Deltarune: The Fate of the "Genocide Route"

Disclaimer: This post will have heavy Undertale and Deltarune (Episode 1) spoilers. 

When Deltarune came out, I speculated on some of the future events that might happen in later episodes. Today, I'd like to present a theory about the design of Deltarune itself, and why Toby Fox killed the genocide route.

The Start of Genocide

When Undertale came out in 2015, it was deservedly praised for the many ways you could play it, and the many combinations of characters that could either live or die by the end. But by committing entirely to a pacifist or destructive approach, you could reach an ending entirely distinct from any of the 'neutral' ones. These routes are often referred to as the Pacifist and Genocide routes.

Undertale makes no secret of it; the Pacifist route is the "true" route. It is the only route that lasts beyond just a few lines of dialogue and has a full credits sequence. It's the only ending that offers closure for most (sorry, Asriel) characters. The game's trailer even made a point of emphasizing that you don't have to kill anyone.

On the other hand, the Genocide route is distinctly the "wrong" way to play. When you clear an area of monsters, the music becomes unsettling and slowed down. You are required to take increasingly malicious decisions, like attacking Papyrus when he instantly spares you. Characters like Sans berate you for your decisions and you miss out on a lot of charming dialogues and battles. And if you complete it, you can never get the true Pacifist ending again. All in all, the Genocide route is designed to feel distinctly unrewarding.

But it's not. The Genocide route actually has many rewards in store - it hides the two hardest boss battles in the game, Undyne the Undying and Sans, both of which have their own music track and dialogue. Additionally, you get to see dialogue and character interactions you don't on any other route, including backstory about Flowey. To see everything Undertale has to offer, you actually have to complete a Pacifist and Genocide route. The reason why I'm saying all this is because I think it sheds a new light on how Deltarune goes about its choices.

The End of Genocide

In October 2018, Toby Fox finally released the first episode of Deltarune. There is still some speculation as to where the game fits in compared to Undertale, but it's been confirmed that it is set in an alternate universe.

Just like Undertale, Deltarune's combat allows for either violent or diplomatic resolutions. However, you can't kill anyone in Deltarune even if you want to. If you reduce an enemy's HP to 0, they will simply fly off screen or run away. You never gain any EXP. Toby Fox has even revealed that Deltarune will not have multiple endings.

At a glance, one might thus believe that Deltarune is less committed to the idea of pacifism and resolving conflict without violence. One of the defining lines to hammer this home comes from Susie very near the end:

But I think that's only partially true. The game is clearly more 'lenient' on FIGHTing enemies, but it has removed your ability to kill them altogether. As a result, the "Genocide" route no longer exists. There is neither a reward nor a punishment for defeating every enemy. But there is still a reward for pacifism, and Ralsei repeatedly promotes the idea. Make it through Deltarune without hurting anyone, and you can speak to all the Darkners before moving on to the ending. You can choose to be pacifist or not, but you can't choose to be a murderer.

Conclusion

Undertale and Deltarune both offer, and even promote, finding nonviolent solutions to conflict. 

Undertale makes genocide an option, but makes it tedious, difficult and occasionally disturbing to get through. However, players choosing this route are still rewarded with unique battles and lore. 

In Deltarune, perhaps as a consequence of Undertale's genocide route, Toby Fox "killed" the genocide route altogether. It's no longer a valid, planned way to play the game. Only pacifism is rewarded with additional dialogue and character interactions.

It's hard to say which of these is the better solution - there are arguments for and against both. Undertale's genocide route having unique rewards might send a mixed signal, but the fact that killing enemies is an option makes the commitment to sparing them more meaningful.

Deltarune not allowing you to kill enemies and only rewarding pacifism might be more consistent, but it hardly makes a difference for the game's story.

I'd love you hear your thoughts on how each game approaches the "pacifism/genocide" choice. Please leave a comment or send me a message. Thank you for reading! 

Deltarune

We've finally had our first look at the successor to Undertale, Deltarune. I played through the first 'episode.' It'll take some time for me to form coherent opinions, so here's some ranting and wild speculation. I'll update this post as more thoughts and facts come up. I'm also going to include unmarked, HEAVY SPOILERS for Undertale and episode one of Deltarune. Beware!

Timeline Woes
Due to the characters involved and their relationship(s), this game cannot exist in the same "timeline" as Undertale. There are monsters living on the surface, yet our protagonist Kris seems to be the only human. To complicate matters further, his facial features and skin tone are reminiscent of Frisk (also note the name similarity), but his shirt and position in the timeline (recognizes both Toriel and Asgore as parental figures, has a sibling type relationship with Asriel) adds up more for Chara.

My current speculation is that we are in an alternate universe where humans were forced underground and the monsters stayed up above. Kris seems to be the only human around, a fact that is further emphasized by the fact that Susie initially keeps calling him freak.

To make matters even more complicated, there's our adorable and peace-loving companion throughout this adventure. Ralsei is a self-proclaimed PRINCE FROM THE DARK, explicitly establishing himself as separate from the Humans and Monsters in the prophecy, and yet...
... he's Asriel. it makes sense in a way, because he was also the prince of the underground in Undertale... and yet! This makes matters even stranger because Asriel is explicitly known to the world above and is supposedly enrolled in a university elsewhere. I speculate that Ralsei is Asriel from a different timeline, since this entire game seems to be playing with the idea of an alternate universe. It's still very strange that Kris doesn't really react, while Susie actually seems shocked. If my theory is true, that leaves two possibilities: Either Kris knew all along, or this Asriel doesn't look like his brother, the 'other' Asriel.

Every time I dig into the game, things seem to raise more questions than they answer, but I'm very excited to see where this is going.

One more thing, the game distinguishes the creatures from the underground as a separate 'class' of beings, referring to both monsters and humans as Lighteners. This sets the game's theme as being a typical light vs dark story, though it's up to the player whether they want to conquer dark (by being violent) or recovering the balance (by being peaceful).

Or is it? One more thing the game emphasized is that your choices don't matter. It says this several times, especially near the start. It makes me wonder if the outcome of the story will vary as much as it could in Undertale, or if it won't; Toby Fox likes to play with the conventions of the genre, so perhaps this is a play on the illusion of choice? I actually wrote an article about the way Undertale handles choices if you're interested, you can read it if you click here.

UPDATE 2-11-18: Toby Fox posted a Q&A, which you can check here:

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sqn3p9

He answered quite a few questions. Among other things, he confirmed that Delta Rune exists in a separate "universe" from Undertale and seems to imply one does not impact the other. I'm sceptical, though, because it is my belief that Kris and Susie entered another world or timeline through the closet in their school. Being a "separate" universe or timeline does not actually separate it from the story in Undertale.

Furthermore, and this puzzles me even more, he says the ending will be the same regardless of your choices. Undertale, I feel, had something profound to say about finding peaceful resolutions; it seems Delta Rune's outcome is ultimately always the same. I find it strange that Ralsei clearly states the contrary, however. It makes me wonder if this is a bit of deception on Toby's part. Perhaps the outcome will be the same in some ways, and not in others? We'll have to wait and see.
_

UPDATE 2-11-18: After reviewing some gameplay footage, I have a few thoughts about the Lightners and Darkners.

After the adventure Kris and Susie wake up in an abandoned room in the school surrounded by many things they encountered on their adventure (poker cards, etc). It could all have been a dream, but both Kris and Susie remember the adventure and Susie still has her injury from the final battle.

All this got me thinking about what the Darkners really are.

Seam describes the Lightners as being Gods, but not just that - the Lightners are specifically named as the creators of Darkners and those who gave them purpose. And all the Darkners are based on manmade objects; the shopkeeper above is a plushy toy, Rudin and Hathy are poker cards, there are statues and poker chips, Lancer is a spade... It got me thinking that perhaps, the underground in Delta Rune is a place of lost toys.

Gameplay Joys
The battle system is basically an evolution of its predecessor, removing random encounters and introducing multiple party members. The interface buttons are a little small, though, which might be troublesome for people with impaired vision. I have little to say about it, beyond that I think it's great. Any excuse to hear more of Toby's musical talent is fine with me, and the added animations and in-battle dialogues add even more flavour.

_

Also,

That is all.

I'll share more thoughts as more gets revealed and I take more time to do research.

Choosing Through Gameplay in Undertale, Part 2

In part 1, we discussed the implementation of player choice in Undertale. I argued that the battle system was a great vehicle for organic choices, but that the impact of choices in the overworld left something to be desired. At the end, I conceded that there are certain choices in the overworld that do have a major impact. In this article, I'd like to have a closer look at those choices, how exactly they do affect the game and what I think about them. 

Let's get right into it. The most important choices in the overworld concern three story-critical characters.

First up, there's Papyrus. None of the dialogue choices with Papyrus matter at any point. All that matters is that, after Sparing him in battle, the player visits him at his home and agrees to have a "date." This date consists of more dialogue and choices without consequence, though it is a very charming scene. It is a shame, though, because the 'date' switches to a perspective and style similar to the game's battles; it would've been great to forge a more specific relationship with Papyrus through it.

source: willcheat on YouTube

Once the player has "dated" Papyrus, he is seen as befriended, a fact that will contribute to getting the 'true pacifist' ending. This will also allow the player to later befriend Undyne, but let's start at the beginning with her.

The first meaningful choice concerning Undyne starts with Monster Kid, who follows the player around Waterfall for some time. Near the end of the area, Monster Kid trips and hangs from a ledge, pleading for the player to save them. The player can choose to walk away, approach Undyne, simply stand and watch or save the Monster Kid - a real choice using the overworld's mechanics. If the player does not approach and interact with Monster Kid, they will fall and Undyne will jump after them to save them. This doesn't have any effect on the ending, but it does change some of Undyne and Monster Kid's dialogue. The really interesting part, though, is that it decreases Undyne's health if she had to jump down. The dialogue in the scene actually hints at this fact.

source: SuperWiiBros08 on YouTube

The effect of this choice is minor but I really respect its inclusion. The fact that such a clever and natural way for a choice in the overworld to affect the subsequent battle is included really makes me wonder why it isn't more common in the game.

But the interesting choices and interactions with the overworld involving Undyne don't stop there. If the player follows the Pacifist route, the only way to Spare Undyne is to run away from her and run away to the next area. This area, aptly named Hotland, causes Undyne's armor to heat up, after which she collapses. A convenient water cooler is the only thing in sight, clearly instructing the player what should be done.

source: Geoffrey Butler on YouTube

Though I appreciate having another meaningful choice in the overworld, this choice is notable because it's the only choice that can outright lock you out of acquiring the 'true pacifist' ending. If the player ignores Undyne, or worse, pours all of the water on the ground, Undyne will spend the rest of the game in her house because she's suffering from heatstroke. Thus, she is impossible to befriend, and as a result, the player cannot befriend Alpys either. This means the True Lab will not be discovered and the player's friends will not interfere with the battle against Asgore, making the true pacifist ending impossible to acquire on this run.

So, arguably, this moment is exactly what I was asking for in my previous article. However, the problem presents itself when we consider the following facts:

1. Unlike the "dates," this interaction can be missed permanently if the player moves on without giving Undyne the water.
2. It's the only choice of its kind, meaning an explorative or comedically inclined player may intentionally pour all the water out or ignore Undyne as a joke or to see what happens, without realizing what they missed, because prior choices in the overworld never had any permanent consequences - including calling Papyrus a 'loser' and answering negatively to each and every one of this questions in the "date." 
3. It's only barely a choice, due to how obvious the 'right solution' is.

A sensible counterargument to point 2 would be that the choice is also unique in the sense that someone is obviously in danger, which only ever happens with Monster Kid and Undyne. I agree that there is some precedent for the kind of choice it is, but not necessarily for the kind of consequences it implies. Monster Kid gets saved regardless, and Undyne doesn't even die, but you're still locked out of the true pacifist ending.

On point 3, it's easy to argue that the obviousness of the solution also invalidates my critique of its consequences - but in that case, why is it a choice at all?

It may sound like I'm contradicting myself on what I think about this choice, so I'll summarize how I would've preferred it to be. Either...
- The context of the choice is more serious and presented more like a choice, or
- The impact of the choice is diminished.
Essentially, I don't have a problem with this kind of choice, nor with that kind of consequence. I just find attaching such a particularly serious consequence to such a simple and almost funny choice to be a bit out of place, especially because it happens nowhere else at any point. But I'll be the first to admit that this is a nitpicky complaint; it is a choice with consequences and it is in the overworld, so I'm still glad that it exists.

Once Undyne is properly Spared and watered, she can be met and "dated" much like Papyrus. And exactly like in Papyrus' date, nothing you choose makes a difference. You can explicitly state you do not want to be her friend, but you will end up as her friend regardless.

source: willcheat on YouTube

It's still good that the player has to go out of their way to visit Undyne after reaching Hotland, making the "date" a very conscious choice, but I still would've liked some variation within the the date itself and the player's relationship with Undyne.

After Papyrus and Undyne have been dated, the player must first see the Neutral Ending before they can befriend Alphys. I've already overanalyzed this odd requirement to pieces in another article, which you can read by clicking here. If the player dates Undyne before seeing the Neutral Ending, she will call them upon their return from the Core, asking to visit her in Snowdin so she can hand over a letter to Alphys. If the player dates Undyne after seeing the Neutral Ending, she'll give the letter immediately after the date, provided the player has passed through Hotland already.

Giving the letter to Alphys will initiate the third and final date, which is once again filled with many entertaining choices but nothing that'll ultimately impact the ending or overworld.

source: willcheat on YouTube

After Papyrus, Undyne and Alphys have been befriended, the player will gain access to the 'True Lab,' where much of the game's backstory is revealed. Successfully completing the True Lab and facing Asgore at LV1 with 0 EXP will then lead the player to the true final battle and the true pacifist ending.

That about does it for the story critical decisions in the overworld. Before I move onto my conclusion, there's one tool for connecting the overworld and battles that I haven't yet covered and which is used to great effect: Items. The reason I haven't featured them prominently is because they are almost exclusively used in battle, but it would be a shame not to mention some of the clever hidden interactions:
- If the player saves the butterscotch-cinnamon pie they get from Toriel in the Ruins all the way until they reach the fight with Asgore and eat it then, it will decrease Asgore's attack and defense. 
- If the player saves an item purchased from the Spider Bakesale in the Ruins and eats in front of Muffet, she will Spare the player immediately. 

source: Darklyte on YouTube

As cool as these easter eggs are, however, they don't influence the story or ending.

What all this amounts to is that there are 4 choices in the overworld, outside of battle, that influence the player's ability to get to the true pacifist ending. To summarize them once more:
Dating Papyrus, giving Undyne water, dating Undyne and dating Alphys. The inclusion of such choices is, in my opinion, a positive - but I would've liked there to be more choices, or for the choices to have more options than a single date per character that decides whether or not you were a 'good enough' friend. However, credit where credit is due: Undertale's overworld is not a place without consequence, and the overworld and battle system aren't always completely disconnected.

If I missed any important choices or if there's something I got wrong, please feel free to post your feedback!

Undertale Follow-Up: Where Design and Marketing Collide

Recently, I wrote a post about a few inconsistencies in Undertale's design and narrative.

In the middle of my analysis, I took a moment to make a rather bold statement:

"Undertale's design assumes you're playing the game 100 % blind. The moment you hear the word 'Pacifist', or see that trailer proclaiming that 'no one has to die' in Undertale, the jig is up. One could say there's a conflict between the game's design and its marketing."

Now, I covered what the aforementioned conflict is in detail, but I didn't explain where it came from. I'd like to go over that briefly. First, please take a look at Undertale's launch trailer:

Note that the trailer does indeed stress that enemies can be Spared, that they can be befriended and that 'nobody has to die.' So why is Undertale playing its trump card in its marketing?

Well, quite frankly, because it has to. Consider the PC gaming climate, especially on platforms like Steam. Now, before I go on I want to stress something: this is not criticism. I'll simply look at the circumstances in which Undertale was released, and why those might have influenced the marketing. Undertale has two qualities that could make potential buyers wary of it:

Firstly, the artstyle. Retro-styled videogames, especially those emulating a mostly 8-bit style, are very common. With popular revivals like Mega Man 9, and beloved indie titles like Cave Story, it was inevitable that many devs would follow suit. Just searching 'retro' on Steam, as of writing this article, yields 1021 results, and that's without checking other tags like 8-bit, 16-bit, classic or pixel art.

Unfortunately, pixel art is often perceived as lazy or unoriginal. Its low barrier of entry, as well as many low quality games using it, may have led to this reputation. This, in turn, could've caused problems for Undertale, making it necessary for the developer to distinguish it in a different way.

Second, the game's genre. While larger RPG franchises are rare outside of Square-Enix's, engines like RPG Maker have allowed a lot of fledgling game developers to create and release their own projects on platforms like Steam. Unfortunately, these projects don't usually get very high ratings. While the genre is still appreciated, it's practically never considered unique or original to develop a turn-based RPG. I realize that's a bold statement, but how many times since Earthbound have you seen a top down turn-based RPG be considered an innovator of some kind?

Searching for 'RPG Maker' games on Steam gives you 154 results, while 'turn based RPG' yields 477 results. It's certainly less saturated than 'retro games' in general, but still something for the consumer - and thus, the developer - to think about.

So, those are two reasons why Undertale needs to distinguish itself through its marketing to prevent it from being dismissed at a glance. In marketing, you see, there's a concept called a 'unique selling point' or 'unique selling proposition' (USP). You want your product to be noticed in the crowd, you're going to need at least one of these, and Undertale calling itself 'the friendly RPG where no one has to die' performs that duty admirably.

So, what this all boils down to is that Toby Fox developed an incredible game with a solid marketing campaign, but the former's design ended up clashing a bit with the latter's transparency. 

But a lot of this has been conjecture. What do you think? Am I right about Undertale's design and marketing? Please feel free to respond. I might just write another follow up based on feedback!

Undertale: Two Anomalous Bosses and an Arbitrary Blockade

Let's kick off with Undertale, a turn-based RPG by Toby Fox that has - since its release on September 15 - gained a huge and passionate fanbase. This isn't going to be a general analysis of Undertale, but rather, a look at a few specific things that stuck out to me about the requirements for getting a certain ending.

Be warned that I'm going to spoil a lot of things about the story and mechanics of Undertale. Read only if you've played it, or don't care about spoilers. I'm going to explain some things about the game, just to establish them, but in general I'll be assuming the reader knows the game. 

One of Undertale's greatest virtues is in how many ways it can be played. Enemy encounters can be handled in two distinct ways; you can either attack the enemy until it dies, or Act to convince them not to fight you and Spare them. This is the first RPG I've seen that has an actual 'Mercy' button in its battle system interface.

source: http://theawesomer.com/

Now, due to this option, you can play the game without harming a single creature. This is referred to as a Pacifist playthrough by most people. Completing a Pacifist playthrough is the only way to get the true ending. Now that's established, let's get straight to the point.

You cannot get the True Ending without first getting a Neutral Ending, which is a simple ending consisting of a phone call briefly discussing or demonstrating the consequences of your choices; even if your first playthrough is 100 % Pacifist, you'll still be pushed into the neutral ending. The reasons why, and what this means for the design, are what I'd like to examine.

The in-game reason why you're prevented from getting the True Ending is simple. To get it, you need to befriend three major characters: Papyrus, Undyne and Alphys. You have to befriend them in order; you cannot befriend Undyne before Papyrus, and you cannot befriend Alphys before Undyne. However, you're arbitrarily prevented from ever befriending Alphys until you see the Neutral ending. To complete her sidequest, you must deliver a letter from Undyne, which she simply won't give you until after having completed a 'neutral run.'

From a narrative perspective, it makes little sense for Undyne to only give you this letter until after you've seen an ending. After all, when you get the letter from her, as far as she's concerned, the "ending" never happened since you returned to a prior save. Regardless, this wouldn't be much of a problem in and of itself, as Undertale plays around with the idea of memories from previous timelines or "save points" carrying over into new ones.

The problem is simply this: Alphys doesn't cause the crucial difference between the Pacifist and Neutral endings. The penultimate boss of the Neutral Run is Asgore Dreemurr, the King of Monsters. On a successful pacifist playthrough, the battle will start, but Asgore will then be knocked offscreen by none other than Toriel. 

source: KiteTales on YouTube

Toriel is the second character you meet, and the first major boss. She disappears from the story fairly early on. So, how come it's her that makes the difference? Why does she only interrupt Asgore after you've discovered Alphys' backstory? This all doesn't make a great deal of sense, until you realize this:

You're supposed, or at the least expected, to kill Toriel on your first playthrough. 

Maybe that's a hasty conclusion to draw, but think about how much sense it makes considering the 'flow' of the narrative. She's the defining difference between the ending of a Pacifist and Neutral playthrough. But if you're not convinced, allow me to delve into the mechanics of her battle.

Toriel's battle sticks out compared to other battles. In Undertale, as a pacifist, every battle is solved in one of two ways: You either solve a puzzle using the Act menu, or outlast the enemy until you can show Mercy. In Toriel's battle, however, you have to specifically choose Mercy and then Spare many times in a row before she'll finally give up on fighting you - and it takes several Spares before Toriel will actually start to show any signs of being affected. Compare this with, say, Papyrus, who you only need to Spare at the very start and end of the battle. He also literally spells it out in red text.

source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EvnJ5IkP5U

So, consider the design here: In terms of explaining how to Spare bosses, Papyrus might as well be the first boss because his battle's design is perfect for it. The reasons for this are simple:

The battle won't even really start until you either Fight or Spare.

The battle shows clear progress, with Papyrus saying something new each turn and constantly hyping up his 'special attack.'

Papyrus literally tells you when Mercy becomes an option. 

Most bosses after Papyrus work similarly, with only minor differences between them. But Toriel, in spite of her role as the game's tutorial, has no such structure or clues in her battle. Attempting to talk to Toriel eventually leads to the game stating outright that "talking isn't the solution." As it takes several Spares to show visible progress, it's not unnatural for a player to assume that Fighting is the only option. 

I think it's important to sidetrack for just a minute here. You might have your doubts about that last statement, because actually, a lot of people do seem to successfully Spare Toriel on their first playthrough. This boils down to a related but seperate issue that I'd like to address in the future: Undertale's design assumes you're playing the game 100 % blind. The moment you hear the word 'Pacifist', or see that trailer proclaiming that 'no one has to die' in Undertale, the jig is up. One could say there's a conflict between the game's design and its marketing. It's important to realize this to understand where my "problems" with the design are coming from. In the future, I hope to look at Undertale's marketing in more detail.

So, now that we've established that, let's get right back to the heart of it. Comparing the design of Toriel's battle with Papyrus', it seems clear that either the game is explaining itself in the wrong order, or that you're expected to kill Toriel. And Undertale's design in general is too complete and well thought out for me to assume the former. 

Toriel's battle isn't the only evidence supporting this theory, however. The fact that you cannot get the True Ending when completing the game for the first time also supports it- being unable to acquire Undyne's letter seems little more than a mechanical failsafe to ensure that. However, I'd like to present one more compelling piece of evidence:

source: Super Beard Bros. on YouTube

I briefly mentioned him before, but now we're going in depth: Asgore Dreemurr, Toriel's ex-husband and the second-to-last boss of any Undertale neutral playthrough. Like Toriel's, Asgore's battle is completely different from any other you encounter on a Neutral or Pacifist run. When the battle starts, Asgore destroys the Mercy button from your interface. This implies that there is no way he'll accept Mercy from you. But surely, if you're a Pacifist, there is some clever way to talk yourself out of it, right? Like with Toriel, there is some hidden way to convince him not to fight, right? The unfortunate answer is no. Even if you didn't touch the Fight button a single time, on your first run it's inevitable: you have to Fight him. 

Not only does this seem out of place in the narrative, the battle also represents a major difficulty spike for Pacifists who aren't properly equipped. To compensate, a Pacifist is allowed to speak to Asgore to decrease his Attack and Defense, but that seems like a band-aid for the underlying issue; logically, the battle shouldn't even happen for a Pacifist who managed to spare Toriel. Fortunately, Asgore can be Spared once his HP reaches a certain point, but that doesn't change that you had to Fight him to get to that point.

With all of that said, it seems pretty clear that on your first run, a neutral playthrough wherein you kill Toriel is expected, which leads to the inconsistencies I've pointed out. 

With all of that said, it makes a lot of sense for Toby to want you to see the Neutral Ending first; after all, at the end of it, Flowey will reveal how to get a better ending if you Spared him. 

source: Super Beard Bros. on YouTube

This ties in with Flowey's role in the story, and the critical part he plays in acquiring the True Pacifist ending. After all, it's Flowey who gets Papyrus to call everyone together to interrupt the battle with Asgore - again, except for Toriel. 

source: Cryaotic on YouTube

So, that's the gist of it; both the narrative and game design of Undertale expect you to kill Toriel on your first run, which seems to have lead to some small inconsistencies. I'd like to stress, though, that Undertale's design and story are amazing in general. That's really the only reason why these details stuck out to me. Also, nothing I've concluded here is factual. In fact, I hope to write a follow-up piece based on responses and feedback, so please do respond in any way you can!

Thank you for your time! Hopefully, we can discuss design again soon.