive. You can't walk around a room without having to fight the same couple of monsters 20 or so times, and every single fight is exactly the same "press either talk or attack then dodge bullets for a couple of seconds, repeat". Even the boss fights are little more than different patterns to dodge. If you happen to enjoy that kind of gameplay, great, but endless identical encounters with a very basic and repetitive combat system is hardly something that deserves to be called one of the best games ever. Bad graphics and interface, passable but nothing special sound, extremely repetitive encounters and combat - it could have the best writing the world has ever seen and still not come close to being a great game overall. And given that the writing is more of the usual quirkiness for the sake of it, and all good or all bad moral choices, it's not exactly amazing on that front either.

Why? It's still the exact same thing mechanically speaking. The only difference is that it doesn't necessarily end with killing everything that comes across.

This is actually exactly my problem with it. If the mechanics are identical, there's no difference between a pacifist run or any other. A game like Deus Ex gets pacifism right - sneaking around or talking to people are both different from running in all guns blazing. In Undertale, and similarly in Spore and other games, the difference between different kinds of combat are in name only.

I see you're stuck at the assumption that you have to "win" every "battle".
If you somehow get 20 encounters (what the hell are you doing, run in circles in rooms with encounters for 10 minutes each?) and still haven't figured out there's a "flee" option, that's more of an issue with you rather than the game.

Also yeah, ignoring that enemy and then stealing its hat and then apologizing for it or humming to that enemy until you're suddenly in a concert is totes the same as press attack, do 50 damages, you win. And the bosses are totally the same, papyrus is just more things to dodge and dialogue to read, it's the exact same thing as toriel and every other thing in the game. 0/10.

 

[Coruptin]

Try the demo. It's free and goes far enough to give you a decent idea on why the game is so good.

I didn't like the demo. I thought the full game was pretty good though. Toriel just felt like a creep in the demo to me. I had no regrets killing her.

Sorry, but I find the idea of 'pacifist runs' in RPGs to be hopelessly dull and nonsensical. Like designing a Madden game where the football part is optional. "Ugh, I am so sick of all this ball-throwing stuff in these football games! Can't they ever innovate?!?" *eyeroll*. Please. I refuse to play yet another game which denigrates the player for the act of playing it.

Usually they are really dumb and boring, but Undertale was built around it. In the genocide run you pretty much OHK everything. It's actually a lot more tedious except a couple of the bosses.


I think I feel a bit differently about genocide then most people. I like doing the genocide run because it makes me feel like a proper villain, or rather it lets the NPCs you learned to love in the pacifist run be real heroes. The whole reason I bought the game is because of watching Undyne be super cool fighting the player to the death. In that moment you understand why she's the captain of the guard, why the child monster hero worships her. Flowey even gets his feelings back without absorbing everyone! I can see Toby Fox didn't intend this though. The ending was just a real player character dissonance moment for me because of the mindset I had playing the genocide run.

 

[Madmanonfire]

Fair question - is "best written game" enough to qualify as "best game"?

I'd have to say absolutely not. The story and writing in Undertale might be OK (although I certainly don't think it deserves as much praise as it's had), but the actual gameplay is incredibly boring and repetitive. You can't walk around a room without having to fight the same couple of monsters 20 or so times, and every single fight is exactly the same "press either talk or attack then dodge bullets for a couple of seconds, repeat". Even the boss fights are little more than different patterns to dodge. If you happen to enjoy that kind of gameplay, great, but endless identical encounters with a very basic and repetitive combat system is hardly something that deserves to be called one of the best games ever. Bad graphics and interface, passable but nothing special sound, extremely repetitive encounters and combat - it could have the best writing the world has ever seen and still not come close to being a great game overall. And given that the writing is more of the usual quirkiness for the sake of it, and all good or all bad moral choices, it's not exactly amazing on that front either.

Why? It's still the exact same thing mechanically speaking. The only difference is that it doesn't necessarily end with killing everything that comes across.

This is actually exactly my problem with it. If the mechanics are identical, there's no difference between a pacifist run or any other. A game like Deus Ex gets pacifism right - sneaking around or talking to people are both different from running in all guns blazing. In Undertale, and similarly in Spore and other games, the difference between different kinds of combat are in name only.

Considering how inaccurate all of your assertions are, it seems like you're hating Undertale just because it's popular.

If you actually tried playing the game, you would see that the story is clever and gripping, taking into account most of the player's actions; the encounter rate of enemies is about 0-2 per room, and there are several enemies you only fight once ever; each fight presents unique options to interact with the enemies, and it can only be considered repetitive on a genocide run, which doesn't even take very long to complete (and otherwise, you're pretty much describing every turn-based rpg ever); Several boss fights have unique mechanics, so they're not just "different patterns to dodge"; graphics are nicely detailed in battles and kept simple enough outside of battles; the soundtrack is highly praised for a reason, just look up Megalovania or Spider Dance; quirkiness is not inherently bad, and it contrasts with the heavy moments in the game; moral choices and each run play significantly different from each other, because your choices have an impact on the world, the dialogue of characters, and what you end up having to do to complete each run.

You can't just make up opinions without anything backing them up and think they can be taken seriously.

 

[Coruptin]

Considering how inaccurate all of your assertions are, it seems like you're hating Undertale just because it's popular.

If you actually tried playing the game, you would see that the story is clever and gripping,

The other guy is making false accusations, but that doesn't mean you should present subjective matters as objective fact. For you the story might be clever and gripping. For me it feels pleasantly predictable and charming. For someone else it might be dull and overtly quirky.

I'd have to say absolutely not. The story and writing in Undertale might be OK (although I certainly don't think it deserves as much praise as it's had)

This is actually exactly my problem with it. If the mechanics are identical, there's no difference between a pacifist run or any other. A game like Deus Ex gets pacifism right - sneaking around or talking to people are both different from running in all guns blazing. In Undertale, and similarly in Spore and other games, the difference between different kinds of combat are in name only.

I'd say the writing is a little more than just OK and, considering that it tells a story that could only have the impact it does through a videogame, I'd go as far to say it's also a story that takes proper advantage of its medium.

I think the bullet hell actually makes the combat very active and engaging. Most turn based RPG feel very passive and boring for me, but I don't dread Undetale's combat like I would other RPGs because the bullet hell actually lets me do something.

 

[Charli]

*furiously listening to Undertale rock covers*

I'm too bias at this point to do anything but agree.

 

[Redryhno]

Ah, so first it's "just sitting around and spamming healing is boring" and now it's "I totally never healed once until the final boss." Sure bro. We believe you. You're the best at Undertale. It was so easy it's a bad game. Everyone is totally wrong about how awesome it is. You were right!

Dude, I watched three people play through it on Pacifist before I opened the game and did my Genocide run. The majority of the time, that's what they were doing. I never said I was the best at Undertale, just that the combat was ANNOYING, simple, and that I didn't care for it even though I like challenges. It's recognizing patterns and adapting quickly. Just a rhythm game with failstates that are easier to trigger. I don't care for Touhou either, it's not my kind of game in that respect, doesn't mean I don't like the characters in it too.

I never said it was a bad game either. I said it was a good game that is over-hyped in pretty much every category that isn't character or dialogue and many of the music tracks. Which in alot of ways I hate more, because alot of people are now going into with heightened expectations.

In any case, I still maintain my belief that it's a better game to watch than to play. You think you can maybe bring down your LOVE for people saying they didn't care for parts of it?

 

[Eric the Orange]

First off The indie community already has a ton retro artsy games. Hell I would call it a stretch to call this game artsy. Second while this game has a pretty rabid fanbase the actual sales numbers are only OK.

Yes, there were also first person horror games before Slender, and games about building things before Minecraft. I see Undertale being the finishing blow that's going to fill a bunch of college indie devs with determination and think they can build the same experience with their pirated version of RPG Maker XP.

I was thinking stuff more along the lines of DayZ, Five Nights at Freddies, or Minecraft for the kind of thing that spawns a ton of clones. 200k copies is good but not good enough to get the copycats crawling out of the woodwork.

EDIT: I was looking up sales numbers for other indie games, Shovel knight, for example had 180k copies sold it's first month, and I haven't seen a flood of retro indie platformers trying to copy it's success.

 

[Hungryfreak]

When I look through criticisms of Undertale here and anywhere else, one common thread I notice are the people saying "BUT IT'S NOT FUN."

I can go on defending how Undertale is one of the few RPGs that integrates a non-menu element into its combat and contains more entertainment value by gameplay than most popular RPGs, but that's not the core of the problem.

The problem is people treating video games like they're just toys. Criticizing a game like Undertale for lack of fun is like criticizing Schindler's List for a lack of explosions and titties. The quality in Undertale is measured in how it tells a story through the medium of gaming, not by how hard it makes your action dick.

 

[Redryhno]

When I look through criticisms of Undertale here and anywhere else, one common thread I notice are the people saying "BUT IT'S NOT FUN."

I can go on defending how Undertale is one of the few RPGs that integrates a non-menu element into its combat and contains more entertainment value by gameplay than most popular RPGs, but that's not the core of the problem.

The problem is people treating video games like they're just toys. Criticizing a game like Undertale for lack of fun is like criticizing Schindler's List for a lack of explosions and titties. The quality in Undertale is measured in how it tells a story through the medium of gaming, not by how hard it makes your action dick.

Thing is...while it doesn't have to be "fun", it does need to be engaging in more than story and music. I find the bullet hell aspect annoying. Don't mind the rest of it really, but the combat is incredibly barebones. Especially when you're fighting Papyrus and Sans...

And that's ignoring the most common argument people respond with criticism to Undertale is just "WELL YOU JUST DON'T GET IT", or some variation thereof. People can get it and still not really care for it.

 

[Hungryfreak]

Thing is...while it doesn't have to be "fun", it does need to be engaging in more than story and music. I find the bullet hell aspect annoying. Don't mind the rest of it really, but the combat is incredibly barebones. Especially when you're fighting Papyrus and Sans...

And that's ignoring the most common argument people respond with criticism to Undertale is just "WELL YOU JUST DON'T GET IT", or some variation thereof. People can get it and still not really care for it.

I didn't mean to target you, really. If you don't like the gameplay, then it can't be helped, but you can at least recognize it as more involved than the average RPG interface. I was more calling out people like Kahani that seem to need games to be toys to enjoy them.

And I think that kind of "U DUN GET IT" response is trite, but fair in some cases. I mean a game is only as effective as the experience it actually gave a player, so if someone truly doesn't get it then that's in part on the game, but the kind of player I'm addressing has already written off 'getting it' in the first place. People who go into Undertale caring more about its use as a toy than its potential to tell a story really aren't getting it.

You don't fit into that category, though. You gave the game a chance and just weren't as wowed as the rest of us. I can't say your experience was wrong because that's dumb. All I can do is ask that you appreciate it for how it stands out.

 

[hentropy]

I do love Undertale and personally consider it the best game so far this year (here's hoping Fallout 4 threatens that standing...), but I can totally understand why some people may not be into it. I don't think we should get in the "objectively good" game, no matter how much we may personally love something.

Personally I thought it was a lot of hype for nothing until about halfway through the first playthrough. I can't really say bullet hell was my thing either, and while the comedy did work and characters were likable, but I didn't see what the fuss was... until I did.

I do think it's probably he best example of a game that knows what it wants to do, and then executes without any huge flaws, something that I can't say about any game I've played recently. It only helps that it's also very innovating and clever in its execution. I think that's mostly the standard a game should get GOTY by, personally.

 

[Redryhno]

Thing is...while it doesn't have to be "fun", it does need to be engaging in more than story and music. I find the bullet hell aspect annoying. Don't mind the rest of it really, but the combat is incredibly barebones. Especially when you're fighting Papyrus and Sans...

And that's ignoring the most common argument people respond with criticism to Undertale is just "WELL YOU JUST DON'T GET IT", or some variation thereof. People can get it and still not really care for it.

I didn't mean to target you, really. If you don't like the gameplay, then it can't be helped, but you can at least recognize it as more involved than the average RPG interface. I was more calling out people like Kahani that seem to need games to be toys to enjoy them.

I really can't say that with any hint of having a straight face actually. Unless by more involved you're talking solely about the bullet hell aspect, and even then, sorry, but no. Most rpgs involve just as much puzzle solving as most of the ACT menu that Undertale is being praised for. Is the thing you're up against weak to an ability you've got? Does it have a countdown attack? Weakpoints? windows of opportunity? Do you have to wait a turn because you don't have the resources to use your abilities? Is it worth using your strongest attack here? It looks like a tanky enemy, but that doesn't mean much because you just ran across a bunny with a million HP back up the road a bit. Is it worth it to just run away because you don't get anything of value from fighting this thing? Does it have a self-destruct death so it's worth it to take the next hit because you'll take less damage?

Hell, if you're going to say the combat menu is "involved" in Undertale solely because of the bullet hell, you really haven't played alot of RPGs.

Edit: also didn't feel targeted, was just saying.

 

[runic knight]

I like the bullethell sort of chance to dodge aspect when being attacked myself, in concept anyways. As a bare bones rpg, it offers something more that the usual praying the enemy misses, and in doing so adds a bit more skill to a simple menu system rpg. It is a great idea to make it more interesting and engaging as combat has often been one of the weakpoints of older style rpg games. Hell, I used to level grind simply so I could spam A through grunt fights in several rpg, so the dull aspect of menu combat in that regard being improved to demand some sort of skill beyond the strategy of how to kill most effectively, well I appreciate the effort.

The execution though, that could use improvement. Bullethell is something different, but it doesn't seem like the right something in the end. I see why rpg went the western route and became 3rd person action games. I can see why jrpg worked in other methods such as the Tales series or Star Ocean. The feeling of positioning and timing similar to those rpg styles seems to be what was sought, and while they did, kinda, get that with the bullethell, I think it still wasn't the best option to go with, even taking into account the technical limitations. Unique and pleasant and by no means a bad game, the writing and characters are charming enough, but the bullethell still seems like someone understood a weakness of the classic RPG and sought a solution, but didn't quite get it right. I hope they keep at it, the innovative thinking behind it is good, and I hope they don't feel bound to that system alone in the future.

 

[kenu12345]

Still trying to figure out what went wrong with the sounds of the game, being outright hurtful to my ears.

Also music is really not that great.

Also I now have spoiled some things for me (yeah, I should not have ...) and ... it does not seem special. It does seem pretty much have to have the classic "all good vs all evil" simplicity thing going on, which does not at all make for a compelling story.

I'm probably still going to play through it some day (if I can mod out the ugly main character asset lolol), but I really don't feel like spending even 10? on it right now.

No character in the story is explicitly evil. They just have different goals then you. You should really finish it dude

 

[Nuuu]

I really love the game, but I'll be honest, the current state of the community is almost as much of a downer as the Genocide path. I don't feel like they're rabid, but a bit reactionary (at least on the steam forums). It doesn't help that there are a lot of people poking the bear and making the problem worse.

There is also a lot of hype around the game right now that it can't live up to. People forget that this is a $10 indie game, not a AAA game with a several million dollar budget. Yes, it will be forgotten after a while, but that isn't a big deal or a bad thing.
The game's story is powerful, but obviously it's not going to make as much of a long-lasting impression as MGSV or Mother 3.

And no this game is not for everyone obviously, a lot of people aren't into the game play elements or may want a certain area to be higher quality and that is fine. Over-hype clouds the game genre and mechanics with high review scores and praise.
It's still important for those who don't like the game to remember that proper wording is still key when making your experience with the game public. A game is usually popular for a reason, so make sure that you can differentiate your qualms as personal opinions and actual issues with the game (The difference between not liking the music and not liking how certain sounds loop poorly).

 

[Lazule]

Tbh this game is overrated by the temporal hype it has.

It lacks a challenge, it's easy to beat and there is no punishment. It has a good soundtrack.

The story is "win through the power of friendship!" I'm picking that story arc because all the other ones are half-assed (weak) in comparison. I don't exactly get why Yahtz says it's nicely written it's a mediocre story in all honesty. Maybe it's because of the flowchats you can make? The game is short and there aren't a ton of endings either but I guess you can interact with the world fairly enough...

The game was definitely not good enough for me... I expected a good RPG like Chrono Trigger or Valkyrie Profile (and I'm sure these are the games I must be comparing Undertale to since it's a "traditional RPG"). I think Undertale could have been made in RPG maker.

Bottom line: It has characters, multiple endings, poor gameplay, good music. That's all you need to know, it will be forgotten in 2016. I will also revisit this thread in 2016 just to tell you guys if I was correct and you jumped into the next trend or wrong and this actually became a cult classic. We'll see...

Have a good day.

 

[loa]

I really can't say that with any hint of having a straight face actually. Unless by more involved you're talking solely about the bullet hell aspect, and even then, sorry, but no. Most rpgs involve just as much puzzle solving as most of the ACT menu that Undertale is being praised for. Is the thing you're up against weak to an ability you've got? Does it have a countdown attack? Weakpoints? windows of opportunity? Do you have to wait a turn because you don't have the resources to use your abilities? Is it worth using your strongest attack here? It looks like a tanky enemy, but that doesn't mean much because you just ran across a bunny with a million HP back up the road a bit. Is it worth it to just run away because you don't get anything of value from fighting this thing? Does it have a self-destruct death so it's worth it to take the next hit because you'll take less damage?

Hell, if you're going to say the combat menu is "involved" in Undertale solely because of the bullet hell, you really haven't played alot of RPGs.

Edit: also didn't feel targeted, was just saying.

So did you ever ask yourself questions like "if I die a lot to this boss, will it eventually start to feel bad about it and mention that in dialogue you only get by screwing up over and over?" in any other rpg you can think of?
Questions like "if I just block a lot, will that have an actual effect? Like, make the enemy mad or stop attacking me or anything at all"?
Has there ever been any sort of characterization of HOW the enemy fights going on beyond the "battle you are supposed to lose to show off how badass the big bad is and to highlight how badass you must become to overcome that"?

Toriel will start to miss on purpose if you're on low hp. Because she doesn't actually want to kill you.
Papyrus is more concerned with making his attacks look cool rather than effective. Because he's the most kind character in the game, he likes to entertain you with his puzzles rather than actually stop you and in fact you can't even get a game over out of his fight which he offers to skip if you keep losing to him.
Undyne is out to kill you yet gives you a spear to block her attacks with which she instructs you how to use if you get it wrong at first. Because she is the heroine who wants a fair fight and acts much like an anime character because she thinks that's human history. But make no mistake, she's far from being all talk, this is the strongest monster in the game. It just takes more for her to actually show her talons. That's because deep down she doubts the reason behind why she fights yet tries to stay determined.
Mettaton looks scary and takes off lots of hp with his attacks but you can't actually lose against him at first. Because he's all about the show, more interested in entertaining than in combat.
Asgore destroys your "mercy" option at the start of the battle and it's an actual battle this time. Because he literally doesn't want mercy, he thinks he doesn't deserve it and he wishes you never came to him but the weight of his duty still keeps him moving on if you insist.

Most random encounters aren't even strictly "battles" but abstractions about conversations and acting.
Snowdrake is a comedian who left home and tries to make a living. You'll actually meet his parents later.
Ice cap wants to show off its hat. After ignoring it and "winning" you can take it further and steal the hat, turning it into "ice" and then proceed to tell it that it looks fine without its hat.
Shyren can be "spared" after humming 1 time but if you keep doing it multiple times even though you "won the battle", you'll start escalating things until you're in a concert and the fame gets to you. After doing that, singing to knight knight, an encounter in a later area, will put her to sleep in 1 round instead of 2 because you now know shyrens song.

I could go on and on, there is so much more.
The just game oozes characterization in the ways you interact with characters during "combat" at every turn.

Name one other rpg that does that.
Yes sure, they're more involved in terms of figuring out weakpoints, strategies or whatever but did you ever do things like considering the intention behind why goblin A actually fights you?
Moreover, the much dreaded ludo-narrative dissonance you have probably seen countless times. For example in ff7 when aerith dies and that's somehow a big deal even though you regularly revive dudes in combat or when red XIII father is revealed to be petrified and that's a big deal even though you can just walk that status effect off in combat and probably have a stack of 99 plotholes to fix it in your inventory.

Undertale does the opposite of that.
Combat harmonizes with the story rather than being something you just do to move the plot forward.
That's where it shines. The bullet hell isn't just a mechanical challenge, the enemies express themselves through what they throw at you and how they do it. It's storytelling.
That's the kind of "involved" this is about.

 

[1981]

There is also a lot of hype around the game right now that it can't live up to. People forget that this is a $10 indie game, not a AAA game with a several million dollar budget. Yes, it will be forgotten after a while, but that isn't a big deal or a bad thing.
The game's story is powerful, but obviously it's not going to make as much of a long-lasting impression as MGSV or Mother 3.

I agree with the first part. Innovation? Unexpected depth? Humour? The Witcher 3 has all of those things and a striking 3D world. But I don't think Undertale will be forgotten anytime soon. It reminded me of To The Moon, which is also more complex than it seems. The fact that I still remember it means that a low-budget game can make a lasting impression.

Yes, the combat is monotonous. It's plain tedious for those who don't like bullet hells. I wish you could replace it with... dunno, tetris? The game makes an attempt to reduce repetition, but many elements still interrupt the story. Instead of cutscenes that require interaction, would it be possible to open text boxes as you walk up to something or while you're walking through an area? If they risk getting in the way, maybe add a hotkey to dismiss them?

I took my headphones off because I couldn't stand the noises. Which always hurts the immersion.