Just How Much Content Should Be Added For the Game to Feel Complete?

[ScienceNonfiction]

It can be fuel for obsession, true, but it definitely felt more like a natural response on Noct's part to his destiny than romantic obsession. *shrugs*

Hmm, ok, obsession isn't really romantic even if the obsessed person thinks it is, but hey idk.

It's not that I'm ignoring what the game was saying about Ardyn; I just feel like there's a different sort of morality in play when dealing with a human who's been transformed into a monster rather than a human in a human body. There's a sense of the target having already abandoned their humanity in the former that doesn't exist in the latter.

I guess the game could sort of work around that in Ardyn's case by implying that killing Ardyn's human body with the Royal Arms effectively killed his mind and the only thing left was a shell possessed by daemons, but it'd be tricky. And, even if it didn't undercut the more meaningful fights we already got, it'd still leave the final fight feeling hollow and thematically unnecessary. =/

Well to me it is necessary to enjoy the end of the game. I get what you're saying but I don't agree with it obviously and if the game repeatedly tells me over and over that he's a human then that's good enough for me. Anyway, I'm gonna see the ending of the game again soon probably and maybe I'll see it more your way or like it more after the initial shock of "What, that's it!?" wore off... but I doubt it =P. Also hopefully Ifrit won't be such a pain now that I'm a higher level.

Raiden being "practically a terrorist" has practically nothing to do with the ways in which Kojima intentionally evokes negative emotions in the people who play MGS2

Absolutely not true. A huge part of that game has to do with how the "bad guys" win at the end and it's all your fault.

very unappealing avatar

You take that back, Raiden is sexy af.
Hmmmmmm, but Snake is good too.........

SotC is a bit different because it interferes with the type of enjoyment provided by puzzles, in which the frustration one feels when trying to solve the puzzle transforms into elation once one has successfully completed the puzzle. Negative emotions are necessary and even desirable to a certain extent when puzzle-solving, but they're usually designed to make overcoming the challenge feel even sweeter. And for myself and a lot of the critics who've forwarded SotC as an example of games-as-art, SotC turns the figurative fruits of victory into ashes in our mouths through its portrayal of the felling of the Colossi.

Ok, how does this invalidate my point in any way?
Besides, why get frustrated at the puzzles? I didn't get frustrated. If you can't figure it out then just think about it more.

It's designed to be played by people at conventions who specifically chose to experience games with an explicit mechanical meaning

So they already knew there was some twist coming? That's pretty lame. And if it's designed not to be fun then it's a bad game. Doesn't matter whether or not it "means" anything.

that lack of fun seems to have been a feature rather than a bug.

Seems like you're operating under the assumption that the game isn't fun because it isn't fair, but some unfair games can be fun. Just look at Marco Polo. The person with their eyes closed is at a major disadvantage, but it's still a fun game. Obviously I don't know whether or not I think the landlord's game is fun cause I never played it. But if it isn't a fun game then the "well that was the point!" argument doesn't excuse it.

FFVII, FFIX, and Mother (as far as I'm aware) were games that dealt with their themes on an almost entirely narrative level instead of using game mechanics to portray thematic content.

Mother for sure has thematically-linked gameplay elements. Almost every element of FF9's design (game design, visual design, sound, etc) is arguably related to one of its major themes, which, even if not intentional on every level, is probably not accidental. But that's another long discussion for probably another time. FF7 I have no idea, but I do take back what I said about FF7 being 100% fun cause I forgot about the snowboarding.

Saying that games should limit themselves to that is basically saying that games should abandon what makes them unique as a medium. =/

Point out where I said this. Cause it seems like you're trying to put words in my mouth (again ).

Fine art, literature, and film are all allowed to explore emotions that are unpleasant and uncomfortable. Games should not be barred from doing the same simply because they are defined by rules and have a name that sounds like a child's plaything.

Who says they're not? All I want is for the game also to be fun. If a game forgoes fun to

explore emotions that are unpleasant and uncomfortable

then forget that. There's plenty of other stuff out there that can and does and is fun, whether linking gameplay with theme or not.

Out of curiosity, how do you define "fun?"

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have it, but you can't use it on Chocobos or during fights. =(

You want to overwrite the Chocobo music? That's the most messed up thing I've heard all week!

Now in 2016

Wait, what?

 

[Ikkin]

Hmm, ok, obsession isn't really romantic even if the obsessed person thinks it is, but hey idk.

Rephrase "romantic obsession" to "obsession based in romantic desire," then, because that's more along the lines of what I intended anyway.

Well to me it is necessary to enjoy the end of the game. I get what you're saying but I don't agree with it obviously and if the game repeatedly tells me over and over that he's a human then that's good enough for me. Anyway, I'm gonna see the ending of the game again soon probably and maybe I'll see it more your way or like it more after the initial shock of "What, that's it!?" wore off... but I doubt it =P. Also hopefully Ifrit won't be such a pain now that I'm a higher level.

I guess it's just a case where we're just going to need to agree to disagree, then. =/

...especially since I apparently had a very different experience with the Ifrit fight than you did. XD I fought him at level 42 (with team members in the high 30s), and while he was definitely a challenge and made me use a bunch of items, I really enjoyed the fight for the ridiculous spectacle it provided (both with regards to the awesome unique summon animations and being able to warp through the air to chase him around the rather massive arena).

Absolutely not true. A huge part of that game has to do with how the "bad guys" win at the end and it's all your fault.

Plot-wise, maybe, but that's not what gets discussed when talking about the ways in which MGS2 intentionally messes with its players. Unhappy endings generally exist outside of the realm of negative emotions being evoked through gameplay. It's certainly possible to use gameplay mechanics to make the player experience an unhappy ending vicariously -- say, shooting The Boss in MGS3 or fighting to keep Zack alive as the DMW breaks down in Crisis Core -- but there are major design considerations when doing so beyond "the player's reward for beating the game is an unhappy ending."

You take that back, Raiden is sexy af.
Hmmmmmm, but Snake is good too.........

If you think Raiden's sexy, you're clearly not part of the (straight/male/anxious about masculinity) audience who Kojima wanted to mess with. XD;

Ok, how does this invalidate my point in any way?

Well, you said that, "You're not exactly a good guy in [SotC] either, but that doesn't mean the game mechanics are any less fun to play." My point was that while simply playing as an avatar who isn't a good person doesn't meaningfully affect the game mechanics, SotC's method of evoking negative emotions is more complicated than that.

Besides, why get frustrated at the puzzles? I didn't get frustrated. If you can't figure it out then just think about it more.

Because it's annoying to lose progress/have to backtrack and have to redo tricky maneuvers I've already done, even if overcoming such challenges provides a sense of accomplishment? I kind of assumed that was a natural part of puzzles/platformers/puzzle-platformers. XD;

So they already knew there was some twist coming? That's pretty lame. And if it's designed not to be fun then it's a bad game. Doesn't matter whether or not it "means" anything.

It's not that the players knew there was a twist coming -- the idea was that the games being played were designed to say something meaningful about the world, so the players would know that the game was trying to say something without necessarily being able to guess that it would impart its meaning through a twist.

And I fail to see how a game that, by all accounts, accomplishes what it sets out to do is a bad game just because it fails to meet some nebulous requirement of "fun." As far as I'm concerned, that makes as little sense as calling a painting that's intentionally unpleasant to look at a bad painting just because it isn't beautiful. =/

Seems like you're operating under the assumption that the game isn't fun because it isn't fair, but some unfair games can be fun. Just look at Marco Polo. The person with their eyes closed is at a major disadvantage, but it's still a fun game. Obviously I don't know whether or not I think the landlord's game is fun cause I never played it. But if it isn't a fun game then the "well that was the point!" argument doesn't excuse it.

There's a difference between basing a game around asymmetric player roles and making a game inherently unfair. Having to close one's eyes in Marco Polo makes things a lot more difficult, but it's balanced by the other players having to respond "Polo" whenever the person with their eyes closed says "Marco" and the lack of a meaningful time limit for the person with their eyes closed to tag someone else. It's entirely possible (and even expected) for the person with their eyes closed to succeed under the rules of the game. An unfair game is one in which the rules of the game are actively stacked against a player and make it significantly harder (or even outright impossible) for them to succeed through no real fault of their own.

The Landlord's Game seems to be based around negative and positive feedback loops (the poor get poorer while the rich get richer) that make it harder for players who aren't winning to keep up. As such, I'm inclined to think that the fun derived from it is intentionally zero-sum -- the winner has fun at everyone else's expense. That's, uh, not an uncommon way of handling the "fun" requirement of games, but the sheer length of the game and the choice to sabotage the potential for comebacks still distinguishes it from something like Mario Kart (which is unfair to the leaders in order to make comebacks more likely) or a game of old-school FPS deathmatch (which is mostly just skill-based).

Mother for sure has thematically-linked gameplay elements. Almost every element of FF9's design (game design, visual design, sound, etc) is arguably related to one of its major themes, which, even if not intentional on every level, is probably not accidental. But that's another long discussion for probably another time. FF7 I have no idea, but I do take back what I said about FF7 being 100% fun cause I forgot about the snowboarding.

You're going to have to provide details with regards to Mother, because I'm not familiar with that game at all. =/

As for FFIX, I've played that game to completion, and in mechanical terms, it's a pretty standard (if unusually slow) ATB RPG through and through. The only instance I can think of where it used its gameplay mechanics to reflect anything in particular was "Dagger can't concentrate." And, amusingly enough, that's just another instance of a game conveying meaning by evoking negative emotions in the player. A lot of people hated that bit. XD

Point out where I said this. Cause it seems like you're trying to put words in my mouth (again ).

Well, you didn't necessarily say that games couldn't explore emotions that are unpleasant and uncomfortable, but you did heavily imply that, unlike fine art, literature, and film, games can't be good without balancing out those unpleasant/uncomfortable emotions with "fun." My point is that there shouldn't be a double-standard in that regard.

Who says they're not? All I want is for the game also to be fun. If a game forgoes fun to

explore emotions that are unpleasant and uncomfortable

then forget that. There's plenty of other stuff out there that can and does and is fun, whether linking gameplay with theme or not.

What you personally want shouldn't be a universal standard, though. There are obviously people out there who appreciate games that forego fun in favor of exploring negative emotions, so it doesn't really make a lot of sense to judge games that do that as inherently bad. =/

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

So you want to impose a strict requirement that games have to be fun to be good, but you can't even define "fun?" How is that fair?

You want to overwrite the Chocobo music? That's the most messed up thing I've heard all week!

Hey, I have no beef with the Chocobo music as part of the soundtrack. It's catchy, it's fun, it does exactly what it's supposed to do.

But it's just one song on a loop, and there isn't a single song in existence that would retain its entertainment factor when played ad infinitum. Not to mention, most of my time off-road is spent on Chocobo-back, so I hardly get a chance to use the MP3 player the way things stand. >_>;

 

[ScienceNonfiction]

Rephrase "romantic obsession" to "obsession based in romantic desire," then, because that's more along the lines of what I intended anyway.

Did I actually use the term "romantic obsession" though? I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I'm too lazy to look back at my posts and check though. Maybe I phrased it in a confusing way though, so my bad. Anyway, thanks for the advice (I mean it, not trying to be a sarcastic douchebag)

...especially since I apparently had a very different experience with the Ifrit fight than you did. XD I fought him at level 42 (with team members in the high 30s), and while he was definitely a challenge and made me use a bunch of items, I really enjoyed the fight for the ridiculous spectacle it provided (both with regards to the awesome unique summon animations and being able to warp through the air to chase him around the rather massive arena).

Oh, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it too. I loved the summons as well.

Well, you said that, "You're not exactly a good guy in [SotC] either, but that doesn't mean the game mechanics are any less fun to play." My point was that while simply playing as an avatar who isn't a good person doesn't meaningfully affect the game mechanics, SotC's method of evoking negative emotions is more complicated than that.

Ummm, alright? I don't get it but sure.

Because it's annoying to lose progress/have to backtrack and have to redo tricky maneuvers I've already done, even if overcoming such challenges provides a sense of accomplishment? I kind of assumed that was a natural part of puzzles/platformers/puzzle-platformers. XD;

Hmmm, well personally I barely get frustrated at games and in general.

And I fail to see how a game that, by all accounts, accomplishes what it sets out to do is a bad game just because it fails to meet some nebulous requirement of "fun." As far as I'm concerned, that makes as little sense as calling a painting that's intentionally unpleasant to look at a bad painting just because it isn't beautiful. =/

An intentionally unpleasant painting sure sounds like a bad painting to me and also sounds like a lazy insult to all the painters who give all they've got to make the best looking painting that they can. But I don't know anything about paintings so I could be wrong.

Having to close one's eyes in Marco Polo makes things a lot more difficult, but it's balanced by the other players having to respond "Polo" whenever the person with their eyes closed says "Marco" and the lack of a meaningful time limit for the person with their eyes closed to tag someone else. It's entirely possible (and even expected) for the person with their eyes closed to succeed under the rules of the game.

Lol, that's not true and you know it. It's nearly impossible to tag someone in that game unless they let you do it on purpose. It's totally stacked against the person who is "it"!

You're going to have to provide details with regards to Mother, because I'm not familiar with that game at all. =/

Singing. I don't want to spoil too much of the game though. It's worth it to play it yourself.

As for FFIX, I've played that game to completion, and in mechanical terms, it's a pretty standard (if unusually slow) ATB RPG through and through. The only instance I can think of where it used its gameplay mechanics to reflect anything in particular was "Dagger can't concentrate." And, amusingly enough, that's just another instance of a game conveying meaning by evoking negative emotions in the player. A lot of people hated that bit. XD

You, uh... you don't see how the notion that people need to accept the scariness and pain of change/death/seeing someone get hurt that are a part of every relationship and to value the joy that comes with every relationship despite the pain applies to the game itself and its place in the FF series as a whole?

Well, you didn't necessarily say that games couldn't explore emotions that are unpleasant and uncomfortable, but you did heavily imply that, unlike fine art, literature, and film, games can't be good without balancing out those unpleasant/uncomfortable emotions with "fun." My point is that there shouldn't be a double-standard in that regard.

Yes, I do think a video game has to be fun to be good. What's the "balancing out" part all about though? Many games in the FF series deal with uncomfortable emotions while being fun at the same time. It's obvious that if they weren't fun then those parts wouldn't be good.

What you personally want shouldn't be a universal standard, though. There are obviously people out there who appreciate games that forego fun in favor of exploring negative emotions, so it doesn't really make a lot of sense to judge games that do that as inherently bad. =/

Well it sure makes sense to me.

So you want to impose a strict requirement that games have to be fun to be good, but you can't even define "fun?"

Yup.

How is that fair?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

there isn't a single song in existence that would retain its entertainment factor when played ad infinitum.

Except the Chocobo theme

Oh yeah, also you posted some stuff about MGS3, which I skimmed but didn't read since it looked like it contained spoilers and I never played that game. So I don't want to spoil myself just in case I ever decide to get back into the Metal Gear series. I kinda just stopped after MGS2 cause... well I don't know why really.

 

[Ikkin]

Did I actually use the term "romantic obsession" though? I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I'm too lazy to look back at my posts and check though. Maybe I phrased it in a confusing way though, so my bad. Anyway, thanks for the advice (I mean it, not trying to be a sarcastic douchebag)

You didn't; I did. What I was trying to say was that I never really meant to imply there was anything romantic about obsession, just refer to a particular sort of obsession focused on an object of romantic interest.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it too. I loved the summons as well.

That's good. Since you implied he was a pain when you fought him the first time, I thought you might not have had much fun with the fight. XD;

Hmmm, well personally I barely get frustrated at games and in general.

Lucky. XD; I'm not sure that's a common way to experience games, though (think of how many times you've heard people joke about breaking controllers due to difficult games).

An intentionally unpleasant painting sure sounds like a bad painting to me and also sounds like a lazy insult to all the painters who give all they've got to make the best looking painting that they can. But I don't know anything about paintings so I could be wrong.

Not a fan of modern art, I take it?

Lol, that's not true and you know it. It's nearly impossible to tag someone in that game unless they let you do it on purpose. It's totally stacked against the person who is "it"!

Depends on how you play it, I guess, but whenever I've been involved, the game takes place in a swimming pool full of people, which massively restricts the options the non-"it" people have for escape while also providing constant audio cues as to where people are. Obviously, if you set it in a play space larger than 16'x32' and have fewer players, the difficulty increases accordingly.

Singing. I don't want to spoil too much of the game though. It's worth it to play it yourself.

Eh, I've already read extensive analyses of Earthbound and Mother 3, both of which I'm far more likely to play than an NES game that's pretty basic-looking even for the standards of the day. =/ Spoilers don't really bother me for anything I'm not trying to experience on release, anyway. Mind explaining in spoiler tags?

You, uh... you don't see how the notion that people need to accept the scariness and pain of change/death/seeing someone get hurt that are a part of every relationship and to value the joy that comes with every relationship despite the pain applies to the game itself and its place in the FF series as a whole?

In FFIX as a whole, sure, but the portrayal of those themes are heavily, heavily weighted towards cinematic or literary-style elements (visuals, music, written dialogue, etc.) as opposed to game mechanics. FFIX's game mechanics are not meaningfully different from previous ATB FF games in a way that expresses anything thematically relevant, except for "Dagger can't concentrate" -- if the combat systems were swapped with the ones from FFIV, I'm not sure there'd be any impact on the game's portrayal of its themes whatsoever. Interestingly enough, I don't think you can switch the systems with FFV-VIII, because V had a job system and VI-VIII all tied their progression mechanics into their worldbuilding, unlike IV and IX -- there's significantly more context to customizing characters using Espers, Materia, and GFs than there is in learning abilities from random weapons and accessories in IX.

Basically, FFIX is a lot like a Naughty Dog game -- it's an exemplar of storytelling techniques from other media being used in games, but doesn't really do much to use the unique capability of games to add to that.

Yes, I do think a video game has to be fun to be good. What's the "balancing out" part all about though? Many games in the FF series deal with uncomfortable emotions while being fun at the same time. It's obvious that if they weren't fun then those parts wouldn't be good.

Dealing with uncomfortable emotions while still being fun completely undercuts the effective expression of uncomfortable emotions in the first place, though. That's where the "balancing out" thing came from -- you seem to be implying that games can't be good if they're not trying to make their players enjoy themselves at all times, even if the things they're trying to convey are inherently not enjoyable.

Well it sure makes sense to me.

Because you don't think that it matters that other people's taste differs from yours? Or...?

Yup.

That's not even close to being a fair way to assess... pretty much anything. =/

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And apparently that doesn't matter to you...?

Except the Chocobo theme

Even the Chocobo theme. =/

Oh yeah, also you posted some stuff about MGS3, which I skimmed but didn't read since it looked like it contained spoilers and I never played that game. So I don't want to spoil myself just in case I ever decide to get back into the Metal Gear series. I kinda just stopped after MGS2 cause... well I don't know why really.

The MGS3 thing comes up pretty much every time people talk about the interesting things that game does, so I figured it'd be safe to reference it without any of the necessary context. Sorry. ^^;

To talk about the game more generically, though -- MGS3 does a few things that are designed to make the player take responsibility for the deaths of both standard enemies and named characters, all of which are interesting from the perspective of using game mechanics to convey meaning. It's definitely relevant to the conversation we're having.

EDIT: I came across this video about fun in video games, and it seemed relevant to the ongoing conversation in that regard. Basically, it argues that "fun" is useless as a description and actively limiting when set as a goal for games as a medium.

 

[Nova]

So how do you guys feel about this interview?

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/hajime-tabata-on-final-fantasy-xvs-dlc-plan-chapter-13

 

[Ikkin]

So how do you guys feel about this interview?

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/hajime-tabata-on-final-fantasy-xvs-dlc-plan-chapter-13

It's basically what I wanted from the revisions -- keep the direction intact while tightening up the implementation and fleshing out the story.

 

[Jenova]

So how do you guys feel about this interview?

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/hajime-tabata-on-final-fantasy-xvs-dlc-plan-chapter-13

Sounds like if you don't like the game as is then you won't like it in the future. The changes coming are merely tweaks and refinements. Not a compete overhaul as everyone is assuming. It's fine with me. I think overhauling the game would not only be a complete waste of time, but also an insult to the people who worked on it and fans who enjoyed the game in its current form. Basically, no one should be expecting Final Fantasy XV: A Realm Reborn here.

 

[Jubileus]

So how do you guys feel about this interview?

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/hajime-tabata-on-final-fantasy-xvs-dlc-plan-chapter-13

Good interview. The direction and intentions of the update are pretty clear judging from what Tabata said in that article, and it's as @Jenova said, the upcoming changes are tweaks and refinements of the game as is. No complete overhaul of scenarios.

I'll admit, I wasn't sure what the team meant when they said they wanted to keep updating the game and improving the story. A part of me even thought a FFXV: ARR kinda situation was gonna happen since I wasn't sure what to expect, but with this interview, it's crystal clear and leaves no room for wishful thinking and unrealistic expectations.

I'm fine with it and wish the team a smooth development process for these updates.

Now my next question is: how extensive will these tweaks and refinements to the game be?

Will they extend throughout the rest of the game? Or be solely done on the latter half of the game?

Let's have fun speculating on this guys (and please let's keep it civil whilst staying on topic - which means no Versus and other irrelevant stuff)

It's basically what I wanted from the revisions -- keep the direction intact while tightening up the implementation and fleshing out the story.

If they get this part right, with the story implementation and scenarios blending in seamlessly together in a way that makes sense, then by the end of it all, this will no doubt be one of the most captivating and intriguing stories in the FF series.

It's got so much potential and is powerful on so many levels. More father-son moments will no doubt bring on the feels and be very relatable to a lot of players.

 

[Slaintimez]

So how do you guys feel about this interview?

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/hajime-tabata-on-final-fantasy-xvs-dlc-plan-chapter-13

Really vague interview. And that line "Tabata acknowledges the uncertainty surrounding the DLC plan" is a little bit worrysome, two months since realease and they don't know yet what is gonna be released outside of season pass...

Still, im waiting for detail announcements to judge.

 

[Lulcielid]

I think the line was meant torwards the fans feelings.

 

[Nova]

Was it confirmed that we are getting an ATR this month?

 

[Lulcielid]

Was it confirmed that we are getting an ATR this month?

We got confirmation of a New Year ATR happening, no date though.

 

[Jubileus]

In regards to improving the implementation and story, does anyone here still think they're gonna add in an explorable World of Ruin?

It's already been cemented that they're gonna keep the scenario as is, so... I'm not sure how an explorable WoR would fit in here since that would mean they would have to change the scenario and direction of that chapter up until they actually reach Insomnia.

I was hoping they would expand on ch14 by making Noctis catch up with what happened during the 10 years he was away with all of the characters (Cor, Cindy, Cid and Iris, and maybe he'd have to go search for the guys individually), but I'm thinking it's not likely anymore.

Thoughts on this matter anyone?

 

[Lulcielid]

An interesting observation on chapter 13:

My argument from the start has been that Chapter 13 was fantastic, it just didn't have the impact it was going for because of its placement in the game.
What I mean is that for a handful of chapters leading up to 13, we have long since been cut off from the open world. We had been on linear path for a number of chapters that left little in the way of decision making in where to go and which quests to handle. I think for a lot of players, they stuck to this linear path and finished the game out rather than constantly using umbra to go do sidequests.

Now, this lack of freedom felt throughout much of the second half of the game culminates in Chapter 13: a Chapter about lack of freedom.
You wind up feeling isolated from the main open world and powerless to dictate the pace of the journey on your own terms, and THEN chapter 13 hits. This kills the impact of the Chapter and annoyed a lot of people.

I really think at this point in the game, players were praying for the world to open back up a bit again, not shrink even further.

I love the atmosphere and the whole idea behind the Chapter. I just hope the friend DLC packs fit nicely into the main storyline and open up the second half of the game so that Chapter 13 can have the impact it was meant to.

 

[Nova]

Tabata mentioned in the IGN pre-release event that he would like to open up new area content in Eos post-release. So technically its possible for them to expand areas the best they can while not significantly changing canon events + fleshing out scenarios within the story.

 

[Jubileus]

Haven't watched that event yet now that I think about it. I'll be sure to check it out. Sounds good.

 

[Nova]

Lemme save ya time. He specifically mentions it in the 47:30 minute mark.

 

[Jubileus]

Thanks for the link and much appreciated.

Well that's good news. Since I've been playing around in the Carnival I'm greatly looking forward to Altissia opening up. I spot some dungeons and interesting outposts on the cliffs there.

 

[Storm]

dear god

 

[Jubileus]

dear god

O_O

For a continent that is not meant to be explorable, that sure is a fuckload of content.

Dear me... I must say the snowy landscapes are quite beautiful.

Such potential...

I have no idea what to expect from here on out tbh. The development for this game has so many questions and controversies that I think the best thing anyone can do is reserve judgement until the very end of development whilst having zero to low expectations.

It's the only way to stay sane.