Watch the Footage archive

So, fun fact. Despite some Meta thinking otherwise, this game was not designed so that it was inevitable that the Cabal had to be sent back, or really any of the characters. There were multiple endings planned for -- one where the players come out more strongly for the Cabal, and decide to close the wall to keep them all here. Mr. Administrator would be pissed, of course, but it was a viable ending.

And a lot of our original end game plan was all about this choice being difficult, and the players working racing with each other -- friendly competition leading to quickening stakes for both sides.

But obviously, we wound up going in a different direction. It turned out that the difficulty of the choice was not only creating opposing views, but that those conflicts could become quite persona with such a small, tight-knit player group. Many people tried to simplify the conflict by debasing one side or the other. So Cthulhu showed up! I think our narrative was strengthened by the ambiguity, but it wound up not being a central player conflict.

I think the interesting question this raises is whether difficult moral choice, and factions in general, are something that can work in an ARG. I still think they could -- but in order for this to have actually worked, it would need to either be introduced earlier (probably when the Cabal first revealed themselves). I also think that it might of worked if we had a bigger, less tight knit group -- but the thing is, I like the way our group turned out.

Connor Fallon wrote:I think the interesting question this raises is whether difficult moral choice, and factions in general, are something that can work in an ARG. I still think they could -- but in order for this to have actually worked, it would need to either be introduced earlier (probably when the Cabal first revealed themselves). I also think that it might of worked if we had a bigger, less tight knit group -- but the thing is, I like the way our group turned out.

I think I agree with this. It is really a double edged sword. Having a close knit group is what made the game what it is, and I think it gave us as players, the most REASON to continue fighting. Even if we were disagreeing we still cared enough to keep going. If we'd been a larger group and lacked that sense of comraderie that kept us going when things got tough.

The thing I took away from it is that game design isn't one size fits all. We borrowed the two-sides-racing-against-each-other mechanic from an MMO. The base here was much smaller and required a different approach, in the end.

I still love that we made you pick between two imperfect options. I don't believe in game design where you have choices and one is perfect and fixes everything right away. No one learns anything from that.

RANDOM PLUG

Everyone play the Walking Dead. Game isn't perfect, but it certainly does that very well.

Yes. Seconding that. Play the Walking Dead.

None of us worked on it, so it's not a shameless self-plug.

Just a shameless plug. And god, I wish I had worked on it. Here it is, by the way

Lets' get back on track.

My steampunk hovercraft is full of eels I still didn't get to play. So no. =P

But yeah, even though the end result is the tram, having two fractions could be fun, too. The bigger the group, the more likely it would happen. Which is why Google, having all the audience in the world, can use it as a core mechanic in Ingress.
GrumblegrumblestillnotabletgrumblegrumblewanttoplaygrumblegrumblecouldtakedownCthulhugrumblegrumble