302.5 hours played
Written 25 days ago
[h1][i]“Even our house pets are rather evil.”[/i]
~Ilwrath, Star Control II[/h1]
The 90s didn't just mark a moment for role-playing games; they redefined the very essence of interactive storytelling. It all began with a sequel to Star Control, a game whose influence, though rarely celebrated today, laid the groundwork for the rich interactive dialogue options we now take for granted. Tim Cain (the man behind games like Fallout, Arcanum and The Temple of Elemental Evil), for example, claims Star Control II to be “his personal favorite RPG of all time” that inspired him a lot when he worked on his own projects. Sure, we had some advanced dialogues before that in giants like Wizardry and Ultima, but it wasn't before SC II when we started to get that certain feeling that we were actually living in that virtual world. And when the Fallout series appeared? Boy, oh boy...
Nowadays, Fallout is our typical console-oriented stuff from Bethesda. With dialogues being just some short replies that lead to pretty much the same result. Back in 90s? It was an entirely different story. While taking SC II as an inspiration, Black Isle turned dialogues into something absolutely magical. Not only it felt a lot like an interactive version of a Choose Your Own Adventure book, the stats of our character actually mattered. The smarter we were – the more complicated our conversations became, charisma made us more likable, certain specializations used to unlock alternative solutions and so on. Fallout and its sequel did not look impressive. Moreover, those were turn-based games that were unable to compete with mainstream stuff like Diablo. But what it did with the dialogues? It was magic.
Finally, there was Baldur's Gate. Made by a young Canadian team founded by newly graduated doctors, it revolutionized the whole fantasy CRPG thing. On many levels. First – it introduced us to the so-called Infinity Engine, which was perfect for this kind of entertainment. Second – it actually used Advanced Dungeons & Dragons rules. Third – while being a real-time game, it had “the advanced pause”. The same exact one we can see in Bethesda's Fallout nowadays. The idea was both simple and genius at the same time. Turn-based stuff was cool, but not everybody likes it, while obviously, real-time battles with a big party can become chaotic. Hence the idea – to let us pause the game at any moment and let us give our party commands. Pause the game, make some commands, unpause and see the results. Like I said, simple, yet genius. Most importantly, though, Baldur's Gate was a true RPG. I already mentioned D&D, right? Well, when it's about D&D, there's that thing called alignment. Most of the games wants us to be good. To do the “right” thing. Baldur's Gate allowed us to be not only good, but also bad. And everything in between. Should I say it was fun? Up to this day, there are not so many games that fully allow us to make any avatar we wanted. And most of those? Most of those are from Tim Cain.
Speaking of Tim Cain, after his work on Arcanum and The Temple of Elemental Evil, he moved on from Interplay to co-found Troika Games. Heck, he was one of Troika's three founders (yes, there were three, hence the name). Unfortunately, as we all know, Troika didn't do well financially, which led to it being closed in 2005. But guess what? After working for NCSoft for some time, Tim... Joined Obsidian. Yeah. [i]The[/i] Obsidian. The one that began its story making sequels to BioWare games, developed the best “new” Fallout (New Vegas) and... Yeah. Reviving good ol' Baldur's Gate in its original form. Minus the licensed D&D thing, of course. And yes, Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity was the first game, on which Tim worked after joining the team. While Tyranny? Tyranny was the second.
If you think you know where this is going, you're correct. Tyranny is pretty much another Pillars of Eternity. It looks like Baldur's Gate (everything – from UI to cursors are [i]exactly[/i] the same), it feels like Baldur's Gate (both the “advanced” pause and dialogue trees are there) and, well, it's Baldur's Gate. When it's about core thing? There isn't much to say here, really. You like Baldur's Gate – go ahead and buy Tyranny. You'll f*cking love it. What's the difference, though? I mean, OK, clearly this here is not a licensed title and there won't be any references to D&D and its settings. But what's the difference from Pillars? Why not just giving us another Pillars game? Well, there's a reason for that. A pretty good one too.
See, Tyranny comes with a pretty unique world, in which... there are no lawful good characters. In the world of Terratus, everybody was touched by evil one way or another. Even the good guys are neutral good at best (again, no D&D stuff here, I'm just making parallels). You included. And that's the funny part. Even when games do give you full control over your character and their views, you always start either good or neutral. In Tyranny? You're the bad guy. Like, for real. There's that big godlike figure that aims for world domination and you're their servant. You goal – to enter the current region and make sure it'll fall. Or not. Because again, what we have here is Baldur's Gate variant and it's up to us to decide how we want things to end. We can become tyrant on our own [i]or[/i] free region from tyranny. Like I said, though, lawful good isn't a thing here and there'll always be... Something. In other words, Tyranny is a Baldur's Gate about evil guys. Is that it? Is that the only difference?
Nope. Remember how Baldur's Gate had reputation? Well, in Tyranny things are even more complicated. Our usual reputation is called favor (loyalty when it's about companions), but this time there's also so-called wrath / fear. And, of course, both play a very important role in dialogues. Which are exactly as juicy as you want them to be. If something, dialogues are the main dish in Tyranny, while the world itself... Isn't really that big. Location-wise it can be compared with the very first Baldur's Gate, which had 54 areas. Tyranny has about 70, but the maps themselves are actually quite small and not complicated enough. Which makes it game way shorter than you'll probably want (something about 20 hours to beat the main story).
Sure, Tyranny also comes with its own thing. Remember how in Obsidian's Neverwinter Nights 2 we had a stronghold with some recruitable characters? In Tyranny we've got customizable towers, in which we'll be able to hire NPCs like traders and trainers (leveling in Tyranny will make you think of good ol' Gothic a little), but all in all, it won't make much difference. All in all, Tyranny feels like a “Baldur's Gate lite”.
But you know what? Somehow, it only makes the game better. If something, that's what makes Tyranny to stand out. For what it is, Tyranny is perfect. It makes you remember exactly why we fell in love with those advanced dialogues back in the days. If you'll expect Pillars of Eternity, you'll of course, notice the lack of the exploration, but that's just the thing here. Tyranny is a dialogue porn. That's what it's all about. And that's why I ended up loving it so much. With one big “but” – Tyranny is... ridiculously imbalanced game. No, seriously, it's like they didn't even try. Magic is strong, bows are weak, while swords are something in-between. Feels like a joke. And despite the small world, you [i]will[/i] fight a lot in here. Still, I don't feel like going on this game too hard for that. Make it 100+ hours long and I will. I totally will. But with it being a tiny little present for those who grew up playing those games I've mentioned above? I don't think it'll be fair. Tyranny's beauty comes from its world and its dialogues. If you seek a meticulously balanced game with vast exploration, Tyranny simply isn't it. But if you crave a compact, dialogue-rich experience steeped in moral ambiguity, Tyranny delivers a truly unique and memorable journey. Dixi.
