I'm sure that, while 17k may be mathematically and technically true, they're going to be virtually indistinguishable. I'm pretty hyped for the game but I also don't care for the obviously clickbait claim.
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
135 points (89.9% liked)
Games
32521 readers
1665 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
In this ending Shadowheart has a ponytail...
I agree and I suspect companions are carrying a lot of the weight for this calculation.
Hypothetically, if there's 10 companions with 10 individual endings each you'd get 100 endings right there. Add in 10 main endings and you get 1000, add in 4 major side quests and 4 variations each and you're at 16,000 ending variations.
Since it's variations of the combined ending, each permutation would count as unique. Meaning that 10 companions with 10 endings each would total 10.000.000.000 variations,
I'm not entirely sure why, but I don't think that adds up. 10 companions with 10 different endings is a total 100 endings, however there are apparently 1.7x10^13^ combinations if you were to pick any 10. I don't entirely know if I did the math right there.
So you don't have 1000 endings from the 100 total companion endings and 10 main endings, you have 110 total endings.
Either 17,000 is a figure from the various combinations (compare that to Fallout 3's purptorted 300 endings) or there are 17000 total ending "slides." The former is much more likely.
Unless I'm getting the math wrong myself, for any "pick 1" combination set like this we're dealing with just multiplying the combination sets together. Technically we're multiplying by the factorial of the sample size, but 1!=1.
We're not picking any 10 from within the subset of 100; you cannot pick both ending 1 and ending 4 from companion A and then no ending at all for companion C. I'm assuming each individual sub-ending is mutually exclusive with the rest of its sample space. That difference of assumptions is what led to your 1.7x10^13^ combinations.
You're probably more right than me here, but I'm just not following. Does it matter whether or not to pick 1 from 10 sets of 10 or to pick 10 from a single set of 100? We don't care about what set each individual item came from, just that it's unique and the number of possible combinations.
Edit: Probably just best to dismiss this. I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about.
Yes, it matters. If you're picking 1 out of 10 each from 10 different sets, you get 100 combinations. This also limits the sample space to what is possible.
For simplicity's sake so we can do math that we can intuitively figure out, look at it as picking one from binary choices, with three companions. So you have companions A, B, and C. With possible endings A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2.
If you pick 1 from A, 1 from B, and 1 from C you get 2*2*2 possible outcomes, or 8.
If you pick any 3 from the set of 6 (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) you get 6!/(3!*3!) possible outcomes, or 20.
With the former, you always get one ending for each companion. Every companion has an option selected, and every companion does not have multiple endings selected. With the latter, you might get 1 from each companion. Or you might get A1, A2, and B1 — with no endings for companion C, and two endings for companion A.
How can ending A1 "A lived happily ever after" and ending A2 "A died midway through the player's journey, never having found happiness" both happen? They cannot. We need to use a system that limits the sample space to exactly 1 per companion, even if that option itself might be "doesn't show up in the end slides."
It's nice to know the ending will touch upon your actions thoroughly, but I suspect it will be a lot like the The Witcher 3 technically having 40-something "endings" (but really it's just 3 major outcomes with some variations on the details).
load more comments
(1 replies)
Devs saying stuff like this always makes me roll my eyes. I know games have come a long way, but you say a number that hilariously large and I know, it's going to be silly stuff like the game tracking what people are wearing or some crap and they are counting that as a variation. It's just pretty obviously bullshit.
It's even worse than that because once you see that you just know that all they did was add the ability to mix and match ending tidbits like a damn sectional sofa and let math do all the work.
You can get to 16,000 different endings with something as small as 8 different unlockable characters that each have a unique ending.
There should be an achievement for beating the game using only sausage as a weapon
Yeap. 17,000 marginally different endings in meaningless ways. Probably. I don't know. I saw the headline and rolled my eyes. I should click it.
I see it more as, there's 17k stories to be told. You'll likely never met someone IRL that had the same experience as you. Might have had the same major ending, but the resolution to do many other stories will be different.
I mean, it's just variations of similar endings... I'd prefer what Nier Automata did with their 26 endings. Getting an ending because I backtracked, or because I fished, or because I exploded at a very inappropriate time and place... Yeah that's my kind of multiple endings.
You should definitely play "The Stanley parable" if you haven't yet
I've never been made to laugh till I had tears in my eyes by a game before
spoiler
(following the adventure line / the narrator losing it in the cupboard)
Not the longest, but hands down the weirdest game I've ever played, and well worth the money. Now, where did I leave my bucket?
Good suggestion, it's sitting in my backlog as it is, too.
But ultimately, they are just variations of game over screens or just transitions between acts. Actual endings are like 2 or 3.
It was 5 main endings actually. Plus maybe another one related with Emil to wrap up other Nier game storyline
26 endinga and awesome music
This is a very dumb article. Like, I understand there's a lot of hype for this game right now but jfc. If anyone is expecting to be able to play this game 17,000 times and expect to see something unique each ending, they've lost their damn mind
I think most people realize that this means the game is going to end up being like Fallout NV, where you have a slideshow ending showing you how your choices affected the roleplaying environment, and that there are a lot of slides you'll end up sitting through. The number seems to imply that you have a lot potential variety of impact.
Or at least they will
While the writer wasn't obviously talking about so many different endings, it is still an impressive number of variations, highlighting how much the choices players will make will have an impact on the story up to the very end.
So, are we talking something like the equipment on the player during the ending cutscene? Without more details I don't see how this figure is supposed to be impressive.
Probably just some quests that get a "what happened to them"-scene in the ending.
Like Quest 1 can have outcome A/B/C and Quest 2 has A/B
And you already got AA, AB, BA, BB, CA, CB variations, add some more quests and you got 17k outcomes easily.
What matters though is how many major endings there are.
An ending that mentions a yes or no response to 14 things would have 16384 variations. Don't get too excited by this big number. It could easily be just "one ending" where they mentioned the outcome of 14ish things you did.
I'm gonna be so pissed if I don't get my Mass Effect 3 color changing ending 😤
Yeah sure... If they just kept it to a sane number like Chrono Trigger did so much time ago, it would be much better. Why are we counting permutations as "different endings"?
It gets C L I C K S
And all of them are probably going to be slightly alternate from eachother, but serving no significance. Kind of like those Mortal Kombat endings where each character had a slideshow ending, but just reworded.
So, 17k loose "if" statements defining if some single sentences will pop up during the ending scene.
if player has killed love interest-> And the love interest remained deadif player has killed love interest AND ressurrected-> And the love interest died, but got betterif player has NOT killed love interest-> And the love interest never died, just as their love
etc etc
You don't even need that many 'if' statements. If you're stringing together a sequence of cause and effect binary decisions (as so many RPGs are wont to do), then you only need 14 of them to get over 16,000 possible combinations!
Nobody said that. It is a nonsense number.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Honestly that's just like 14 different choice points, none of which have to be significant. Every choice doubles the possible endings if they throw a statement about it in the ending
They better add a "Kissing a chicken" ending or else I will get really pissed.
Man, now I'm gonna have to replay it 17,000 times.
I've never played any of the Baldurs Gate games, do you guys reckon I will need to have played the originals first? Cos this games sounds great!
The first two were amazing but long ago, in sure there will be treats for those of us who remember them but I'm sure they'll be expecting a mostly fresh audience.
Just know if you hear 'go for the eyes boo' it's referencing a hamster.
A dwarf giant hamster, excuse you.
Cheers, I'm very excited to give it a go!
I grew up with the first Baldur's Gate games and both are amazing but BG3 seems more of a standalone. I played the early access and I don't see much need to play the first 2, the story is not connected.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That definitely sounds like a bragging point, but nothing something really valuable. Big numbers sound impressive, but do those variations impact the endings in a meaningful way?
view more: next ›