Inquisition wasn't bad I guess. Kinda cliffhangery. I liked the full stop dying provides though, plus bittersweet sticks better than happily ever after.
The cliffhangery part for me is one of its strengths, imo. After playing the game and all DLCs it just leaves you with more questions and getting you thinking on theories.
The cliffhangery part for me is one of its strengths, imo. After playing the game and all DLCs it just leaves you with more questions and getting you thinking on theories.
That's what made FNAF so popular.
Note: That's not a joke, that series has become hugely popular more for what it doesn't tell you than what it does. There are people that don't even play the games but love discussing the lore and theories.
That's what made FNAF so popular.
Note: That's not a joke, that series has become hugely popular more for what it doesn't tell you than what it does. There are people that don't even play the games but love discussing the lore and theories.
What's FNAF?
Yeah.. funny that. A friend of mine finds what's written on the DA Wikia more interesting than the game itself.
What's FNAF?
Yeah.. funny that. A friend of mine finds what's written on the DA Wikia more interesting than the game itself.
Five Nights at Freddy's
A lot of people like to rag on it however you can't deny the creator of the game has done a great job at capturing peoples interest and imagination with the narrative and structure of the plot.
Five Nights at Freddy's
A lot of people like to rag on it however you can't deny the creator of the game has done a great job at capturing peoples interest and imagination with the narrative and structure of the plot.
Did a little search on it.
Well.. it seems ridiculous. But funny. Obviously it works though.. and why the hell not?
Neither does BioWare. BioWare cannot control how we consume their content, so they shouldn't sacrifice other parts of the game in order to do it. Because it won't work.First of all, variety does not solve problems. You don't make an ending good or well written by offering a wide variety of them. The idea that offering a wide variety of endings is automatically good writing and game design that makes everyone happy because 'you choose' the ending is very wrong and frankly just leads to incompetence on behalf of the writers.
Secondly, you shouldn't really 'want' one conclusion or another when you have no idea of the thematic content of the story.
How is that a bad thing?That doesn't refute the accusations that would be made against you. It reinforces them. Reinforces that you want to the game to be happy because you have to hide away from the cruel, brutal 'real world' full of meanies and bullies.
What's wrong with not facing reality? Is reality important?It's always a competition. The world is full of imbeciles eager to do things the wrong way. If you want to do things the right way, you need reasoning to back up why it's right. Otherwise they can always just say you're a stupid fool who can't face reality and you'll have nothing to say against it.
Anything that isn't Mass Effect 3's ending, and is coherent.
Not really the point though, the Mass Effect trilogy didn't need a happy ending - it just needed one that didn't rely on dropping starbrat in to hand you the endings on a plate - that's what was wrong with it.
I'd say that given Mass Effect was a story so big (in theory, anyway) it had to be told across a trilogy of games, then yeah it did need a happy ending. More than one in fact. And it needed a multitude of bittersweet endings of various degrees of bitter and sweet. And it needed downright depressing endings. Endings where the galaxy dies or the Reapers triumph. Big story, lots of choices, lots of outcomes. We needed all of it represented.
But most of all we needed endings that didn't generally suck. Something that, at the end of the journey, didn't leave us thinking "well, that was a colossal waste of time"
I'd say that given Mass Effect was a story so big (in theory, anyway) it had to be told across a trilogy of games, then yeah it did need a happy ending. More than one in fact. And it needed a multitude of bittersweet endings of various degrees of bitter and sweet. And it needed downright depressing endings. Endings where the galaxy dies or the Reapers triumph. Big story, lots of choices, lots of outcomes. We needed all of it represented.
But most of all we needed endings that didn't generally suck. Something that, at the end of the journey, didn't leave us thinking "well, that was a colossal waste of time"
I'm English and grew up on 80s movies ... my idea of a happy ending is probably " ... well, at least it wasn't raining".
If endings won't make me feel sad and depressed after beating a game - I'll be happy. I don't mind a little drama here and there from time to time, but come on. Enough is enough.
I agree. I remember the sinking sad feeling I had after finishing ME3. It wasn't that good sad feeling you get when the conclusion fits the rest of the story. The ending didn't feel right and, obviously, many other people had the same reaction as me. I hope MEA manages to make an appropriate ending that allows for some player agency in setting the tone of the ending.
Happy vs sad debate.
I'd say the current trend is to equate over the top shallow shock value as the mature content. It's not much better than the other extreme of a Disney happy ending. Both happen in reality. There are happy endings in life, there are grim dark endings in life. Honestly for most people life trends towards the happy side I expect. But life is a mix of both but rarely at either extreme.
Are people who need the Disney ending escaping reality maybe, but it's no different than the grim dark ending fans are just immature kids who think shock value makes things mature. Nothing is wrong with either even if the above is true for you because stories and games aren't there to model reality. Just to entertain. So if a Disney ending makes you happy awesome. If grim dark makes you feel mature and deep, awesome. Hopefully the next game will have endings that satisfy the majority of you.
Yep. It's like the trend for movies and tv shows to advertise themselves as "dark and gritty". The term lost it's meaning after awhile. Angst isn't the one true reflection of reality to rule them all. Aligning yourself on one end of the emotional spectrum in the hopes of being superior to others is sadly shallow. Joy and happiness are part of life as well. Denying those emotions and their utility within a story is just limiting your toolset when writing a story. It's silly.
Inquisition wasn't bad I guess. Kinda cliffhangery. I liked the full stop dying provides though, plus bittersweet sticks better than happily ever after.
well in fairness so was DA2 really I gue4ss until they wrapup with the last DA game of the series then that will most likely continue t obe the case wedo know though that they have another 2 games at least planned but we will see in time I guess.
to keep this on topic although I felt that the end to ME3's ending was a little weak I am happy enough with it and the original trilogy as a whole so no problems there
I don’t think the ending is very important.
First of all, most players never see it. Second, the ending is a very brief event when compared to the rest of the game.
I'd much rather the game be engaging and interesting throughout, and then the ending just won't matter. ME3's problem wasn't that the ending was bad. It was that the bulk of the game didn't offer enough to do, and the ending didn't make up for it. Only once they'd reached the end did players realize that's all there was, which is why the ending drew their ire. But I think that anger is misdirected. It's the whole game that failed them, not just the ending.
This is why DAO and Inquisition are superior games. They offered decision-making content throughout, so the endings were less important (and even fewer people saw them).
I can't really agree. Ending is something that can if not really make, at least break the game. ME3's ending before extended cut for example. If something has bad ending it makes you want to forgot whole product, bad endings have ruined many things for me.
Also I don't think developers should make their game according people who don't finish the game. I find it bit of failure from developers part if player doesn't finish game, of course that happens with every game, but it always means that game wasn't interesting for these players, that it lacked something to keep them playing. So it's quite poor mindset to have that since people won't finish the games anyways ending doesn't matter. It'll matter to those who like the game.
In a fixed narrative, I would agree that the ending can ruin it. I read and re-read the books in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series for years, until it ended badly. Now I can't see myself reading them again, because the ending was so unsatisfying.I can't really agree. Ending is something that can if not really make, at least break the game. ME3's ending before extended cut for example. If something has bad ending it makes you want to forgot whole product, bad endings have ruined many things for me.
Also I don't think developers should make their game according people who don't finish the game. I find it bit of failure from developers part if player doesn't finish game, of course that happens with every game, but it always means that game wasn't interesting for these players, that it lacked something to keep them playing. So it's quite poor mindset to have that since people won't finish the games anyways ending doesn't matter. It'll matter to those who like the game.
Also I don't think developers should make their game according people who don't finish the game. I find it bit of failure from developers part if player doesn't finish game, of course that happens with every game, but it always means that game wasn't interesting for these players, that it lacked something to keep them playing. So it's quite poor mindset to have that since people won't finish the games anyways ending doesn't matter. It'll matter to those who like the game.
Sometimes the game is bad, but sometimes players are just stupid or easily distracted.
I agree with you that they shouldn't excessively or specifically address the players who aren't invested. Everytime I heard one of those stupid soundbites about how ME3 was the best place to start the trilogy, I cringed.
In a fixed narrative, I would agree that the ending can ruin it. I read and re-read the books in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series for years, until it ended badly. Now I can't see myself reading them again, because the ending was so unsatisfying.
But I don’t think RPGs are like that, because the narrative is largely ours to create. And if it is a fixed narrative, such that the ending could ruin it, then it's a lousy RPG anyway that was ruined long before the ending.
Well, I'd say part of what makes an RPG's ending lousy is making it fixed. That no matter what you do, you can't get an outcome consistent with the narrative you're trying to make.
No idea.
Endings aren't one size fits all. It really depends on what sort of story Bioware is trying to tell with Andromeda. The most important thing is that the ending has to match the story being told and feel like it is an appropriate or natural conclusion to the story.
It is difficult to speculate on what Andromeda's ending should look like, with no concrete information on the game besides the setting.
I'm hoping ME:A isn't a save the galaxy type of story. i would like to see them take a crack at a 'smaller' story where there are still choices, consequences, and moral dilemmas, but not on the scale of civilization altering ones. A smaller story would allow a stronger/less world altering ending that can stand alone.
I think my biggest thing is dealing with cohesive story elements. An Ending has to make sense especially when you have a character following a standard than letting them go against it. Such as convincing TIM that there was no way to control the reapers then choosing to control the reapers.
I feel like they tried to go too big in the ME3 ending. They wanted your final choice to be the one that shaped the future of that world but it wasn't necessary. If they had followed through with the series one goal, "defeat the Reapers" and let the choices you'd made up to that point shape the universe post war that would have not only made more sense but given them an easier setup to work with for possible future games.
Not that giving destroy as the only option would be the only option but hinting towards the others in game prior to the end would have helped as well. We never ran into any cyborgs or individuals with any biomechanical integration which could have helped with displaying how that would be the natural evolution. The only option we had when discussing control with TIM was to staunchly tell him it would never work. He never even gave a credible reason for how or why it would.
I have no fix for starchild though I'm partial to Indoctrination theory.
Overall I would prefer an ending that fits with the overarching narrative. It doesn't have to be a final choice or even the biggest boss as long as it makes sense in the world previously presented. Don't build me a world give me rules and them break them with no rhyme or reason. It can be happy or sad but it has to fit.
Also remember that someone leaked the original ending so the one we got was a re-working so it wouldn't be spoiled........ though I do hear a lot of people saying, in there opinion, that the original ending was worse than what we got.
Didn't the leaked scripts line up with the shipped game?
I thought this was confusion born out of the "dark energy" concept also floating around at the same time.
In a fixed narrative, I would agree that the ending can ruin it. I read and re-read the books in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series for years, until it ended badly. Now I can't see myself reading them again, because the ending was so unsatisfying.
But I don’t think RPGs are like that, because the narrative is largely ours to create. And if it is a fixed narrative, such that the ending could ruin it, then it's a lousy RPG anyway that was ruined long before the ending.
Video games have quite fixed narrative as well, main story. In good RPG's player can impact it with choices, but that doesn't remove need of narrative and story that carries to ending as well. Only games where strong ending isn't needed is games that don't have clear ending and continue after main story. Then ending might not break the game, but if it's weak people will feel that the main story was lackluster.
Наверх