Undertale is one of the most popular games of the last decade. Some used to herald it as one of the greatest games ever made, back when it came out. I vividly remember a girl I was really into back then cosplaying Sans - but I didn't know who that was. For my whole life, it feels like the whole world has been talking about Undertale and stuff that has been inspired by it. So, I took the plunge myself. I wanted to know why Undertale was so... important.
And on one hand, I think it's easy to see why. It's an indie darling that is subversive, humorous in tone, satirical of RPG tropes and quick to push the boundaries of the fourth wall. Those things don't really sound like too big of a deal now, I don't think. But Undertale popularised a lot of these ideas in the mainstream, and I think that caught a lot of people off-guard. Undertale is creative with its postmodern relationship with the audience, as well as in its usage of contemporary humour. While not the first game to do so - a lot of the things I've just mentioned were done by Earthbound and Metal Gear Solid 2 a decade or so before the release of Undertale - its indie darling status as well as its genuine creativity brought it to the forefront. Undertale was many people's first experience with a postmodern meta-narrative integrated into a video game. It changed the tone around video games, and presented the idea of "video games as art" in a new way to a new audience.
So, I see the appeal there. Undertale isn't lacking in things to like. Its creative manipulation of traditional battle mechanics is very interesting, and so is its willingness to reach out the screen and make things specifically about the player.
In 2021, I still find that creativity compelling, and I think a lot of the work put into Undertale pays off. However, I think a lot of things now don't really work in its favour. I think the idea of sparing enemies, or having the death of an enemy taken seriously, is very, very cool on paper. But in practice, Undertale's usage of this system results in finding every way possible to not use the core combat mechanics. Thematically, this makes sense, but gameplay wise, I think it's a waste. The battle system is good - why can't I use it without punishment? You get locked out of the true ending if you kill even one thing. So why fight, ever? I think it's a fatal flaw of the system. Even in Genocide, the opposite occurs - why spare anything, ever? I don't think it works out. I wasn't satisfied sparing enemies, and killing them would've locked into the bad endings. So I'm stuck in an unsatisfying limbo if I want to get a nice ending. I don't think that's good game design, even if it thematically proves something. The bullet hell stuff is fun, though, and it shines through in the fight against Asgore especially. The creativity of the game really works out when it comes to making unique attack patterns to dodge - especially in bosses.
Another thing I thought was quite underwhelming was the writing. A lot of the humour in this game is VERY hit or miss. Sometimes, it makes me want to roll my eyes. Too much quirky randomness humour that feels very bland and dated. Sometimes, I chuckled quite a bit. I thought Sans was consistently pretty funny. Alongside this, though, I don't think the main plot of the game is very interesting, and I think a lot of the meta elements go to waste when it comes to Chara - or Will, in my case. At first, Frisk, the main character, is introduced with your name. However, it turns out that the character bearing your name was actually the first human to fall down. This holds potential meaning, and having the final boss say that they don't want you to leave them behind, to stop playing with them, is quite emotionally powerful, I think. However, I think it falls apart when you realise the first human to fall down is like, an entire character on their own. The only thing they really have in common with you is their name, and it doesn't loop back to the player - at least in the routes I played. It felt like an underdeveloped excuse to have the characters refer to me, the real person, instead of a grand plot development - even though the former would've been much more fitting, I feel. But again, apparently Genocide does something different, so I don't want to be too mean to this character.
This writing issue does extend to the gameplay, too. I thought the puzzles had potential to be fun - but every character in the game makes it their mission to tell you the solution to each and every puzzle in the game in some sort of ironic fashion. It was funny for a bit, but eventually it just got grating. Let me play your game, please! On top of it all, I think the message of the game ends up being kind of shallow in the end. Being friends with everyone solves everything. Always be determined to be as kind to people as you can be. Killing people is always bad and you shouldn't do it. I don't know, I guess that's fine. I didn't think it was all that interesting by the end, though - especially when the backstory of characters like Alphys and Asgore open up some pretty morally complex questions about accountability for horrible actions taken by them.
Despite everything I've said, I had fun. I chuckled a bit. The boss fights were fun. I stream a lot of the games I play to my friends, and it was entertaining to play it with them. The music was awesome, a lot of the visual setpieces were very memorable, and if nothing else, Sans is still funny. It was a pleasant experience, even if it definitely showed me how much I suck at bullet hells.
So, where does that leave us? Do I understand why Undertale is so revered? I think I do. It's a generally pleasant and upbeat experience that has a darker underbelly to be explored. It was a pioneer of modern metanarratives and satire in gaming. A cast of likable characters and iconic music only bolstered this.
But at least, speaking as an adult in 2021, back to myself starting in high school in 2015, I think time has changed. I think Undertale is something that I don't think I'll ever be able to connect to in the same way that its superfans did and still do.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that you had to be there - and I wasn't.
And on one hand, I think it's easy to see why. It's an indie darling that is subversive, humorous in tone, satirical of RPG tropes and quick to push the boundaries of the fourth wall. Those things don't really sound like too big of a deal now, I don't think. But Undertale popularised a lot of these ideas in the mainstream, and I think that caught a lot of people off-guard. Undertale is creative with its postmodern relationship with the audience, as well as in its usage of contemporary humour. While not the first game to do so - a lot of the things I've just mentioned were done by Earthbound and Metal Gear Solid 2 a decade or so before the release of Undertale - its indie darling status as well as its genuine creativity brought it to the forefront. Undertale was many people's first experience with a postmodern meta-narrative integrated into a video game. It changed the tone around video games, and presented the idea of "video games as art" in a new way to a new audience.
So, I see the appeal there. Undertale isn't lacking in things to like. Its creative manipulation of traditional battle mechanics is very interesting, and so is its willingness to reach out the screen and make things specifically about the player.
In 2021, I still find that creativity compelling, and I think a lot of the work put into Undertale pays off. However, I think a lot of things now don't really work in its favour. I think the idea of sparing enemies, or having the death of an enemy taken seriously, is very, very cool on paper. But in practice, Undertale's usage of this system results in finding every way possible to not use the core combat mechanics. Thematically, this makes sense, but gameplay wise, I think it's a waste. The battle system is good - why can't I use it without punishment? You get locked out of the true ending if you kill even one thing. So why fight, ever? I think it's a fatal flaw of the system. Even in Genocide, the opposite occurs - why spare anything, ever? I don't think it works out. I wasn't satisfied sparing enemies, and killing them would've locked into the bad endings. So I'm stuck in an unsatisfying limbo if I want to get a nice ending. I don't think that's good game design, even if it thematically proves something. The bullet hell stuff is fun, though, and it shines through in the fight against Asgore especially. The creativity of the game really works out when it comes to making unique attack patterns to dodge - especially in bosses.
Another thing I thought was quite underwhelming was the writing. A lot of the humour in this game is VERY hit or miss. Sometimes, it makes me want to roll my eyes. Too much quirky randomness humour that feels very bland and dated. Sometimes, I chuckled quite a bit. I thought Sans was consistently pretty funny. Alongside this, though, I don't think the main plot of the game is very interesting, and I think a lot of the meta elements go to waste when it comes to Chara - or Will, in my case. At first, Frisk, the main character, is introduced with your name. However, it turns out that the character bearing your name was actually the first human to fall down. This holds potential meaning, and having the final boss say that they don't want you to leave them behind, to stop playing with them, is quite emotionally powerful, I think. However, I think it falls apart when you realise the first human to fall down is like, an entire character on their own. The only thing they really have in common with you is their name, and it doesn't loop back to the player - at least in the routes I played. It felt like an underdeveloped excuse to have the characters refer to me, the real person, instead of a grand plot development - even though the former would've been much more fitting, I feel. But again, apparently Genocide does something different, so I don't want to be too mean to this character.
This writing issue does extend to the gameplay, too. I thought the puzzles had potential to be fun - but every character in the game makes it their mission to tell you the solution to each and every puzzle in the game in some sort of ironic fashion. It was funny for a bit, but eventually it just got grating. Let me play your game, please! On top of it all, I think the message of the game ends up being kind of shallow in the end. Being friends with everyone solves everything. Always be determined to be as kind to people as you can be. Killing people is always bad and you shouldn't do it. I don't know, I guess that's fine. I didn't think it was all that interesting by the end, though - especially when the backstory of characters like Alphys and Asgore open up some pretty morally complex questions about accountability for horrible actions taken by them.
Despite everything I've said, I had fun. I chuckled a bit. The boss fights were fun. I stream a lot of the games I play to my friends, and it was entertaining to play it with them. The music was awesome, a lot of the visual setpieces were very memorable, and if nothing else, Sans is still funny. It was a pleasant experience, even if it definitely showed me how much I suck at bullet hells.
So, where does that leave us? Do I understand why Undertale is so revered? I think I do. It's a generally pleasant and upbeat experience that has a darker underbelly to be explored. It was a pioneer of modern metanarratives and satire in gaming. A cast of likable characters and iconic music only bolstered this.
But at least, speaking as an adult in 2021, back to myself starting in high school in 2015, I think time has changed. I think Undertale is something that I don't think I'll ever be able to connect to in the same way that its superfans did and still do.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that you had to be there - and I wasn't.