Since it's the first game of new setting, it should be pretty solid in terms of world state, so I'm expecting pretty defined ending.
But that would be pretty boring, wouldn't it? So "fake" endings, whether they are failures or not, could be a way to spice things up.
What would be the point? If there's any kind of sequel you wouldn't be able to continue. Seems like a waste of resources better used elsewhere.
It adds a risk and reward. Your choices have more meaning.
There are literally thousands of failure endings, however we all have reload buttons.
Well bioware is pretty experienced with failure ending as far as i know. Or should i say failure endings.
I like the idea better when its presented Suicide mission style so that if you want to play it out that way you can.
You can play it out that you lose and the bad guys win. Forget the refuse option in ME3 which was on the right track. Imagine the refuse ending merged with the galactic dark age that Destroy was originally intended to be only applied more broadly.
I dunno if that makes sense but I'm hitting add reply anyway.
Perhaps there's an idea here... a solid, cohesive ending for the basic game that allows the series to continue... and "alternate ending(s)" DLC so that the player can play it out a different way IF they want (completely optional). Files generated by the DLC would not be importable; and there could be a clear point in the main game where, if the DLC is installed, the player can select to play for the alternate ending(s) instead of continuing through the main (canon) game. The DLC would supply/sub in alternate dialogue options after the point where the player can select to go the DLC route.
Well, ME3 had 3 fail endings and the 1 victory ending left the galaxy in the crapper so if this is to be a one off game maybe they'll have 5 fail endings this time. If it's the first in a trilogy you'll probably have to wait a little longer for the L's to kick in.
But even if Shepard dies at the end of ME2, the mission to stop the Collector threat is accomplished. So from that perspective it is less than ideal, costly even, but it isn't a really a failure ending.
Really only ME3 had a failure ending, and it wasn't even packaged into the game until EC.
But even if Shepard dies at the end of ME2, the mission to stop the Collector threat is accomplished. So from that perspective it is less than ideal, costly even, but it isn't a really a failure ending.
Really only ME3 had a failure ending, and it wasn't even packaged into the game until EC.
Yeah, you're right. I mean, having Shepard and his/her team die is a shame, but they did complete their mission.
Being unable to import that save into ME3 makes it a failure in the technical sense, though. Kind of a shame because the "went out in a blaze of glory" ending of ME2 is pretty epic.
Sort of a degree thing, but when the protagonist or crew die completing their mission it is more a sacrificial ending. Outright failure endings don't make a lot of sense since failing to beat the game is the failure ending for nearly every game ever made. The backlash would be absurd, especially given ME3, if in MEA you could get to the end after beating every encounter and then the game is like "Oh wait, you actually lost. Sorry bro."
Sort of a degree thing, but when the protagonist or crew die completing their mission it is more a sacrificial ending. Outright failure endings don't make a lot of sense since failing to beat the game is the failure ending for nearly every game ever made. The backlash would be absurd, especially given ME3, if in MEA you could get to the end after beating every encounter and then the game is like "Oh wait, you actually lost. Sorry bro."
Failure to successfully complete the end goal mission does not have to equate to failing the game. For example, a failure ending (as a divergent DLC add on) could allow the player the opportunity to role play for a period of time near the end of the game as the antagonist who ultimately sabotages the protagonist (causing the protagonist to fail in their mission but requiring the player to "beat" the PC (even as they had individually developed that PC to the point the DLC diverges from the main game). This then would a failed mission ending that actually requires the player to beat the game/DLC as the antagonist.
Every combat death is a failure ending.
Stop reloading.
While, true, obviously what's being asked for is a bit more dramatic than simply getting offed in a combat sequence with a critical mission failure screen. You don't see anything playing out beyond that point. It's just death and that's it. While that's essentially truer to life, truer to life isn't precisely what people always want.
It is what I want.While, true, obviously what's being asked for is a bit more dramatic than simply getting offed in a combat sequence with a critical mission failure screen. You don't see anything playing out beyond that point. It's just death and that's it. While that's essentially truer to life, truer to life isn't precisely what people always want.
I got the Blood & Wine ending you might as well describe as 'failure' and it's pretty cool
I got the Blood & Wine ending you might as well describe as 'failure' and it's pretty cool
Witcher 3 blood and wine big spoilers.
Witcher 3 blood and wine big spoilers.
Spoiler
I like the idea better when its presented Suicide mission style so that if you want to play it out that way you can.
You can play it out that you lose and the bad guys win. Forget the refuse option in ME3 which was on the right track. Imagine the refuse ending merged with the galactic dark age that Destroy was originally intended to be only applied more broadly.
I dunno if that makes sense but I'm hitting add reply anyway.
You know the ending doesn't have to be a suicide mission to be considered worth while. This is a mission puzzle, if you will, they've used once before in Kotor. Except during that run, you only chose one player. Don't know if it could fail, as mine didn't when using Mission, but a new version could go either way. Maybe it could be like the galaxy alliance gathering in ME3 but if you don't get the right kind of faction with each species/group (enough Paragon or Renegade), *explosion sound* game over as the PC and the ARK go buh-bye. At least for that character-run anyway.
You know the ending doesn't have to be a suicide mission to be considered worth while. This is a mission puzzle, if you will, they've used once before in Kotor. Except during that run, you only chose one player. Don't know if it could fail, as mine didn't when using Mission, but a new version could go either way. Maybe it could be like the galaxy alliance gathering in ME3 but if you don't get the right kind of faction with each species/group (enough Paragon or Renegade), *explosion sound* game over as the PC and the ARK go buh-bye. At least for that character-run anyway.
This is a mission puzzle, if you will, they've used once before in Kotor. Except during that run, you only chose one player.
"This looks like a job for a wookie!" 
But as to the topic, yes there should be failure endings. And success endings. And endings with mixed results.
Oh, sure, totally. That's a good suggestion. I think the "failure" ending should be kind of easy to get, too. In some games which contain a failure/bad ending, the player has to be completely incompetent to get it, and has to purposely play poorly. What made the suicide mission in ME2 so tense was that losing your squadmates was surprisingly easy. You had to do each and every loyalty mission, upgrade every single part of the Normandy, and select the right squad members for each scenario. If you didn't, then someone was bound to die.
If Andromeda makes you work to get a good ending, then it makes it all the more satisfying.
Oh, just a little unrelated side-note, maybe don't put an entire video in your signature? Please? Thanks. You're the greatest.
Perhaps there's an idea here... a solid, cohesive ending for the basic game that allows the series to continue... and "alternate ending(s)" DLC so that the player can play it out a different way IF they want (completely optional). Files generated by the DLC would not be importable; and there could be a clear point in the main game where, if the DLC is installed, the player can select to play for the alternate ending(s) instead of continuing through the main (canon) game. The DLC would supply/sub in alternate dialogue options after the point where the player can select to go the DLC route.
<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
You want to pay for a different ending? ... Really?
Look,
The available information (leaked or otherwise) points to two facts:
1. The Helius Cluster is at the edge of the Andromeda galaxy.
2. A follow up game has the humans encounter a more powerful foe that comes from deeper within the cluster.
Alternate endings can be designed with a goal other than a binary choice. Also, it can be designed to end with political ramifications or a New Earth with poor / bountiful resources or loss/no loss of team mates/LI or with a vaccine treatment that adds youthful centuries to the humans or only the Pathfinder or a combination of those game states. The follow up Andromeda game can start from that ending point or it can start centuries later with new characters
<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
You want to pay for a different ending? ... Really?
Look,
The available information (leaked or otherwise) points to two facts:
1. The Helius Cluster is at the edge of the Andromeda galaxy.
2. A follow up game has the humans encounter a more powerful foe that comes from deeper within the cluster.
Alternate endings can be designed with a goal other than a binary choice. Also, it can be designed to end with political ramifications or a New Earth with poor / bountiful resources or loss/no loss of team mates/LI or with a vaccine treatment that adds youthful centuries to the humans or only the Pathfinder or a combination of those game states. The follow up Andromeda game can start from that ending point or it can start centuries later with new characters
They can still do all of that within a regular in game endings or any planned followup game. An alternate endings DLC would just add on even more divergent endings. It wouldn't take away anything from the main game... just pick a point within the main game and add on something more different that would not carry over into the next game. Paying for an alternate ending that entails a group of new missions to get there is really no different that paying for any separate DLC mission or quest. Just means you won't be seeing the DLC characters in the subsequent game(s) like they did with the ME Trilogy.
Retour en haut
.
