To be honest, sometimes ago I came to conclusion that Tyranny's plot and world are useless to discuss. Developers definitly conciencly, thoroughly remove any way to actually have a solid position here. I believe it was kind of basic design idea, to get rid from classical option with a player character Who Shake Foundations of the World and Learning Ancient Forgotten Knowledge. Everything that a mystery will stays a mystery - at least without DLC revealing.
We don't know what is Kyros plan, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know what are Spires and Oldwalls, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know how Edicts works, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know how Archons born, because developers doesn't want us to know.
Not because we're stupid, or dump, or something, and missed a lot info, no. This info just isn't presented in a game - by design.
Maybe some of the info in Missives, Bladen Mark tales, Sirin tales, Landry and Ebb speculations is true, but we never know.
I believe it's bad world design, INTENTIONALLY bad world design (I can't imagine how it can be oversight). So I don't really want to play this game - devs definitly wants me to play it, to make a pointless guesswork, that nobody can prove or refute on any basis but "I do/don't like it". They did a lot of juicy hints and never puts them further.
To be honest I found such approach far more insulting that any other thing, including even artifical block on one of four regions in game. I love a good story, but a story where key plot points leaves unresolved isn't good. Because...
Let me ask you a school-level question (really, I live in Russia, and it's common question in literature classes). What's Tyranny about?
In my opinion the best RPG ever made (at least yet) was Planescape: Torment, and it have a global question put into gamer's perspective - "what can change a nature of the man?" It's the central question, and game looks about it from every side, this or there, with subtopics as "relationships", "responsibility", "memory", "tabula rasa", and all that questions, and game sticking to it, makes P:T great. So it was something it's about.
Tyranny don't. I suspect it's supposed to be about "lesser evil" and famous enough "lawful in evil state" problem, but...
You see, I don't feel I'm selecting between "lesser" and "greater" evils when I'm choosing between Disfavored and Chorus after Act 1. Because I haven't real urge to solve a problem, you see? First act was great, because it's created motivation. I wanted a Conquest to be finished because Conquest part of generation, and, well, I had Kyros' Edict on my head, and yes, there was a point to chose between two evils which is more sympathetic. Ok, I chose third - and authors didn't have a decency to make it right. "Of course, we can't claim Ascension Hall just now, because if we do they will attack us; so we need to make them argue, to make them attack us, and then they will we will do anything but actually barricade in inner hall and claiming Ascension Hall". Hil-la-ri-ous. But everything after Act 1 don't even give me such level of "lesser/greater evils" problem, because I haven't something to solve I really need to take an evil.
Or take another great RPG - Fallout 2. It's about post-apocalyptical America, about world builded anew, with player character, actually, as side observer. It shows player community building, how do will America lives after Bomb, what will be problems there. Let's be honest, F2 had a formal goal ("bring GECK" and "rescue villagers"), but it wasn't that Fallout was all about.
I feel that Tyranny setting SHOULD BE GOOD, and I think I'd say it's good if I only would be allowed to actually knows more about it. Don't just tell me about some cities, put me there, if you want to make a setting-based game, right? I mean, imagine Fallout 2 game where you're locked to Arroyo, inner hall of Vault City, Clamath and Den, and everybody around speaks about NCR or Frisko, but never put you there. Hell, guys, Fallout 2 is 18 years old, released a year later after first one, and it have 19 big locations, not to mention random encounters (ahem). 19, nineteen. Tyranny have 5, right?.. and one big round room as a bonus.
And Fallout tells you what's all this is about. It tells you what's GECK about, what's Anclave about, what's Vaults about. Not as, you know, everybody tells about Vaults, but it's only speculations, and you never see one.
The most hillarious thing is you quite never see actual tyrannical Kyros' empire - because Tiers are warzone, and the only imperial place you saw is Tunon Court. And it's one room.
Or Baldurs Gate/Arcanum/Alpha Protocol/Dragon Age Origins. It was, actually, epic stories (yes, AP too) - you have a goal, you pursuing it. You need to know what's the hell happens and/or solve a problem arisen around. And that's good. Not as Mike Thorton have some actual phylosophical questions on his head, but he had a problem with framing and being hunted, so he solves it. Quite good, and we actually have answers and FINISHING A PROBLEM.
But Tyranny after Act 1 lacking global quest. I mean, well... you essentially SOMEHOW became a gofer for some faction (the one you actually should supervise and investigate, right?) or you are going to run around collecting artifacts, because a man who is an assasin whose job is to kill enemies of the state told you it's a good idea ("not to take it as an order, you know..."), and you just said "hell, what really can go wrong". I mean, of course, it's quite a natural course of action for high-leveled official in tyrannical state, right?
I mean, if you find yourself in such story, it's reasonable question "why am I doing this?"
Why Revan actually hunts Star Maps in KotOR? Because he knows what are they, he knows they're the way to great power Malak have, and he wants to get Malak ridden from this power (and, maybe, takes it himself).
Why Thorton tries to uncover the conspiracy in Alpha Protocol? Because he will be killed another way, and because he wants to know who frame him and why.
Why Grey Warden tries to defeat the Blight? Because if he don't, Blight just kills everything, including him.
Tyranny don't have such decency (again) to give you such answers. Why am I gofer for Disfavored/Chorus/rebels? I know perfectly what do THEY got - I'm solving their problems. What do I got, just theoretically? I mean, what's my profit doing so?
The anarchy path looks kinda better this side, but, REALLY... "You're going to collect artifacts. You don't know, how do they work, but they will grant you some power. No, you will not ever know how or why. No, you don't need this power for anything particular. Also you're going to activate some ancient buildings, you will not ever know who built them and why, but you will anyway. Why? Because it looks cool. Ah, else MAYBE (nobody ever will tell you for sure) it will make you an Archon, but nobody ever will tell you what it actually means but being leashed by all-powered Kyros the Overlord. And as you know from two stories about Archon you know Kyros the Overlord isn't very gentle with new Archons. Ah, yes, don't forget to deliberatly broke his Edicts (no, nobody will ever tell you how do they actually work) by legal loopholes in wording, sometimes breaking his own strict laws in process, because why not."
Khem, sorry. I'm trying to say game fails giving you real quest building your game story. The nearest to - collecting evidence against Archons - is completing passing by, you just hold alt (or it's tab?) and clicking everything, so you'll have a full bag. And as activating a Spire is just caming in and click pixels in right order, it's not feeling as great task - especially including you'll never know WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU DOING.
So I can't say what's Tyranny about. What do you think?
We don't know what is Kyros plan, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know what are Spires and Oldwalls, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know how Edicts works, because developers doesn't want us to know.
We don't know how Archons born, because developers doesn't want us to know.
Not because we're stupid, or dump, or something, and missed a lot info, no. This info just isn't presented in a game - by design.
Maybe some of the info in Missives, Bladen Mark tales, Sirin tales, Landry and Ebb speculations is true, but we never know.
I believe it's bad world design, INTENTIONALLY bad world design (I can't imagine how it can be oversight). So I don't really want to play this game - devs definitly wants me to play it, to make a pointless guesswork, that nobody can prove or refute on any basis but "I do/don't like it". They did a lot of juicy hints and never puts them further.
To be honest I found such approach far more insulting that any other thing, including even artifical block on one of four regions in game. I love a good story, but a story where key plot points leaves unresolved isn't good. Because...
Let me ask you a school-level question (really, I live in Russia, and it's common question in literature classes). What's Tyranny about?
In my opinion the best RPG ever made (at least yet) was Planescape: Torment, and it have a global question put into gamer's perspective - "what can change a nature of the man?" It's the central question, and game looks about it from every side, this or there, with subtopics as "relationships", "responsibility", "memory", "tabula rasa", and all that questions, and game sticking to it, makes P:T great. So it was something it's about.
Tyranny don't. I suspect it's supposed to be about "lesser evil" and famous enough "lawful in evil state" problem, but...
You see, I don't feel I'm selecting between "lesser" and "greater" evils when I'm choosing between Disfavored and Chorus after Act 1. Because I haven't real urge to solve a problem, you see? First act was great, because it's created motivation. I wanted a Conquest to be finished because Conquest part of generation, and, well, I had Kyros' Edict on my head, and yes, there was a point to chose between two evils which is more sympathetic. Ok, I chose third - and authors didn't have a decency to make it right. "Of course, we can't claim Ascension Hall just now, because if we do they will attack us; so we need to make them argue, to make them attack us, and then they will we will do anything but actually barricade in inner hall and claiming Ascension Hall". Hil-la-ri-ous. But everything after Act 1 don't even give me such level of "lesser/greater evils" problem, because I haven't something to solve I really need to take an evil.
Or take another great RPG - Fallout 2. It's about post-apocalyptical America, about world builded anew, with player character, actually, as side observer. It shows player community building, how do will America lives after Bomb, what will be problems there. Let's be honest, F2 had a formal goal ("bring GECK" and "rescue villagers"), but it wasn't that Fallout was all about.
I feel that Tyranny setting SHOULD BE GOOD, and I think I'd say it's good if I only would be allowed to actually knows more about it. Don't just tell me about some cities, put me there, if you want to make a setting-based game, right? I mean, imagine Fallout 2 game where you're locked to Arroyo, inner hall of Vault City, Clamath and Den, and everybody around speaks about NCR or Frisko, but never put you there. Hell, guys, Fallout 2 is 18 years old, released a year later after first one, and it have 19 big locations, not to mention random encounters (ahem). 19, nineteen. Tyranny have 5, right?.. and one big round room as a bonus.
And Fallout tells you what's all this is about. It tells you what's GECK about, what's Anclave about, what's Vaults about. Not as, you know, everybody tells about Vaults, but it's only speculations, and you never see one.
The most hillarious thing is you quite never see actual tyrannical Kyros' empire - because Tiers are warzone, and the only imperial place you saw is Tunon Court. And it's one room.
Or Baldurs Gate/Arcanum/Alpha Protocol/Dragon Age Origins. It was, actually, epic stories (yes, AP too) - you have a goal, you pursuing it. You need to know what's the hell happens and/or solve a problem arisen around. And that's good. Not as Mike Thorton have some actual phylosophical questions on his head, but he had a problem with framing and being hunted, so he solves it. Quite good, and we actually have answers and FINISHING A PROBLEM.
But Tyranny after Act 1 lacking global quest. I mean, well... you essentially SOMEHOW became a gofer for some faction (the one you actually should supervise and investigate, right?) or you are going to run around collecting artifacts, because a man who is an assasin whose job is to kill enemies of the state told you it's a good idea ("not to take it as an order, you know..."), and you just said "hell, what really can go wrong". I mean, of course, it's quite a natural course of action for high-leveled official in tyrannical state, right?
I mean, if you find yourself in such story, it's reasonable question "why am I doing this?"
Why Revan actually hunts Star Maps in KotOR? Because he knows what are they, he knows they're the way to great power Malak have, and he wants to get Malak ridden from this power (and, maybe, takes it himself).
Why Thorton tries to uncover the conspiracy in Alpha Protocol? Because he will be killed another way, and because he wants to know who frame him and why.
Why Grey Warden tries to defeat the Blight? Because if he don't, Blight just kills everything, including him.
Tyranny don't have such decency (again) to give you such answers. Why am I gofer for Disfavored/Chorus/rebels? I know perfectly what do THEY got - I'm solving their problems. What do I got, just theoretically? I mean, what's my profit doing so?
The anarchy path looks kinda better this side, but, REALLY... "You're going to collect artifacts. You don't know, how do they work, but they will grant you some power. No, you will not ever know how or why. No, you don't need this power for anything particular. Also you're going to activate some ancient buildings, you will not ever know who built them and why, but you will anyway. Why? Because it looks cool. Ah, else MAYBE (nobody ever will tell you for sure) it will make you an Archon, but nobody ever will tell you what it actually means but being leashed by all-powered Kyros the Overlord. And as you know from two stories about Archon you know Kyros the Overlord isn't very gentle with new Archons. Ah, yes, don't forget to deliberatly broke his Edicts (no, nobody will ever tell you how do they actually work) by legal loopholes in wording, sometimes breaking his own strict laws in process, because why not."
Khem, sorry. I'm trying to say game fails giving you real quest building your game story. The nearest to - collecting evidence against Archons - is completing passing by, you just hold alt (or it's tab?) and clicking everything, so you'll have a full bag. And as activating a Spire is just caming in and click pixels in right order, it's not feeling as great task - especially including you'll never know WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU DOING.
So I can't say what's Tyranny about. What do you think?
Last edited: