Chesspieces with self-will

[ywhtptgtfo]

This game has a very strong "mankind is very bad" undertone and that history is simply going to repeat itself.

What would've been interesting is to add in an element of redemption and learning. This applies especially to emissaries, who were defined as chesspieces with their own will. To a lesser extent, members of the inner circle such as Natara and Batarr could've been swayed as well.

Now I know the ending happened this way due to a severe lack of resources in the dev team, but in a more ideal setting, it would've been better to have the following additions:
1. Side quests and affinities with Yuslan, Tealor, Bartarr, and Natara. Rhetoric checks on their character development
2. Max affinity with both Bartarr and Natara would prevent their betrayal and make the city still defendable in the end
3. Max affinity with Yuslan will make him hesitate in the end but the high one essence will still not be captured. Offers option for PC to kill Tealor in the end
4. Max affinity with Tealor would allow PC to convince him to reflect on his ego and not to go through with activating the beacon

Then with this, we can have some palatable alternate endings:
1. Tealor is dead and the city is conquered - Coraek puts everyone to the sword. Beacon is destroyed. New Beacon is soon to be built in Qyra
2. Tealor is dead and the city is successfully defended - The Order submits to Coarek's requests and the Beacon is destroyed. Word of Lightborn's death caused a civil war in Enderal. New Beacon is soon to be built in Qyra
3. Tealor is alive and the city is conquered. Same as #1 but Coarek will be killed by Tealor first
4. Tealor is alive and the city is successfully defended. Same as #2 except no civil war due to Tealor's leadership. Best ending. Player gets to free-roam after.

[ArsCortica]

I understand that this game ostensibly gives of the "mankind is inherently evil" feeling, but imho it's less about that, and more of a psychological parable about letting things go rather than endlessly seeking to revert one's own mistakes. The entire hero character of the player character is based on survivor guilt as s/he is the only member of the family that survived the attack by the zealots. Likewise, Tealor Arantheal is pathologically obessed with firing the beacon because he wants to create a lasting (positive) legacy for himself, rather than going down into the books of history as the man who abbandoned his own son and eventually was imprisoned by the latter.

This is a recurring topics with all major characters in the game. Jespar blames himself for failing to take care of his sister, and later for abandoning his companion even though he knew she would die - his way of dealing with this is to constantly run away from all responsibility. Calia blames herself for her proverbial inner demon and seeks to exorcise it by constantly pushing herself to her mental and physical limits while denying herself any joy. Ryneus is more than aware that he's a cripple and that he should be dead, but staves off both issues with his make-believe world.

Again, the issue here is that even your flaws and mistakes simply are part of you, and that trying to burn them out of you or to erase them from existence altogether in a desperate attempt to gain absolution from others is a futile act. At the end of the day, only you can give yourself this absolution, and you can only do this by admitting that your flaws are part of yourself - and that you must stop your constant attempt to right the wrong because it will only produce more mistakes.

Because of this, I think a happy ending simply would not fit for the story. ´The bitter-sweet nature of both the Star City and the Sacrifice endings very neatly portray this concept of self-absolution, even though I think the Star City ending would see you end up like the Aged Man and the even more aged mummy that presumably is his companion.

EDIT: There also is a quite intriguing fan theory that none of the events in Enderal are real,

[+]

and that it's all just the "Light at the End of the Tunnel" scenario for the player character, while the latter is drowning after being thrown overboard right in the beginning of the game - the theme of letting go in this case would expand to the idea of the player character accepting his or her own death rather than desperately dreaming up all the events that could have been.

[ywhtptgtfo]

Because of this, I think a happy ending simply would not fit for the story. ´The bitter-sweet nature of both the Star City and the Sacrifice endings very neatly portray this concept of self-absolution, even though I think the Star City ending would see you end up like the Aged Man and the even more aged mummy that presumably is his companion.

Self-absolution is definitely a theme for Tealor and the companions, but it does not explain the problem of every major character. Batarr is narrowminded, Natara is insecure, Yuslan is wrathful, Coraek is narcissistic, and the Starling is obsessed. The one person who was truly able to do the right thing in the end was Ryneus - He knew what he did was wrong and ended it.

This leads to the next point - Even though one's flaws and mistakes are part of him, does he necessarily have to succumb to that with fatal consequences? Can he not survive it without blowing a hole in the PC's designs? Calia, Jesper, and Ryneus all were able to do that without much help from the PC.

It doesn't mean everyone should be easy and that's why we have the PC who is supposed to be a wild card that can exert influence on others. Unfortunately, as others mentioned, the PC is way too passive in this game. He was betrayed by Batarr, Natara, Yuslan, and the Starling, he got schooled by Coraek, and he was Tealor's little errand boy. He learned nothing from the experience and did nothing to affect their thoughts and actions. I feel this is a lost opportunity for such a great story.

As for "happy ending", the optimal ending I see is that (1) everyone lives, (2) the problem persists, and (3) everyone has learned a great deal about himself. It's by far not a fairytale ending but it can definitely fit the story.

[Glycerin]

Self-absolution is definitely a theme for Tealor and the companions, but it does not explain the problem of every major character. Batarr is narrowminded, Natara is insecure, Yuslan is wrathful, Coraek is narcissistic, and the Starling is obsessed. The one person who was truly able to do the right thing in the end was Ryneus - He knew what he did was wrong and ended it.

This ending for A Song in the Silence is entirely optional. Before they fixed it, it was even impossible to gain enough sympathy with Ryneus to make him give up. And even now you need to talk him into it, so I don't think he really understood what he had done.
As for Tealor, it would have been better (for him) if his motive was self-absolution. He never seems to realize his own mistakes or is blinded by his pride, even to the end:

[+]

"I led them to the light, I alone."

It doesn't mean everyone should be easy and that's why we have the PC who is supposed to be a wild card that can exert influence on others. Unfortunately, as others mentioned, the PC is way too passive in this game. He was betrayed by Batarr, Natara, Yuslan, and the Starling, he got schooled by Coraek, and he was Tealor's little errand boy. He learned nothing from the experience and did nothing to affect their thoughts and actions. I feel this is a lost opportunity for such a great story.

True, a lot of people were unhappy about the main character's lack of control. But I guess that has more to do with their unfulfilled expectations than the story itself. When playing video games you are used to be the hero, the one who sets things right. In Enderal you don't get the chance, the choices are made for you on several occasions. While this certainly breaks immersion, especially if you disagree with these choices, it also serves to illustrate one of the main themes of Enderal: "What distinguishes a free man from a slave?", as it was put in the intro. This feeling of being powerless, not in control of the situation -like a chesspiece, or the afore mentionend slave- suits the story better than achieving your personal goals in my opinion.

[ywhtptgtfo]

Self-absolution is definitely a theme for Tealor and the companions, but it does not explain the problem of every major character. Batarr is narrowminded, Natara is insecure, Yuslan is wrathful, Coraek is narcissistic, and the Starling is obsessed. The one person who was truly able to do the right thing in the end was Ryneus - He knew what he did was wrong and ended it.

This ending for A Song in the Silence is entirely optional. Before they fixed it, it was even impossible to gain enough sympathy with Ryneus to make him give up. And even now you need to talk him into it, so I don't think he really understood what he had done.

That's somewhat true, although he was fully aware that he's giving up on that beautiful world for a harsh existence and potentially (and ultimately) not surviving.

As for Tealor, it would have been better (for him) if his motive was self-absolution. He never seems to realize his own mistakes or is blinded by his pride, even to the end:

[+]

"I led them to the light, I alone."

Which is why there is plenty of opportunity there.

It doesn't mean everyone should be easy and that's why we have the PC who is supposed to be a wild card that can exert influence on others. Unfortunately, as others mentioned, the PC is way too passive in this game. He was betrayed by Batarr, Natara, Yuslan, and the Starling, he got schooled by Coraek, and he was Tealor's little errand boy. He learned nothing from the experience and did nothing to affect their thoughts and actions. I feel this is a lost opportunity for such a great story.

True, a lot of people were unhappy about the main character's lack of control. But I guess that has more to do with their unfulfilled expectations than the story itself. When playing video games you are used to be the hero, the one who sets things right. In Enderal you don't get the chance, the choices are made for you on several occasions. While this certainly breaks immersion, especially if you disagree with these choices, it also serves to illustrate one of the main themes of Enderal: "What distinguishes a free man from a slave?", as it was put in the intro. This feeling of being powerless, not in control of the situation -like a chesspiece, or the afore mentionend slave- suits the story better than achieving your personal goals in my opinion.

Of course - most people would naturally incline for a good ending.

I see things differently on "what distinguishes a free man from a slave".

Rather than being "powerless and not being in control" I believe it's more of a debate on determinism vs free-will - you are in control but are also completely predictable. This is strongly consistent with how emissaries behaved the same in each cycle and fits nicely with the recurring butterfly motif (which is an allusion that things should happen *differently* this time). Unfortunately, it seems like the veiled woman did all the work and the PC did little in producing ripples. In the end, all that intervention before the flooded city was immaterial. She could've achieved the same thing by only intervening at the last encounter.

A second take to this is men being a slave to their own nature - They are trapped in their initial behavioural configurations and are doomed to never overcome their limitations. I don't think the game explicitly states this but again, you can witness how so many NPC's failed spectacularly as they succumbed to their fatal flaws.

Anyhow, the plot of the game still greatly exceeds my expectations. It's just that if the designers go to great lengths to engage the player at a philosophical level, it's natural for the audience to be more inclined to question and pick things apart.

[Alias72]

I just thought I would weigh in on Tealor Arantheal and the PC. Both are emissaries. As stated (I think by the black guardian) they are people who died with a single unfulfilled desire on their mind and their reincarnation exemplifies that desire. It is no mistake that the emissaries do not develop much throughout the game. There not supposed to. They were created by the high ones specifically because their single-mindedness makes them predictable. This is also why the PC is special.

The veiled woman orchestrates the death of the PC at just the right time so that the body would wash up in the pyrean ruins and be found by the PC later. Interestingly enough the players desire to cut their way through the quests and the story, consequences be damned, plays into that. We as players tend to act in a way that coincides with the prophets condition.