Biggest plot holes in games

wakeup

New member
Aug 26, 2012
151
0
0
there are a lot of huge plot holes in games some of which im sure a lot of people haven't picked up on yet. Id love to hear what people think are the biggest plot holes in games and by gosh there's a lot of them.
 

Rawne1980

New member
Jul 29, 2011
4,144
0
0
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
 

endtherapture

New member
Nov 14, 2011
3,127
0
0
Rawne1980 said:
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
Seconded. Also the fact that they were more blood mages, raiders, Templar Grunts, thieves and bandits in Kirkwall than actual citizens made hardly any sense.
 

Jimmy T. Malice

New member
Dec 28, 2010
796
0
0
endtherapture said:
snippety snip
Seconded. Also the fact that they were more blood mages, raiders, Templar Grunts, thieves and bandits in Kirkwall than actual citizens made hardly any sense.
Skyrim has the same problem. There are only about 200 NPCs in the towns, and you'll kill more bandits than that in a few hours dungeon-crawling.
 

crazyrabbits

New member
Jul 10, 2012
472
0
0
wakeup said:
there are a lot of huge plot holes in games some of which im sure a lot of people haven't picked up on yet. Id love to hear what people think are the biggest plot holes in games and by gosh there's a lot of them.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotHole (under the "Video Games" section)

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VoodooShark

Indeed, there are a lot of plot holes in just about every medium.
 

bloodrayne626

New member
May 15, 2008
57
0
0
Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3
during the hallucinogenic sequence where you have to kill Hoyt,
what the hell happened to all the guards?

It just irked me a little. Not enough to be an "oh my god this game sucks because it missed a few details" moment (not like I have those, anyway), but still, what the hell?
 

triggrhappy94

New member
Apr 24, 2010
3,376
0
0
The Super Mutants were the wrong color.
/Being a dick. (EDIT: I should elaberate: I'm being a dick by making fun of the Fallout purists.)

Well, Black Ops 2 is basically one big one.
 

Protocol95

New member
May 19, 2010
984
0
0
Rawne1980 said:
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
That is inaccurate. The game attempts to say "Some mages are good, some are bad and the same goes with templars". Not every mage in the game tries to kill you or someone else or just genreally be a jerk. For example Feynriel is an unfortunate apostate who will only do something bad if you indulged in some really horrible Video Game Cruelty Potential. For the templars there are a quite a few templars who are unabigiously evil. Take Ser Alrik, the templar who wanted to make all mages tranquil, which is considered by many of them a fate worse than death.
 

alphamalet

New member
Nov 29, 2011
544
0
0
Protocol95 said:
Rawne1980 said:
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
That is inaccurate. The game attempts to say "Some mages are good, some are bad and the same goes with templars". Not every mage in the game tries to kill you or someone else or just genreally be a jerk. For example Feynriel is an unfortunate apostate who will only do something bad if you indulged in some really horrible Video Game Cruelty Potential. For the templars there are a quite a few templars who are unabigiously evil. Take Ser Alrik, the templar who wanted to make all mages tranquil, which is considered by many of them a fate worse than death.
I agree to a certain extent, but I still believe that in light of DA:O, the templars vs mages plot felt very contrived. Think about it. In the tower mage origin story of DA:O, a mage uses blood magic and everyone freaks out! It was a big deal that didn't happen often! Even the fiance of the mage that uses blood magic abandons her trust of him and willingly submits to punishment for even associating with him. When you come back to the tower after it has fallen in DA:O, you run into mages that say they want nothing to do with blood magic or the rebellion that is taking place. DA:O did a good job of making you feel sympathetic to both the templars and mages while successfully making the delineation that negative actions were performed by a few bad apples on both sides.

Hop on over to Dragon Age II, and in the game's final act, every templar is order to kill every mage, which prompts every mage to turn into a blood mage. It felt so damn contrived and didn't match the tone of the original game at all. Not only that, blood magic was used at a far greater frequency in Dragon Age II. And for what reason? Didn't people fear it just as much? The writing in DA II was an absolute mess.
 

Protocol95

New member
May 19, 2010
984
0
0
alphamalet said:
Protocol95 said:
Rawne1980 said:
Snip

Snip
In order to prevent to derailing this thread I will make this post as short as I can and not limit how many times I respond. For the increaing tension I feel that this is more of an argument of perspetives and opinions and as such do not want to discuss it any further. I also wish to point out that not every mage becomes a blood mage and that not every templar want to kill every mage, of note during the templar endgame three mages believing Orsino has gone to far surrender to the templars, and as such the templar Cullen wants to merely arrest them. I apologise if my post here has not been very concrete and I would have liked to have a civilised discussion but this is an innappropriate place to do so.

In order counter this slight derailment I will post a plot hole which I believe to be of particualr notice. In Black ops 2
should you snipe Alex Mason in a non-lethal area he will turn up in the ending with Woods even asking where he has been but the game does not answer this. I felt this could have been solved with a simple handwave, such as saying he was in hiding from Menedez and came out of hiding once he was defeated or something else a person more talented at writing than me could come up with.
 

alphamalet

New member
Nov 29, 2011
544
0
0
Protocol95 said:
alphamalet said:
Protocol95 said:
Rawne1980 said:
Snip

Snip
In order to prevent to derailing this thread I will make this post as short as I can and not limit how many times I respond. For the increaing tension I feel that this is more of an argument of perspetives and opinions and as such do not want to discuss it any further. I also wish to point out that not every mage becomes a blood mage and that not every templar want to kill every mage, of note during the templar endgame three mages believing Orsino has gone to far surrender to the templars, and as such the templar Cullen wants to merely arrest them. I apologise if my post here has not been very concrete and I would have liked to have a civilised discussion but this is an innappropriate place to do so.

In order counter this slight derailment I will post a plot hole which I believe to be of particualr notice. In Black ops 2
should you snipe Alex Mason in a non-lethal area he will turn up in the ending with Woods even asking where he has been but the game does not answer this. I felt this could have been solved with a simple handwave, such as saying he was in hiding from Menedez and came out of hiding once he was defeated or something else a person more talented at writing than me could come up with.
I'd definitely like to keep it civil, so no worries there. I'll make a couple clarifications about what I said, like you did, and then drop it.

The reason I said every templar starts killing every mage is because Meredith invoked a certain power once she declared herself head of the chantry after it was destroyed. It called for the murder of every mage in Kirkwall. Every single templar that was obedient did start slaughtering every mage. Once the mages saw this, most of them resort to blood magic, including the Head Mage. The game has you running through Kirkwall killing all of the abominations immediately after the Orsino versus Meredith confrontation. "Every mage and every templar" might have been a bit facetious, but it definitely seemed like it happened to most of them.

Like you said though, we can have the discussion in another thread.

I'll also try to counter the derailment with another plot hole.

In Persona 3
everyone is supposed to lose their memory after the final battle, and they do, but then at the very end they all get their collective memory back at the same time? Seems rather convenient
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
Rawne1980 said:
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
I disagree. I felt the game did a good job of showing that Mages are people who want basic freedoms that everyone else is allowed to have and showed them as people, while at the same time is showed that the Templars are needed because the Mages simply can't be normal people. Knight-Captain Cullen said it best: "There was a time when a Templar at the door was a welcomed sight among the people. Now though, people are just as likely to slam that door in our face than help us. The image of the chained apprentice is one the mages are all too willing to use." Still, I think it could have been done a LOT better in the game and I agree that, at times, it felt like the game was telling you one thing but showing you another. I think a lot of the things that happened in that game could have been avoided if people just sat down and listened to each other.

Anyway, my biggest plot hole at the moment is the best ending in Black Ops II. The game even calls attention to it: "Where the hell have you been for the past thirty years?" A very good question...that the writers totally forgot to answer.

The original ending to Mass Effect 3 still bugs me, but I feel that has been talked about to death. Extended cut bugs me too, though slightly less. Only slightly.

Ezio's failure to act at the end of Assassin's Creed II. He just got through killing dozens of innocent guards minutes before, and NOW he decides he's done killing? Everyone who died in Brotherhood is dead because of that.
Speaking of which, in Assassin's Creed III, why doesn't Desmond pull out the Apple in the beginning? It's not like he didn't have it all the time.

Why is the Didact in Halo 4 doing what he's doing? The Flood has been destroyed. He has no reason to declare war on humanity.

Those are all that I can think of at the moment, though I know there are more that have bothered me over the years. I'm not even sure some of those are plot holes, or just bad writing.
 

RedDeadFred

Illusions, Michael!
May 13, 2009
4,896
0
0
Borderlands 2. Why don't they just turn off the new you station? You die once, you're gone for good. Better yet, why wouldn't Jack put his DNA into it so he couldn't die (after all, he has a massive amount of money)?

This never really bothered me because I don't think you're supposed to take the story that seriously (even though I actually thought the story was very good) but it's still a pretty big plot hole. I guess you could just say it's simply a gameplay mechanic and isn't part of the actual story at all.
 

wakeup

New member
Aug 26, 2012
151
0
0
one that really annoyed me that no one seemed to pick up on when it was released was gears of war 3. you spend the first half or more of the game looking for fuel for a submarine but when you get to the submarine dusty is like "don't worry there's some fuel over there". i mean what the hell the first half of the game is just meaningless. i guess it didn't matter to much as the campaign was god awful in the 3rd game.
 

LongAndShort

I'm pretty good. Yourself?
May 11, 2009
2,376
0
0
Now this is a bit out but the fact that no one ever seemed to call attention to it pissed me off. In Modern Warfare 2, why is it that the Russian terrorists, perpetrating an act of terror in Russia (a region that really has supplied enough illegal weapons to maintain several wars since the fall of communism and immediately after a civil war which would have left even more arms floating around) buy their guns from a guy in Brazil? Seriously, why the fuck would you need to buy your guns from Brazil? I know it's just a deus ex machina so we'd have a level in the favellas, but it grated me nonetheless.

As I said, what really pissed me off was the fact no one else seemed to give it the same thought. Everyone else was too busy griping about nukes in space, or were unable to comprehend why that general bloke betrays you.
 

Marik Bentusi

New member
Aug 20, 2010
541
0
0
BioShock: Just why did Fontaine pull of his elaborate scheme with the protagonist instead of bunkering him somewhere close? It just adds a crapton of unnecessary complications not only in theory, but also practically as it turns out his creation really does backfire on him.
I'd usually just handwave it, but add to that Fontaine's already laughable Saturday Morning Mustache-Twirling Doctor Evilstein Villain Out For World Domination spiel and the fact the whole farce was really just written to allow for the character freedom plot twist, I can't help but be disgusted at the terrible writing beneath and think of the plot hole as an irredeemably deep one.
 

The_Blue_Rider

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,190
0
0
Sniper Team 4 said:
Rawne1980 said:
Dragon Age 2.

All the way through it you get drummed with "Mages are good .... Templars are bad".

Yet all the way through it the Templars are helpful and polite and the Mages are trying to eat my face.....

Kind of hard to follow a plot and take it seriously when it doesn't know what the fuck it's doing itself. In fact, the Templars don't turn "bad" until the very end and even then it's only 1 person .... who turns bad because of a corrupt sword .... made from metal Hawke found.

WHO WRITES THIS SHIT.
I disagree. I felt the game did a good job of showing that Mages are people who want basic freedoms that everyone else is allowed to have and showed them as people, while at the same time is showed that the Templars are needed because the Mages simply can't be normal people. Knight-Captain Cullen said it best: "There was a time when a Templar at the door was a welcomed sight among the people. Now though, people are just as likely to slam that door in our face than help us. The image of the chained apprentice is one the mages are all too willing to use." Still, I think it could have been done a LOT better in the game and I agree that, at times, it felt like the game was telling you one thing but showing you another. I think a lot of the things that happened in that game could have been avoided if people just sat down and listened to each other.

Anyway, my biggest plot hole at the moment is the best ending in Black Ops II. The game even calls attention to it: "Where the hell have you been for the past thirty years?" A very good question...that the writers totally forgot to answer.

The original ending to Mass Effect 3 still bugs me, but I feel that has been talked about to death. Extended cut bugs me too, though slightly less. Only slightly.

Ezio's failure to act at the end of Assassin's Creed II. He just got through killing dozens of innocent guards minutes before, and NOW he decides he's done killing? Everyone who died in Brotherhood is dead because of that.
Speaking of which, in Assassin's Creed III, why doesn't Desmond pull out the Apple in the beginning? It's not like he didn't have it all the time.

Why is the Didact in Halo 4 doing what he's doing? The Flood has been destroyed. He has no reason to declare war on humanity.

Those are all that I can think of at the moment, though I know there are more that have bothered me over the years. I'm not even sure some of those are plot holes, or just bad writing.
With the Ezio thing its understandable though, Ezio's lived most of his life up until this point seeking revenge on the man who killed his family, and when he finally gets there, he realizes what a broken man Rodrigo is, and leaves him to his fate, suffering forever knowing that Ezio was the prophet, and not him. That his lifelong dream of controlling a power greater than god is moot.

Brotherhood would have happened regardless of whether Rodrigo was killed or not as Cesare largely acted on his own, essentially ignoring all advice from his father.

Its not explained very well, but there is a reason
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
Fallout 3 original ending is the worst one that I have ever encountered.

You are faced with a decision to go into a room full of lethal radiation in order to enter a code and prevent disaster. You are told it has to be you, and nobody else, and doing so will kill you.

You have the potential to have a super mutant and a ghoul with you at the end of the game. Both of them are not only immune to the negative effects of radiation, but are healed by it.

They will refuse to go into the room and enter the code because "It's your destiny" to do so.

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Sniper Team 4 said:
Why is the Didact in Halo 4 doing what he's doing? The Flood has been destroyed. He has no reason to declare war on humanity.
Yes he does, because humanity were at war with the Forerunners for a millennia before the Forerunners had even heard of the flood. They were at war because the Forerunners hold the 'Mantle', but humanity are the ones who are naturally supposed to be in charge of it. He is unwilling to relinquish control over to the humans and plans to destroy them rather than let them have it.

His hatred of them has nothing to do with the flood whatsoever.

Marik Bentusi said:
BioShock: Just why did Fontaine pull of his elaborate scheme with the protagonist instead of bunkering him somewhere close? It just adds a crapton of unnecessary complications not only in theory, but also practically as it turns out his creation really does backfire on him.
I'd usually just handwave it, but add to that Fontaine's already laughable Saturday Morning Mustache-Twirling Doctor Evilstein Villain Out For World Domination spiel and the fact the whole farce was really just written to allow for the character freedom plot twist, I can't help but be disgusted at the terrible writing beneath and think of the plot hole as an irredeemably deep one.
Because Jack was a back-up plan, not his main one. He used him in case everything went wrong, which it just so happened to do. He couldn't keep him alive and in Rapture because Ryan could have easily discovered him, which would ruin the point of him being an ace up his sleeve.

Fontaine also did not want world domination, he wanted to control the city. He wasn't supposed to be evil, he was supposed to be greedy and ruthless.