Review RPG Codex Review: Undertale

[ghostdog]

The best way I could describe the game is "cute". I never managed to get to the end because for some reason this game always made me sleepy after a while, but it's definitely recommended for those that like quirky jrpgs like Earthbound and Mother 3.

 

[Cassidy]

Undertale is like the dream game of a gas pump:

Not surprising such "review" sounds like it was written by that NPC.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Why is this game called RPG all over the review.As I understand the combat is some sort of bullet hell gimmick.Is there skills ,progression,stats,you know stuff that make RPG?Even JRPGs usually have more redeeming features for their retarded visuals,like party,turn-based combat,a lot of stats.The impression I got is that it's adventure game,what the fuck is Earthbound or Mother that felipepepe say it's this a clone of,googling it(great job reviewer)I see it's console facebook looking kids game from 1994.
Little awareness as to where we are and that not everybody know the shitty console weeaboo shit.More words on the mechanics and adventure tag would had made reading this less painful.But we don't want that eh,let's make some people butthurt.

 

[vean]

Sup potatojohn?

Am I supposed to be impressed or something?

 

[Damned Registrations]

what the fuck is Earthbound or Mother

Earthbound is the second game in the Mother trilogy, and it broke a lot of popular (at the time) jrpg conventions. In particular, it had a very humorous/strange story and setting. Instead of fighting things like orcs or dragons, you fought things like sentient stop signs and hippies. It generally parodied traditional jrpgs and fantasy/sci-fi settings.

As for calling itself an RPG, it has rudimentary equipment and levels and turn based combat. Puts it closer to rpg than adventure in most people's eyes (if there's an 'adventure' game with equipment, stats, and turn based combat feel free to prove me wrong.)

 

[CryptRat]

what the fuck is Earthbound or Mother that felipepepe say it's this a clone of

Earthbound is arguably the best JRPG ever (I personally think that 2 or 3 games compete). Don't stop to its childish look, its atmosphere is somewhat childish but it's a very clever game.

 

[Murk]

Well, the mother games did give us this guy

 

[BlackAdderBG]

what the fuck is Earthbound or Mother

Earthbound is the second game in the Mother trilogy, and it broke a lot of popular (at the time) jrpg conventions. In particular, it had a very humorous/strange story and setting. Instead of fighting things like orcs or dragons, you fought things like sentient stop signs and hippies. It generally parodied traditional jrpgs and fantasy/sci-fi settings.

As for calling itself an RPG, it has rudimentary equipment and levels and turn based combat. Puts it closer to rpg than adventure in most people's eyes (if there's an 'adventure' game with equipment, stats, and turn based combat feel free to prove me wrong.)

Quest for Glory?
So Undertale has turn based combat,stats and equipment or you are talking bout that Mother game?

Earthbound is arguably the best JRPG ever (I personally think that 2 or 3 games compete). Don't stop to its childish look, its atmosphere is somewhat childish but it's a very clever game.

Clever as mechanically clever,or the shit jrpg storyfag-teens fight weird enemies-clever as Damned Registrations post point out?

 

[NotAGolfer]

Bought it (Undertale), played it for about an hour and then uninstalled again. Asked Steam for a refund too, didn't like what I saw.

The "gameplay" seems to consist of a shitton of pointless and boring minigames like those in AAA games, only that there is basically nothing else here except for some braindead puzzles (maybe they get better later but I won't slurp up all that shit to get there). Also the gameworld is just not interesting. I never felt like there would be anything interesting around the next corner, instead there always just seemed to be another half-assed puzzle room or some cultural reference joke or other boring crap. The game doesn't even try.

This is bottom of the barrel indie imo.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

No.

Bad would be saying you've got a game that isn't what it is. Putting your best foot forward != dishonesty in any shape or form.

Are you saying that this is not the best part of AoD?

Spoiler

 

[Edward The Mediocre]

Just fucking pirate Earthbound already BlackAdderBG you retard.

 

[Irenaeus II]

Well, the mother games did give us this guy

Oh that's where this guy came from?

Super Nintendo ruined RPGs.

 

[CryptRat]

So Undertale has turn based combat,stats and equipment

Yes, it's limited though.

Clever as mechanically clever,or the shit jrpg storyfag-teens fight weird enemies-clever as Damned Registrations post point out?

Clever as Damned Registrations post point out, sorry . When many RPGs try to be sad and/or humourous and/or charming and miserably fails (and JRPGs are good at miserably failing, but these days western RPG are particularly good at miserably failing too, see Bioware), this game is one of the games where you think it's well done. Beisdes, you play children so not emo/lover teens or such shit, it's not a fantasy game and its weird/surreal world is indeed great, the story is good, the characters are introduced in a cool way, some mechanisms/spells are also introduced in a cool way, the villain is cool too.

 

[Edward The Mediocre]

Well, the mother games did give us this guy

Oh that's where this guy came from?

Super Nintendo ruined RPGs.

That's the Game Boy Advance. That specific game came out on april 2006, keep in mind that Oblivion came out a month earlier in the same year.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Quest for Glory?
So Undertale has turn based combat,stats and equipment or you are talking bout that Mother game?

QfG is realtime, no? I suppose it's close enough, though I also think a lot of people would consider that game an rpg as well. I certainly would.

And yeah, Undertale has all those things, though they are quite simplified (you only have attack, defense, hp and level as stats, only two equipment slots with about a half dozen different pieces for each, and the turn based combat is pretty much impossible without at least trying to dodge during the action sequences, though even people terrible at action will get through all the normal fights easily enough).

 

[aeternalis]

Clever as mechanically clever,or the shit jrpg storyfag-teens fight weird enemies-clever as Damned Registrations post point out?

Clever as Damned Registrations post point out, sorry . When many RPGs try to be sad and/or humourous and/or charming and miserably fails (and JRPGs are good at miserably failing, but these days western RPG are particularly good at miserably failing too, see Bioware), this game is one of the games where you think it's well done. Beisdes, you play children so not emo/lover teens or such shit, it's not a fantasy game and its weird/surreal world is indeed great, the story is good, the characters are introduced in a cool way, some mechanisms/spells are also introduced in a cool way, the villain is cool too.

Well in response to his question Earthbound did have a few "clever" for the time and genre (1994 JRPG) mechanics.

I'm not sure it is worth playing today (I liked the game, but nostalgia is a big thing with 90s JRPGs; I realized that when I tried to replay Final Fantasy VI) but don't judge Earthbound by Undertale. Undertale's most direct take from Earthbound is in the final boss fight, otherwise it's just "inspiration".

 

[almondblight]

The best way I could describe the game is "cute". I never managed to get to the end because for some reason this game always made me sleepy after a while, but it's definitely recommended for those that like quirky jrpgs like Earthbound and Mother 3.

I played about 45 minutes of the demo, and it reminded me more of games like Candy Box 2 or Frog Fractions than Earthbound. IE, games that are intentionally counter-intuitive (I guess I Wanna Be the Guy is another one, though a major focus of that was also difficulty). Earthbound was humorous, but played more or less like a straightforward JRPG from what I remember, and had a fairly coherent setting.

But Candy Box 2 and Frog Fractions were a lot better, and they're free (and since I stumbled on both by accident, I imagine there are many more randomly different free games out there). The humor in those games is also much better. Undertale's humor includes things like giving the PC, who's a child, the option to flirt with your human-cow-mother thing (and you get to go on a date with a skeleton later, apparently).

The game play seemed to consist of entering a room, figuring out the gimmick, then going to the next room. At first I tried to do a lot of counter-intuitive things, since I kept hearing about how great the world interaction and reactivity was. But there really wasn't much to do and not a lot of ways to interact with things. The game seemed to also be completely linear (everyone who plays it will go to Room A, solve the puzzle there, then go to Room B, solve the puzzle there, then go to Room C, solve the puzzle there, etc.).

It's punctuated by extremely repetitive combat (though some have said that the encounter rate in the demo is higher, so that might be part of it), which is part of the reason why I didn't bother playing to the end of the demo.

I heard a lot about the reactivity, so I decided to check the FAQ and see what I'm missing. If I kill a certain monster the character I see afterwards will criticize me for killing it; but if I spare it, it criticizes me for sparing it. There seems to be lots of stuff like this:

The next area will look different depending on whether you petted Lesser Dog a lot or not. If you only petted him once, you'll see the dog making snow-dogs. If you petted him a bunch, you'll see long, deformed snog-dogs all over the place.

Well, at least it has multiple endings, right? Huh, here it says it only has 3. I guess that's OK. Oh wait, the genocide ending is about hours of mind numbing repetitive grinding ("It's supposed to be boring!"). Well, it has 2 at least. Oh, the pacifist ending can't be obtained the first time you play the game? Eh, so most are going to be stuck with one ending on their initial playthrough. Eh.

Reading the FAQs, It seems that a lot of the "OMG can't tell you the spoiler!" stuff is about things that happen when you replay the game. Kill someone in one playthrough, and they comment about it in the next, etc. I guess that's kind of interesting? But would I want to keep playing the game when the game itself isn't terribly interesting and I'm doing the same exact thing 95% of the time? It also seems that the previous comment about people not wanting to spoil things is more about not having a good example. "Play this game because if you kill a guy on a playthrough and then talk to him on the next playthrough he'll say he remembers you killing him" - not exactly an argument that makes one want to run out and buy the game.

After the high praise this game was getting I was expecting, if not a great game, at least something somewhat noteworthy (once you got past the graphics/questionable humor). Now I'm wondering if I can blacklist some of the members here so I never take their suggestions seriously again.

 

[Bubbles]

Undertale's humor includes things like giving the PC, who's a child, the option to flirt with your human-cow-mother thing (and you get to go on a date with a skeleton later, apparently).

Children being portrayed in an inappropriate light in a jRPG isn't exactly unheard of though.

 

[TigerKnee]

I want to find the creator's quote where he thinks his own game is like 7/10 on a rating scale because it's really funny when you read all the posts in the topic so far.

 

[Edward The Mediocre]

I don't remember him saying that, but I do remember that he put up quotes of negative parts of reviews that gave his game a 10/10 on the store page on steam.

 

[NotAGolfer]

The best way I could describe the game is "cute". I never managed to get to the end because for some reason this game always made me sleepy after a while, but it's definitely recommended for those that like quirky jrpgs like Earthbound and Mother 3.

I played about 45 minutes of the demo, and it reminded me more of games like Candy Box 2 or Frog Fractions than Earthbound. IE, games that are intentionally counter-intuitive (I guess I Wanna Be the Guy is another one, though a major focus of that was also difficulty). Earthbound was humorous, but played more or less like a straightforward JRPG from what I remember, and had a fairly coherent setting.

But Candy Box 2 and Frog Fractions were a lot better, and they're free (and since I stumbled on both by accident, I imagine there are many more randomly different free games out there). The humor in those games is also much better. Undertale's humor includes things like giving the PC, who's a child, the option to flirt with your human-cow-mother thing (and you get to go on a date with a skeleton later, apparently).

The game play seemed to consist of entering a room, figuring out the gimmick, then going to the next room. At first I tried to do a lot of counter-intuitive things, since I kept hearing about how great the world interaction and reactivity was. But there really wasn't much to do and not a lot of ways to interact with things. The game seemed to also be completely linear (everyone who plays it will go to Room A, solve the puzzle there, then go to Room B, solve the puzzle there, then go to Room C, solve the puzzle there, etc.).

It's punctuated by extremely repetitive combat (though some have said that the encounter rate in the demo is higher, so that might be part of it), which is part of the reason why I didn't bother playing to the end of the demo.

I heard a lot about the reactivity, so I decided to check the FAQ and see what I'm missing. If I kill a certain monster the character I see afterwards will criticize me for killing it; but if I spare it, it criticizes me for sparing it. There seems to be lots of stuff like this:

The next area will look different depending on whether you petted Lesser Dog a lot or not. If you only petted him once, you'll see the dog making snow-dogs. If you petted him a bunch, you'll see long, deformed snog-dogs all over the place.

Well, at least it has multiple endings, right? Huh, here it says it only has 3. I guess that's OK. Oh wait, the genocide ending is about hours of mind numbing repetitive grinding ("It's supposed to be boring!"). Well, it has 2 at least. Oh, the pacifist ending can't be obtained the first time you play the game? Eh, so most are going to be stuck with one ending on their initial playthrough. Eh.

Reading the FAQs, It seems that a lot of the "OMG can't tell you the spoiler!" stuff is about things that happen when you replay the game. Kill someone in one playthrough, and they comment about it in the next, etc. I guess that's kind of interesting? But would I want to keep playing the game when the game itself isn't terribly interesting and I'm doing the same exact thing 95% of the time? It also seems that the previous comment about people not wanting to spoil things is more about not having a good example. "Play this game because if you kill a guy on a playthrough and then talk to him on the next playthrough he'll say he remembers you killing him" - not exactly an argument that makes one want to run out and buy the game.

After the high praise this game was getting I was expecting, if not a great game, at least something somewhat noteworthy (once you got past the graphics/questionable humor). Now I'm wondering if I can blacklist some of the members here so I never take their suggestions seriously again.

Most accurate review I have read so far.
I say add some ugly and repetitive pictures (=random screenshots from anywhere in the game) and put it on the front page.
The people demand it!


Balance has to be restored, that other review supports the decline, it has to go away.

 

[Suicidal]

Time to rekindle that rage engine, guys.

Undertale chosen as Zero Punctuation's best game of 2015. Also, it's the only game he ever included in his top 5 GOTY without reviewing it first.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vid...ion/116617-Top-5-Best-and-Worst-Games-of-2015

 

[Irenaeus II]

I bet it get will the Oscar too.

 

[Shadenuat]

I gave Undertale a try, dropped at spider fufufu girl.
It's about as innocent as Moomins, although way more dumb. No SJW spotted, at least no obvious stuff, although animu is strong in this one.
The most glaring flaw of the game is that it follows paragon-renegade story development, so you either grind monsters or only play minigames (but if you grind monsters, you still have to play minigames, yeah). There is no morale struggle or choice since, really, the monsters are all presented as adoracute, and first books in library tell you that they're basically made of love.
One of the first minibosses is a corgi-doge in armor that licks your face after you pet it, for fucks sake, why would you try and kill it? Or destroy the only part of the game that has character (or err, characters)? Thus the "right" way is completely obvious, while neutral way AFAIK is the most boring of all, as it often happens.
The game is linear, and you'll mostly return to hubs to get "dates", well unless you kill everything.

I personally just got really bored with no-puzzles and twitchy stuff. Somehow I also got pacifist path cancelled although I never killed anyone and played game at level 1. And I have no interest in replaying game with all it's puzzles and cutscenes again.
Humor didn't get me either. Neither did "indie smartyness" aka different attacks and sometimes combat arenas for your "heart movement" or having only 1 save (since it's not ironman in a real sense).

Game seems to want to show that being munchkin and killing stuff for numbers rising is bad, but in truth, no munchkin would want to grind in a game with no interesting character system and such boring gameplay. You can't make a point by just breaking 4th wall, you have to make player believe in something first and then break that illusion. I think even Monster Girls Quest does it in a more elegant way, using game over screens to give hints on the story.

Spoiler

Yes, the guide there is also a villain.

Music is p. cool. Visually game is... cute, I guess? It's boring to watch at since there are very few animated pieces. "Sprite" art like this just screams "no effort" to me when compared to actual old games or new games with powerful art like Child of Light, Ori&Blind Forest or even Aquaria that was waay prettier. The colors are okay however, as well as shifts in lighting and mood, and shop screens are well made - if only whole game looked like those.

Overall, not worth the time unless you became addicted to moving little heart on the screen for some reason, but also not a criminal offence people make it. You can always play it to genocide the shit out of monsters you hate, or romance a skeleton.. or a ghost.. whatever makes yours hard.

 

[Durandal]

Undertale doesn't ask if the player is doing the right thing, Undertale clearly tells the player what is and isn't the right thing to do. All choices you make have little meaning on a moral ground if they are this binary and pre-defined like a Bioware RPG. It's about as morally touching as watching a movie that follows the life of the worstest psychopath or that of the bestest human. There are barely other motivations the player can have for completing the Genocide route that aren't just pure curiosity. Why else would one go out of their way to slaughter literally every monster in the game other than to see what happens if you do? This motivation is also mirrored by the main antagonist Flowey, who also claims to have killed out of pure curiosity, therefore it's obvious that Toby intended most people to play through the Genocide route with a similar mindset of curiosity.

One thing Undertale does right is show the consequences of your actions, as such it is too bad that the player isn't as able to feel responsible compared to other games with CnC. In Undertale, you rarely ever go 'oh fuck, did I cause this?' because you clearly know beforehand how you are going to play the game and what possible consequences your actions may have. Undertale safely sidesteps the responsibility the player might feel by making saving/loading a central part of its narrative, so all these people who died at your hands have never died, it's all just part of the game, bro. Nobody ever feels bad about all the civilians they kill in GTA because they are all just AI-controlled entities who will just respawn later on, or come back if you reload your save. Being responsible for the death and suffering of many isn't your fault, because you just did it out of curiosity, it's not like you made a dumb choice you never thought through or really wanted to kill everything.

At least Undertale isn't Spec Ops: The Line where the game forces you to kill even though at many times there were plenty of options available that didn't have to end in the death of many faceless soldiers, and then preaches you for all the killing you did, making the message lost on the player because most people probably would have acted differently in such a situation that did not necessarily result in death. Having choices is always nice, but what puts weight behind these choices is that the player himself (assuming the player isn't roleplaying anything but himself) would have chosen a certain option in that situation, and as such when the player faces the consequences for his actions, it affects the player on a personal level. The extent and effort to which Undertale tries to make the player feel bad for taking the Genocide route feels wasted if the players have such an easy excuse to disavow themselves from their actions in the game, by knowing that they are still decent human beings and that they just did it to see what would happen, and that they would never do such a thing IRL.

The consequences of making a saving/loading mechanic a central part of the narrative would have been more interesting if there was some grey moral area, and if the player himself could be personally more invested in the story, but I assume that that would be too much to handle for the casual audiences.