Undertale (PC, PS4, Switch) & Deltarune (PC DEMO)

[Brad]

If you only want to see things on a surface level you'll never really understand what the creator was attempting to establish with his characters and design choices. This applies for a lot of media. The fact that many can see this perception means it's definitely not invalid - if you can't interpret it that way, then perhaps it's just with you and how you experience the world and how you approach fictional narratives? Who knows.

There's a lot of choices in life where you're given no good reason to be kind or nice to people who don't show it back - this is a pretty central idea behind the whole game. You get to understand the main characters more by showing this kindness, you gain friendship and investment and their support. You get to unlock the secrets of the Underground by showing mercy and letting monsters live. I'm pretty sure kindness was the main theme that Toby wanted people to take away from this.

[Briraka]

If you only want to see things on a surface level you'll never really understand what the creator was attempting to establish with his characters and design choices. This applies for a lot of media. The fact that many can see this perception means it's definitely not invalid - if you can't interpret it that way, then perhaps it's just with you and how you experience the world and how you approach fictional narratives? Who knows.

There's a lot of choices in life where you're given no good reason to be kind or nice to people who don't show it back - this is a pretty central idea behind the whole game. You get to understand the main characters more by showing this kindness, you gain friendship and investment and their support. You get to unlock the secrets of the Underground by showing mercy and letting monsters live. I'm pretty sure kindness was the main theme that Toby wanted people to take away from this.

So basically, throw away any sense of self-preservation and befriend someone who tried murdering you to get more bang for your buck. What a load idealistic BS.

[Diogenes]

By your logic the humans would have killed Toriel. None of them did and instead stupidly faced Asgore. Wow these humans are so evil they're retarded.

What the hell are you even talking about here?

Hurt, yes. I doubt he was angry though.

He seemed a lot more apologetic than irritated or angry about the situation. It certainly feels like he's being honest what with the "You can come live with me and my wife, and we can be a family" and stuff after that.

No I mean, when he first said that he would destroy humanity, after Chara and Asriel died, he was angry. After the pain started to fade he realized he couldn't go through with it.

I can understand the cowardice and that he doesn't want to take back what he promised to his people, but is anyone really pent up about the Humans besides Undyne? If you do a pacifist run, on a first playthrough, Toriel comes back into power and people are pretty much ok with her policy of having to treat every Human who falls down preciously.

Yeah, there are monsters out there who have their hopes pinned on Asgore getting them out of the underground. There's the guys around the hotel like VEDJ said, plus the whole sequence before meeting Asgore where the random encounters tell you a bunch of backstory that ends with them trusting in Asgore to free them. And the not-quite-pacifist ending does make a point of saying that everything that happened was a pretty big setback for monsterkind and they're struggling to stay hopeful, they just don't get any angrier at humans because in that playthrough you're about as nice as you could be and what goes wrong isn't your fault.

[Dejablue]

I'm saying, if the human requires a boss monster's soul, why not kill Toriel? Yet she's still alive.

[Diogenes]

I'm saying, if the human requires a boss monster's soul, why not kill Toriel? Yet she's still alive.

Because the door to the ruins is one-way and they probably didn't know they'd need a monster soul until they left. Also she's really really nice, why would anyone want to kill her?

[Briraka]

I'm saying, if the human requires a boss monster's soul, why not kill Toriel? Yet she's still alive.

I don't think the player or any of the other humans were given the information about how to cross the barrier at that point, so the only reason Toriel could die was because the player didn't figure out how to spare her, or just went ahead and killed her.

[Wraith]

So basically, throw away any sense of self-preservation and befriend someone who tried murdering you to get more bang for your buck. What a load idealistic BS.

That's the core challenge of the game, yes. Can you be kind to every single monster you encounter, despite the circumstances? No matter how much they lash out at you or how tough it might be to do so? No matter the consequences? It's the whole point of the game, and I think your strong emotional response against that means the game succeeded in what it was trying to get across. Sometimes one of the hardest things to do is forgive.

[Briraka]

 

That's the core challenge of the game, yes. Can you be kind to every single monster you encounter, despite the circumstances? No matter how much they lash out at you or how tough it might be to do so? No matter the consequences? It's the whole point of the game, and I think your strong emotional response against that means the game succeeded in what it was trying to get across. Sometimes one of the hardest things to do is forgive.

That's the thing, though. Pacifying monsters is just as easy as attacking them. All you have to do is plug away at the non-aggressive actions the game gives you until you find the right string of functions to get past the attacking monsters.

[DBZHedgy]

 

Yeah, there are monsters out there who have their hopes pinned on Asgore getting them out of the underground. There's the guys around the hotel like VEDJ said, plus the whole sequence before meeting Asgore where the random encounters tell you a bunch of backstory that ends with them trusting in Asgore to free them. And the not-quite-pacifist ending does make a point of saying that everything that happened was a pretty big setback for monsterkind and they're struggling to stay hopeful, they just don't get any angrier at humans because in that playthrough you're about as nice as you could be and what goes wrong isn't your fault.

I feel that it's quite a statement that they immediately retract all ire towards the humans once Frisk breaks the barrier. They aren't angry at the humans, they're angry that they're still stuck down there. They aren't really hyped for all of the humans to die, they just want to get out of the underground after being there for so long. Using 7 souls was overkill at that point.

Or at least I'd hope that's the case.

If not, then I don't think that there would be such a happy ending once everybody got out of the underground on the pacifist ending...

Even with the lack of that knowledge though, I didn't notice anyone being disappointed in Asgore for not going through with the whole end humanity thing after Frisk breaks the barrier. Maybe that's because Frisk changed their minds throughout the pacifist playthrough, like that of Undyne, but I still think it speaks volumes. 

With that said, it still makes plenty of sense for Asgore to personally have some resentment towards Humanity to want to do all of that when he could just take the easy way out with one soul and call it a day. Toriel notes that it even took longer than just using one soul. It was just plain unnecessary. He could've stopped it at any time before or during your arrival to the Underground, but he chooses not to. Cowardice? Sure. I can buy that, but no one is really gunning for the humans to begin with, they just wanna leave. Correct me if I'm wrong, but no one was bummed about Asgore not killing all of humanity.

[Dejablue]

I don't think anyone was bummed. But if it took just one soul then why did they waste their time collecting more than just 1? Is it because Asgore wanted to make sure that he was strong enough to wipe out mankind? That's the only way it makes sense, for those extra souls to be of any use, it would have to be for warfare.  So even though Asgore didn't really want to do it, he did it because his people wanted it. But when you break the barrier, humans and monsters get along perfectly fine from what we see in the credits. So all the monsters just changed their minds? That's what I don't like, it's so vauge, I conclude in one direction, you guys conclude in the other. But it's really unrealistic. We've seen throughout history how people retain bitterness even long after the transgression has ended. 

And the only way this forgiveness and kindness trumps all rhetoric works is because it's a video game. I mean yeah you can forgive your enemies, but they will probably kill you. And you can't load up a save in real life.

[Briraka]

I don't think anyone was bummed. But if it took just one soul then why did they waste their time collecting more than just 1? Is it because Asgore wanted to make sure that he was strong enough to wipe out mankind? That's the only way it makes sense, for those extra souls to be of any use, it would have to be for warfare.  So even though Asgore didn't really want to do it, he did it because his people wanted it. But when you break the barrier, humans and monsters get along perfectly fine from what we see in the credits. So all the monsters just changed their minds? That's what I don't like, it's so vauge, I conclude in one direction, you guys conclude in the other. But it's really unrealistic. We've seen throughout history how people retain bitterness even long after the transgression has ended. 

And the only way this forgiveness and kindness trumps all rhetoric works is because it's a video game. I mean yeah you can forgive your enemies, but they will probably kill you. And you can't load up a save in real life.

Well, in a sense it's realistic. After all...

... it's all just a game. ;P

[Diogenes]

But if it took just one soul then why did they waste their time collecting more than just 1?

Because Asgore didn't want to kill people. You need 7 human souls to break the barrier, with one human soul in their possession Asgore would need to absorb it, pass through the barrier alone, kill 6 more humans for their souls, then return to free the rest of the monsters. But because he couldn't go through with it and because he didn't have the guts to tell the monsters that the plan was off, he just hid and waited and hoped futilely that humans would stop falling into the underground. And if you wanted to be less charitable you could argue that that way he could justify it as self defense, as any trapped human would have to come to kill him and take his soul if they wanted to leave, compared to him going out and actively hunting down a half dozen humans.

[Brad]

So basically, throw away any sense of self-preservation and befriend someone who tried murdering you to get more bang for your buck. What a load idealistic BS.

You're playing a game with lesbian fishes and skeletons with adoration of spaghetti. 

[Candescence]

Thing is, the game does eventually put you into situations where fighting is the only way to resolve a situation, and even admits in the pacifist ending that you can't solve all problems peacefully, or at least entirely peacefully.

The two mandatory instances of fighting being Asgore and Flowey, both of whom can be spared once you've beaten them down - Asgore offers to adopt you, but if you've already got the neutral ending, he'll just decide against it and kill himself to allow you to leave. Flowey's 'spare' choice actually makes a surprising amount of karmic sense - he's outright goading you into killing him, but if you repeatedly refuse to, his entire worldview just breaks, and him agonizing over being unable to comprehend why you would show him kindness is a much more appropriate punishment than death, because he not only wants you to kill him (not out of guilt, but to force you to adhere to "kill or be killed"), but also because he knows his death isn't permanent anyway.

Asriel, if you backtrack all the way to the beginning to talk to him, will outright tell you that the world above (aka reality) isn't nearly as nice and that there's a lot of Floweys out there, among other things.

Whether this game is too idealistic is debatable, but that kind of idealism is honestly refreshing in a genre where killing is practically mandatory, mostly because nearly every other RPG is virtually impossible without doing so (due to EXP), and the exceptions pretty much universally involve stealth and knocking people out (hello, Deus Ex and its sequel and prequels).

... Actually, now that I think about it, that applies to pretty much most of the medium. Undertale is practically the only story-driven game I know of that actually enables non-violent, non-stealth conflict encounter resolution as a regular gameplay feature.

Edited December 23, 2015 by Candescence

[Dejablue]

Mirrors Edge, Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker, Metal Gear Solid 4 Along with all the other story driven games in existence where violence isn't even an option. Some Ultima games as well. I'm probably missing some but this is what comes to mind. I don't see why Undertale deserves a pat on the back because it doesn't resort to stealth.  The way the game is made makes the very notion of stealth impossible. I wouldn't praise it for something it can't do. An RPG with stealth elements might actually be interesting. In Undertale the methods you have to pacify enemies is the exact same command prompt to attack them.

Also am I going insane? I remember something Toriel said to Asgore. So she divorced him because he didn't want to cross the barrier and kill 6 people?

Edited December 23, 2015 by Dejablue

[Wraith]

Mirrors Edge, Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker, Metal Gear Solid 4 Along with all the other story driven games in existence where violence isn't even an option. Some Ultima games as well. I'm probably missing some but this is what comes to mind. I don't see why Undertale deserves a pat on the back because it doesn't resort to stealth.  The way the game is made makes the very notion of stealth impossible. I wouldn't praise it for something it can't do. An RPG with stealth elements might actually be interesting. In Undertale the methods you have to pacify enemies is the exact same command prompt to attack them.

The "Pat on the back" comes from the ability to interact with enemies in non violent ways. With stealth, you're not interacting with the enemy at all, so the choice comes down to killing them or avoiding the whole thing entirely. It's just being praised for being creative. Nothing more. 

[Dejablue]

The "Pat on the back" comes from the ability to interact with enemies in non violent ways. With stealth, you're not interacting with the enemy at all, so the choice comes down to killing them or avoiding the whole thing entirely. It's just being praised for being creative. Nothing more. 

Is it really tho? Like when I'm playing the game I know that in a pacifist run, I have to basically press "the other options" besides fight. And eventually one of them will work out for me. Since it is a text heavy game, the feedback is all the same to me. When I say stealth, there are a lot of things you can do. You can sneak around the enemy, knock them out, distract them, with bait or tricks, trap them, it's like puzzle.

[Kuzu]

I've only made it to Asgore, and on a neutral run at that, but my impressions of the game do give me that it is very biased towards the monsters and against the humans. Now granted, its justified because we literally don't learn anything about the humans other than what the Monsters tell us, so obviously what we're told will definitely be Anti-Human.

That said, I don't really like the implications of the game that pacifism is the only way to succeed, but in the case of defending yourself from harm, you're called out as a violent asshole. Its something that rings as a flaw to me in the game's design. I still love it, don't get me wrong but I can understand the problems of the message its trying to convey.

[Diogenes]

Also am I going insane? I remember something Toriel said to Asgore. So she divorced him because he didn't want to cross the barrier and kill 6 people?

More because, if he was actually trying to free the monsters, he could've done it years ago. Whether he waits for 7 souls to show up or he goes hunting for the last 6 himself, 7 people would need to die either way. Instead of having either the conviction to free the monsters immediately or the courage to admit to them he was wrong, he just hid and waited.

[Dejablue]

Kuzu basically condensed all of my ramblings into a single post. I wish we knew more about the humans. If this is supposed to be a game where in the end, two civilizations are supposed to come together and coexist peacefully, the story is terrible at convincing me that this is going to work out. We're just told that it works out. But who is Frisk and why would some tiny child have any influence on humans? I mean Frisk fell down the hole, for all we know he was being sacrificed. 

Edited December 23, 2015 by Dejablue

[Kuzu]

See, I feel like the game's message would be better conveyed if it wasn't so anti-violence and pro-pacifism; let the player actually defend himself a bit then give us an option to spare or not. Have some Monsters actually not attack you, whether intentionally or not. Utilize the "Act" function more. Lastly, I don't think the game should take the sides of either the monsters or the humans and just let the player decide for themselves who's more "right".

Edited December 23, 2015 by Kuzu the Boloedge

[Diogenes]

See, I feel like the game's message would be better conveyed if it wasn't so anti-violence and pro-pacifism; let the player actually defend himself a bit then give us an option to spare or not.

Well, you can. I think for most(?) random encounters, you can beat them up enough to be able to spare them. Most people recommend against it because it takes the risk of breaking a pacifist run if you do accidentally kill someone, and the combat isn't that interesting anyway. And you're not penalized for attacking bosses either, even though you can't spare them that way.

Lastly, I don't think the game should take the sides of either the monsters or the humans and just let the player decide for themselves who's more "right".

At what point do you feel the game is taking a side? To me, after seeing everything, the closest I feel the game comes to taking any stance on the situation is "both sides have made their mistakes, and it's unfortunate that it's turned out this way". 

[Wraith]

I've only made it to Asgore, and on a neutral run at that, but my impressions of the game do give me that it is very biased towards the monsters and against the humans. Now granted, its justified because we literally don't learn anything about the humans other than what the Monsters tell us, so obviously what we're told will definitely be Anti-Human.

That said, I don't really like the implications of the game that pacifism is the only way to succeed, but in the case of defending yourself from harm, you're called out as a violent asshole. Its something that rings as a flaw to me in the game's design. I still love it, don't get me wrong but I can understand the problems of the message its trying to convey.

It's only when you kill people that you're portrayed as a violent asshole though, and I think that's fair game. Beating someone up until they run way is still fine.

 

[Nepenthe]

But is that not kind of weird? Like, in real life, if I went around beating the shit out of people, I would still get called a violent asshole regardless of the fact that I didn't kill them. That's a weird mechanic in terms of the themes that I imagine is only in there as a safe guard against someone pressing buttons too quickly and thus accidentally hitting a monster during a pacifist run.

[Dejablue]

But is that not kind of weird? Like, in real life, if I went around beating the shit out of people, I would still get called a violent asshole regardless of the fact that I didn't kill them. That's a weird mechanic in terms of the themes that I imagine is only in there as a safe guard against someone pressing buttons too quickly and thus accidentally hitting a monster during a pacifist run.

It makes even less sense when the monsters take the initiative to strike first.  But it is an RPG so fighting of a kind has to happen. Maybe this shouldn't have even been an RPG. It creates too many "Why didn't they just use Phoenix Down on dead Aeris" moments.