5/8/2023 0 Comments Tvtropes the banner sagaThe problem with this situation is that it is presented as a random segment, and except for Folka’s request for advice, the game leaves no indication of what is the option causing the greatest damage.īefore you argue that the situation is “realistic” and intended to make players feel the consequences, remember that The Banner Saga 3 is a structured game manual from A to Z, in which the consequence is always subject to the only law, which is preordained. Two of these three options will result in a fight, and the other will result in the death of a party member. You have three options: reach the bridge quickly, have your troops build a shield and push forward slowly, or find another path. It does not create a specific rule for the player to understand the intentions of the situation, it does not provide the necessary information for the player to think closely.įor example in chapter 19, Iver’s army needed to cross a bridge to catch up with the Bolverk factions. The “ugly” side of this mechanism lies in the fact that these situations rarely give a hint to the player which is the least costly option. ![]() The game has a lot of situations for players to choose how to solve, choose right then go on, choose wrong, lose people, lose possessions or even say goodbye to each friend for the rest of the journey submit. ![]() However, instead of teaching the player to get acquainted directly with the cause and effect system of The Banner Saga 3, Stoic decided to let the player drift in the direction that “life pushes”. This is a game with an extremely linear overall structure given the causal system that operates within the “closed machinery” of storytelling without a certain loop, random encounters can have a big direct impact on experience because developer Stoic can take advantage of the small scale of the game to optimize those consequences. One problem that has probably existed from the past two versions is that the lack of consistency continues in The Banner Saga 3. All of this makes the story of The Banner Saga 3 cliché, with dialogue that perfectly portrays the character’s personality and trends, but takes place with the aim of further explanation useless information in a scenario is suffering from redundancy and lack of endpoints. the object looked important but ended up with no satisfactory results, the characters who should have spoken up in certain scenes turned to no sound. Circumstances that should have been suggested from before appear suddenly, some characters die, but the game never mentions them or shows any concern for that loss, characteristics of some characters. ![]() The Banner Saga 3 deliberately proved “deaf” at the sub-stories it laid out and also failed at the most basic of storytelling. Bolverk was possessed by Bellower? Surprise! Bellower was never mentioned, and Bolverk was okay. Eywyn is not only the “top” of the Valka, but also periodically goes crazy during Iver’s journey with the legion? We listen to Eywyn’s talk, nod, and … move on. Throughout the game, we encounter critical (and serious) situations that are conveyed in a “side information” mode with zero consequences. The Banner Saga 3 has a general trend to solve the problems that characters in the game have, that is … neglecting or doing nothing. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |