How Revenge of the Savage Planet Fits Player Choice

Revenge of the Savage Planet follows in its predecessor's footsteps as a grotesque, exploration-heavy Metroidvania full of witty gags and off-the-beaten-path, sneaky secrets. Developed by Raccoon Logic, a studio formed by Journey to the Savage Planet Following the demise of Google Stadia, this sequel aims to deliver the same humor and satisfying exploration that made the original a sleeper hit.

Game Rant sat down with Raccoon Logic co-founder and creative director Alex Hutchinson, along with game design director Steven Masters, to discuss the team's approach to Revenge of the Savage PlanetMetroidvania elements. Just like in the first game, players can choose to take a direct route to the main objectives and complete the game quickly, or they can explore every corner to find more secrets and upgrades. In their opinion, both approaches are completely correct.

Revenge of the Savage Planet responds to player choices like the Stanley Parable

Like any good Metroidvania, Revenge of the Savage Planet constantly offering players multiple paths forward and plenty of options in between. Masters points out that it's not only important to provide players with options, but also to recognize and celebrate them. This is universally appreciated in games, especially evident in choice-driven RPGs such as Dragon Ageso expanding it into the Metroidvania genre seems like a wise move. Giving players choices is great, but what's most impressive is when the game responds to those choices. As Masters said,

One of the things I find most fun about this design challenge is the response and recognition of the player's journey through the world. Take scanning as an example. One of the first things you find is a health plant, right? You start off lightly damaged and there's a healthy plant nearby so you can refill. Your robotic companion will say something like, “Hey, you should probably check out what that plant is and see if it's useful for you.”

You will get different results from the bot if you choose to scan it or not. This is just one simple example. If you eat a plant without scanning it first, the bot might recognize that you're being a little adventurous and say something like, “I guess you should have scanned that first!” Then you take that idea and apply it to the rest of the game.

Revenge of the Savage PlanetThe peculiar mix of comedy also validates these player choices well. Cautious players can scan an unfamiliar plant before consuming it, while adventurous players can dive into it and take an instant bite. Both of these approaches are recognized, and the robot companion may have a witty remark in store depending on this choice. This is about what players have come to love The Stanley Parable so much: the feeling that the game reacts to the player's actions.

There's no wrong way to play Revenge of the Savage Planet, say the developers

Hutchinson believes it is important that these recognitions are always encouraging. While some developers may not be happy with the player speed-running through carefully crafted levels and wasting countless hours writing dialogue, Raccoon Logic recognizes these as valid approaches and that the game is enriched by validating these players. A fast passing player Revenge of the Savage Planet might elicit cheers from a robot companion who would admire their laser focus on the primary target. As Hutchinson explained,

It's about making them feel like they've always done the right thing. Whatever path they choose is the right one; it's just a taste of their choice. If someone is very careful and scans everything, we recognize that. Or, if someone's in a hurry, we'll celebrate that too – Wow, there's no time to waste!

Meanwhile, Hutchinson notes that it also helps inform players of other options. When game feedback suggests to players that they have done something unusual, it can inspire them to think of new ways of solving problems. This switching between game and player should be done Revenge of the Savage Planet especially a replayable Metroidvania as players return to explore each alternative outcome. As Hutchinson said,

It's all about recognizing the player's decision. I think especially when we're trying to be a little bit systemic—even though it's obviously not a completely systemic game—we want to have enough systemic breadth that you can solve a problem in different ways. We want to celebrate it for the players.

If they realize, “Oh, I could have done it differently,” it encourages them to think differently about the environment. It's a lot more fun than just going from point A to point B and pressing X when you're told to press X.