At our baseline funding, the game will give you an ending akin to PST's: you'll get closure with your companions and find out where you end up on your journey.
This stretch goal would increase that to show you what happens elsewhere in the world as a result of your actions. What did the Sticha do with their part of the Bloom after you stopped the thieves? You defeated the Children of the Endless Gate, but are they truly beaten or do they have plans to return? Find out where all the loose threads are pointing with this stretch goal.
Thanks for your votes and your comments about this idea. We’re adding it to the Stretch Goals, as you’ll see in the imminent update!
cosmin haraga commented
saying saving grace spent the next years looking for you didn't say anything , but would have given her vow a finish
the thiefling became the new pharod
besides when we will get torment 3 ( why the hell not ) it will be equaly different so unaffected by characters here or in the first one.
not that i would mind visiting the blood wars
Hm. I would like a little more detail on the ending than what we got in PS:T, to have further closure for my actions in the game, but I don't want it to be *too* detailed. I like a certain degree of openness.
@n0mDePlume - you're right, an epilogue like this wouldn't have worked at all with PST. Though I wouldn't have minded the companion dialogues just before the end being somewhat longer, and a priority for partial voiceover.
So Full Denouement is nice to have, but _only_ if it does work with the story's ending.
@Xaositect I agree that the epilogue should focus on places and groups rather than companions or the PC.
Fallout 1 focused overwhelmingly on places and the PC just rode off into the sunset. I don't think I've had a single "place or group" epilogue which I disagreed with, but the Mask of the Betrayer ending was ruined for me because the PC and Kaelyn had endings totally different from what I expected the PC to be doing.
I would say that if the PC accepts a stable non-adventuring position, you can cover a bit of that, and if companions are obviously doing their own thing at the end of the game, you can cover that. But I'd say stick with the near future rather than telling the actual outcome of their life stories.
In another topic I saw a guy complain that PST didn't have epilogues for its companions... and I just thought NO. A full denouement in PST itself would have been horrible. The places I met and people I saw were mostly so eternal that my actions wouldn't drastically change them, they just changed me.
Even having anything but the credits rolling after seeing TNO picking up his mace in hell would be horrible drama. When you have a scene like that you just end with it.
There is nothing I want to hear about what Annah or Morte did after TNO was sent to hell. Part of this is because there simply isn't anything they'd "logically" do. The game wasn't setting the companions up to do anything specific after the end of the game, their stories climax at the same time as TNOs (which is great drama). This means the writers would have just had to make up some arbitrary epilogue for each of them.
There's actually some real psychology behind this - when people remember how good an experience was they judge it most by the beginning, the end, and the single most intense moment during it. You want to end on an emotionally intense note, and an epilogue is slow and uninteractive so it's better for some kind of endings than others. Epilogues are great for happy endings, because they show the positive results of things that you did. They're OK for bittersweet endings, where a bunch of stuff was lost but you want to show a positive note after it.
However, I think they're horrible for endings with a sad, mysterious, or open-ended nature because they dilute it with happy, non-mysterious scenes.
PST's ending was sad, and mysterious on the part of the PC and companions. There's nowhere you could put "happy endings for people in Sigil" that wouldn't dilute its impact. TNO has to be able to review all his effects on people and the world before he goes to hell, and the last scene has to be of him there.
@Xaositect : Good point. It's more or less how Fallout 1 and 2 done that and it was working perfectly for those games.
I tend to agree with Xaositect about Macro explanations. Props for mentioning Star Control 2.
I think I've come to the gradual conclusion that this should apply only to places & groups, rather than to Companions or yourself (assuming you survive).
I think the points raised here about the uncertainty not knowing vs a certainty you hate are pretty valid. (Star Control 3 answered all of the delicious mysteries of Starcon 2, but with terrible answers and no new mystery, for example)
Limiting this to your effects on "the world" at a more macro scale makes sense within the game theme, and also helps limit any damage, since you stay away from those things you've likely grown most attached to.
A proper denouement is, I feel, necessary for a story to feel satisfying and with a proper ending, rather than simply an end point. (AKA Falling action, it's important!)
Gabriel Luna commented
I simply want to chime in with words of support, in addition to my votes. To fully embrace a world reacting to your actions, not even to mention to pay off the theme of leaving a legacy and showing what difference a single life can make, you absolutely have to show where things go after your character has left the scene. Or even as a logical progression of having your character still on the scene, as long as it flows naturally from decision points you made along the way. (e.g. "Since you signed the membership ledger of the Society of the Devious Badger and donated more than 10,000gp to their cause we can safely assume you'd join their crusade. Furthermore, since you recovered the Sacred Badger armor, you'd be a symbol during a pivotal battle and help turn the tide" and so on.) It doesn't HAVE to be after your character left the scene, it's just that if it isn't, the satisfaction of the player will vary because you'll have more people shouting "I wouldn't do that!" at their screens.
Whoa, spoilers there. If you read the kickstarter comments, lots of backers haven't played the original yet. I agree with your points, but have a care!
@thedeadlymoose Torment's ending came completely logically from the game. Immortality was a desperate attempt to escape punishment for past deeds, so of course that punishment catches up. You're still alive in the lower planes, and it actually ends on a semi-hopeful note. And if you romanced Fall From Grace properly, she'll come after you. That was the best romance option payoff in the history of gaming. I was REALLY impressed when I saw that happen - they actually respected the fact that Grace had prior experience escaping from hell, and let it change the nature of the ending.
I used Kaelyn as an example (I could also have referred to NWN2's main ending) because she only has bad endings. And the PC is still active and heroic at the end of the game, so they have to assume the PC chooses not to do anything about Kaelyn's ending.
I do think a "full denouement" works best for areas where the PC won't have any post-game effect. That way it doesn't have to assume that the PC fails to do anything about a bad future while it's happening.
@n0mDePlume - I both agree and disagree with you. Any full denoument shouldn't have contrivances for the sake of 'oh and than everything turned out awful; omg guys look how edgy and deep we are' because the story didn't earn that, or set it up.
Part of the brilliance of PS:T's primary ending is that, while it was surprising (and... other things...) it felt inevitable in the context of the story. It was set up the whole way through. It wasn't a contrivance; the story earned it. It "had" to end that way. And that makes all the difference.
AdminTorment (Dev Team, Torment Website) commented
@talharbash (and maybe others): Just to clarify, the resolution examples in the description are just that: examples. You might make entirely different choices in your game (helping the thieves or the Children, for example), or the final version of the story we design might be entirely different -- you might not be able to stop the thieves or defeat the Children at all.
Point being: Don't panic. Nothing has been spoiled :-)
Crikey, I have to vote for this! *goes to remove votes from elsewhere*
@n0mDePlume: I'm completely against what you're asking for. Effectively you want everything in the world to be great if your personal endeavour was done great. I'm sorry but that's not how the world works. sometimes things go badly despite your best efforts.
I don't know if you played the original Planescape:Torment but it seems that you haven't. Because effectively it has only a "bad" ending in your terms. The games like P:T and supposedly T:ToN are not meant for "hollywood-style happy endings", the themes and motifs of such games are too serious for such nonsense. So, if "eternal happiness for everyone" is what you seek in T:ToN ending, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. I strongly advise you to either prepare yourself to a bittersweet(or even plain bitter) endings or reconsider playing T:ToN altogether.
@n0mDePlume - I know what your talking about, it's frustrating to invest in an option to find out that it didn't really matte or just didn't feel like it matched up with the player. I don't mean that there shouldn't bad endings just that the devs should keep in mind the choices the player makes and justify what happens. Otherwise player choice just ends up feeling pointless.
This seems like a basic requirement for this sort of game. I would be most disappointed if it was lacking this function.
Well, there went the rest of my votes.
I don't even remember how many times I replayed fallout 2, trying to change those outcomes.
PLEASE PLEASE, no more spoilers.
@n0mDePlume - 100% agree about Kaelyn, but IMAO that was as much a problem with the game itself as with the denouement. You should have had the option in-game to pledge yourself permanently to her crusade, rather than being railroaded into "oh well, if Kelemvor says no I guess that's it".