Biggest plot holes in games

[SweetShark]

Starcraft 2. Jim Raynor receives a prophesy from a protoss friend of his that Kerrigan, Queen of Blades and ruler of the Zerg, is vital to defeating the Xel'naga who will return to destroy everything.

Now you might think that her current form, in command of a million billion zerg, had a good chance of defending against the Xel'naga. But no, Jim decides to invade her homeworld and use a magic artifact on her, transforming her into her original form, a twenty something girl in command of roughly nothing. She's prettier, but looks aren't everything when there's a galactic apocalypse coming.

Well, to be fair

Spoiler

By seeing the tailers for the new Starcraft 2 game coming, I think Kerrigan have still her powers

 

[SweetShark]

Some pretty nasty plot holes for the game was in the DS game "999".
But I won't even say because despise that, this game have a solid and enjoyable story to tell.
I really need to play the sequel..........but not a 3DS....

 

[Not Matt]

Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3

Spoiler

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?

Spoiler: my guess (spoilers included)

When you fight Hoyt you hurt him, A LOT. mostly in ways that could have taken a life on the spot. my guess is that Jason sees the guards as Hoyt while he's hallucinating and kill them one by one, and then move on to Hoyt as the last guy.

 

[LongAndShort]

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.

More so than that, in MW3 how does Russia have enough military forces to invade America, which has the most superior military in the world, while simultaneously invading every capital city in Europe, after American Special Forces decimated their Navy, and still send an army after Soap, Yuri, and Captain Price?

Now I've had this discussion before, and the conclusion that I came to is that a lot of people seriously underestimate Russia's ability to mobilize and field large armies. Hell, if you look at it historically for most of the Cold War Russia could field more divisions (who were better trained and drilled than are often given credit for - they learned their lessons the hard way in WW2) than the entire of NATO. Really the thing that kept them in check was the American superiority in nuclear weapons rather than American superiority in conventional weapons (and the fact that Russia always believed the US'd be willing to sacrifice Western Europe if it came to a nuclear exchange). Given that in the MW alt-universe Russia is coming out of a civil war (that seemed to include much of Eastern Europe and the Caucusus) and likely already had a lot of men mobilized - not to mention don't need a navy to invade overland - and it's not an inconceivable notion. I think that's why they're so often still used as an enemy in video games, Russia can still be a viable, realistic threat.

I tip my hat at your superior knowledge of Russian military strength.

Nah, I've just conversed with a few oddly proud Russians and International Relations students who like to stir shit to have a working knowledge of "why the USSR should've won the Cold War."

 

[LarenzoAOG]

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.

More so than that, in MW3 how does Russia have enough military forces to invade America, which has the most superior military in the world, while simultaneously invading every capital city in Europe, after American Special Forces decimated their Navy, and still send an army after Soap, Yuri, and Captain Price?

Now I've had this discussion before, and the conclusion that I came to is that a lot of people seriously underestimate Russia's ability to mobilize and field large armies. Hell, if you look at it historically for most of the Cold War Russia could field more divisions (who were better trained and drilled than are often given credit for - they learned their lessons the hard way in WW2) than the entire of NATO. Really the thing that kept them in check was the American superiority in nuclear weapons rather than American superiority in conventional weapons (and the fact that Russia always believed the US'd be willing to sacrifice Western Europe if it came to a nuclear exchange). Given that in the MW alt-universe Russia is coming out of a civil war (that seemed to include much of Eastern Europe and the Caucusus) and likely already had a lot of men mobilized - not to mention don't need a navy to invade overland - and it's not an inconceivable notion. I think that's why they're so often still used as an enemy in video games, Russia can still be a viable, realistic threat.

I tip my hat at your superior knowledge of Russian military strength.

Nah, I've just conversed with a few oddly proud Russians and International Relations students who like to stir shit to have a working knowledge of "why the USSR should've won the Cold War."

That's more than I've got, so the tipping of the hat still stands.

 

[MetalMagpie]

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.

After one of the big characters deaths, I remember turning to my boyfriend (who I was playing coop with) and saying "Was he just too cheap to pay for the New-U Station?"

I actually quite like it as a hilariously massive plot hole. Throughout both Borderlands games it is completely ignored in the plot that not only you but also most of your enemies can resurrect at the New-U Stations. (How many times did you guys kill Bonehead?) One of the few times I have ever literally laughed out loud whilst playing a game was when I was emptying out some bandit nest for the umpteenth time and a marauder said "Oh god, not again!"

 

[Vivi22]

Starcraft 2. Jim Raynor receives a prophesy from a protoss friend of his that Kerrigan, Queen of Blades and ruler of the Zerg, is vital to defeating the Xel'naga who will return to destroy everything.

Now you might think that her current form, in command of a million billion zerg, had a good chance of defending against the Xel'naga. But no, Jim decides to invade her homeworld and use a magic artifact on her, transforming her into her original form, a twenty something girl in command of roughly nothing. She's prettier, but looks aren't everything when there's a galactic apocalypse coming.

The Xel'naga that returns in the prophecy is pretty much shown to be able to control the swarm. This would probably indicate that he could control Kerrigan as well as long as she was infested, just as the Overmind was able to in the first game, negating any ability she'd have to fight back. Given that we already know Heart of the Swarm involves the now mostly human Kerrigan retaking control over the Zerg to some extent, it's a pretty safe bet that Blizzard is going the route of now that she's free from the Zerg but can still control them, she won't be able to be controlled by the dark one. But we'll have to see when the next two games come out.

 

[Laluune]

I don't really know if it's a plot hole as such or just a weak plot... Catherine.

Spoiler

Vincent finds out Catherine is a Succubus from another realm, therefore he didn't really cheat on Katherine because she technically doesn't exist in their world... umm Whatever makes you feel less guilty buddy.

 

[Korzack]

Far Cry 3 in the way that we have this protagonist who has Zero survival instincts, abilities, never used a gun, and yet inside half an hour he's wrestling knives from pirates, head-shotting their mates and knows pretty much from the off how to handle any weapon he comes across with an impressive degree of skill. But he gets grossed out by skinning animals, so it's all okay. There's another one related to the main story-line which I won't spoil, but it's never made sense to me.

 

[Windcaler]

Far Cry 3 in the way that we have this protagonist who has Zero survival instincts, abilities, never used a gun, and yet inside half an hour he's wrestling knives from pirates, head-shotting their mates and knows pretty much from the off how to handle any weapon he comes across with an impressive degree of skill. But he gets grossed out by skinning animals, so it's all okay. There's another one related to the main story-line which I won't spoil, but it's never made sense to me.

I cant commnet on the survival instincts but Jason did know how to use a gun before the game started. In a hallicination its made clear hes been to a firing range and that he was talented with fire arms. The guy who gives him the tattoo also teaches him several of those skills. It really is one of those few games where the protagonist grows into a warrior instead of just being one by trade

 

[Zealous]

Far Cry 3 in the way that we have this protagonist who has Zero survival instincts, abilities, never used a gun, and yet inside half an hour he's wrestling knives from pirates, head-shotting their mates and knows pretty much from the off how to handle any weapon he comes across with an impressive degree of skill. But he gets grossed out by skinning animals, so it's all okay. There's another one related to the main story-line which I won't spoil, but it's never made sense to me.

Jason was already proficient with firearms and had an amazing constitution (adrenaline junkie). His only real problem was getting past the mental trauma of taking other people's lives.
Plus gameplay. I'd imagine that the majority of people just picking the game up wouldn't want to have to play with shitty gunplay for the first couple of hours because realism.

Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3

Spoiler

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?

Yeah, I'd just always assumed that in every "boss fight", Jason is under so much trauma, stress, excitement, fear and is also hipped up on so many drugs that he starts hallucinating as a defence mechanism, drawing up a common theme of his past life (they usually take place in a club-ish area) and the ceremonial knife he was chasing for so long which symbolises his life on the island.

Regardless of whether or not my analysis of the symbolism is correct, Jason just goes into a killing frenzy.

 

[Korzack]

Far Cry 3 in the way that we have this protagonist who has Zero survival instincts, abilities, never used a gun, and yet inside half an hour he's wrestling knives from pirates, head-shotting their mates and knows pretty much from the off how to handle any weapon he comes across with an impressive degree of skill. But he gets grossed out by skinning animals, so it's all okay. There's another one related to the main story-line which I won't spoil, but it's never made sense to me.

Jason was already proficient with firearms and had an amazing constitution (adrenaline junkie) his only real problem was getting past the mental trauma of taking other people's lives. Plus gameplay.

Aah, fair enough - I must've not come across that bit while playing through, so far. Maybe I'll stumble across it play-through no. 2.

 

[Zealous]

Snipity snip

I know the firearm quote was during the

Spoiler

mushroom hunt mission. Just before you find the mushrooms, you're inside the hallucinated grow house of the fine doctor.

You hear Grant say that Jason's a natural with firearms or something.

 

[wolf thing]

halo 4, how did chief and cortana know who the didact was? this with the bad plot and writting in the game is what made its story total shite, it makes no sense, chief was in crystaisis for years and we had never met a forerunner before and it doesnt help that no one in the story asks any question of anykind about the forerunners. just a terrible story.

I did question this at first, on my second play through I noticed how they knew his name.

When The Didact comes out of his Cryptum, all of The Covenenant reverently say "Didact" while bowing down.

I'm not making excuses for poor story telling here, but reading the books gives much more insight into the Didact's motives.

i have read two of the books, fall of reach and ghost of onxys and they gave little on the forerunners. I dont think i should have to read the books to fully understand a story, the books and the games are two separate thing and should have self contained story's, its fine for them to both refrence each other or share characters and themes but they should have separate plots. no one should have to read books (which are very average and derivative of other, better speculative fiction) to fully understand a story in a game, if they have they have failed as story tells.

for what you have said, that is still not a reason why they would have known who and what a didact was, even if they knew what it was called they have no way of knowing what the didact did or use to do on the rings, in good speculative fiction the main characters would have asked questions, talked or speculated on what the didact was, this could all have been done as battle chatter in gameplay and would have solved one of the larger issues with the game.

there would still be the problem of the spartan 4s and there unexplained apperanse. and the lack of depth in chiefs and cortanas relationship.

 

[tendaji]

Reapers in ME3. They collect people to make more reapers. But as soon as they land they say 'Fuck THAT!' and just stomp around and fire lasers at BUILDINGS. No nanotech, biotech weapons whatsoever. Destroying all civilization in the universe. By stepping on their buildings and firing lasers at them.

Not as big as the the catalyst's logic though, ofcourse.

A double whammy completely knocking the reaper's villain status and credibility out of the park.

I opt to simply ignore that part of the story. And should anyone even mention the words "Human Reaper" I shut my ears tight and go "Lalalala can't hear you! Lalalalala can't hear you!"

What's wrong with the human reaper? It's stated somewhere that the outer husks of the reapers all look the same, but the interior resembles more of the species that was used to make it! Also it was a much better idea than Human Fetus Reaper that was a concept design, especially when you would be tasked to kill it. Imagine the Pro-Life outrage at it!

 

[Lucky Godzilla]

halo 4, how did chief and cortana know who the didact was? this with the bad plot and writting in the game is what made its story total shite, it makes no sense, chief was in crystaisis for years and we had never met a forerunner before and it doesnt help that no one in the story asks any question of anykind about the forerunners. just a terrible story.

I did question this at first, on my second play through I noticed how they knew his name.

When The Didact comes out of his Cryptum, all of The Covenenant reverently say "Didact" while bowing down.

I'm not making excuses for poor story telling here, but reading the books gives much more insight into the Didact's motives.

i have read two of the books, fall of reach and ghost of onxys and they gave little on the forerunners. I dont think i should have to read the books to fully understand a story, the books and the games are two separate thing and should have self contained story's, its fine for them to both refrence each other or share characters and themes but they should have separate plots. no one should have to read books (which are very average and derivative of other, better speculative fiction) to fully understand a story in a game, if they have they have failed as story tells.

for what you have said, that is still not a reason why they would have known who and what a didact was, even if they knew what it was called they have no way of knowing what the didact did or use to do on the rings, in good speculative fiction the main characters would have asked questions, talked or speculated on what the didact was, this could all have been done as battle chatter in gameplay and would have solved one of the larger issues with the game.

there would still be the problem of the spartan 4s and there unexplained apperanse. and the lack of depth in chiefs and cortanas relationship.

The problem isn't just Cheif and Cortana's knowledge of the Diadect, it's the Diadect and his motivations in general. The flood is defeated, the forerunners are practically extinct, humanity has not shown any undue aggression to him, yet he immediately gets back on the genocide bandwagon. It's like if FDR came back to life and ordered an invasion of Germany because they were our enemies in WWII, it's stupid.

 

[wolf thing]

halo 4, how did chief and cortana know who the didact was? this with the bad plot and writting in the game is what made its story total shite, it makes no sense, chief was in crystaisis for years and we had never met a forerunner before and it doesnt help that no one in the story asks any question of anykind about the forerunners. just a terrible story.

I did question this at first, on my second play through I noticed how they knew his name.

When The Didact comes out of his Cryptum, all of The Covenenant reverently say "Didact" while bowing down.

I'm not making excuses for poor story telling here, but reading the books gives much more insight into the Didact's motives.

i have read two of the books, fall of reach and ghost of onxys and they gave little on the forerunners. I dont think i should have to read the books to fully understand a story, the books and the games are two separate thing and should have self contained story's, its fine for them to both refrence each other or share characters and themes but they should have separate plots. no one should have to read books (which are very average and derivative of other, better speculative fiction) to fully understand a story in a game, if they have they have failed as story tells.

for what you have said, that is still not a reason why they would have known who and what a didact was, even if they knew what it was called they have no way of knowing what the didact did or use to do on the rings, in good speculative fiction the main characters would have asked questions, talked or speculated on what the didact was, this could all have been done as battle chatter in gameplay and would have solved one of the larger issues with the game.

there would still be the problem of the spartan 4s and there unexplained apperanse. and the lack of depth in chiefs and cortanas relationship.

The problem isn't just Cheif and Cortana's knowledge of the Diadect, it's the Diadect and his motivations in general. The flood is defeated, the forerunners are practically extinct, humanity has not shown any undue aggression to him, yet he immediately gets back on the genocide bandwagon. It's like if FDR came back to life and ordered an invasion of Germany because they were our enemies in WWII, it's stupid.

don't get me wrong there are many problem in the game, but the one i felt that having chief an almost non entity in the story was the game biggest crime. but you are right the didact in general was a terrible and unnecessary part of the game. he lacked clear motives and only interacted with player twice during a cutsence, he also lack any character development.

 

[BleedingPride]

Jeez, can't discuss any plot in a game these days without ME3 popping up. I mean, I get it, but still.

 

[Lucky Godzilla]

halo 4, how did chief and cortana know who the didact was? this with the bad plot and writting in the game is what made its story total shite, it makes no sense, chief was in crystaisis for years and we had never met a forerunner before and it doesnt help that no one in the story asks any question of anykind about the forerunners. just a terrible story.

I did question this at first, on my second play through I noticed how they knew his name.

When The Didact comes out of his Cryptum, all of The Covenenant reverently say "Didact" while bowing down.

I'm not making excuses for poor story telling here, but reading the books gives much more insight into the Didact's motives.

i have read two of the books, fall of reach and ghost of onxys and they gave little on the forerunners. I dont think i should have to read the books to fully understand a story, the books and the games are two separate thing and should have self contained story's, its fine for them to both refrence each other or share characters and themes but they should have separate plots. no one should have to read books (which are very average and derivative of other, better speculative fiction) to fully understand a story in a game, if they have they have failed as story tells.

for what you have said, that is still not a reason why they would have known who and what a didact was, even if they knew what it was called they have no way of knowing what the didact did or use to do on the rings, in good speculative fiction the main characters would have asked questions, talked or speculated on what the didact was, this could all have been done as battle chatter in gameplay and would have solved one of the larger issues with the game.

there would still be the problem of the spartan 4s and there unexplained apperanse. and the lack of depth in chiefs and cortanas relationship.

The problem isn't just Cheif and Cortana's knowledge of the Diadect, it's the Diadect and his motivations in general. The flood is defeated, the forerunners are practically extinct, humanity has not shown any undue aggression to him, yet he immediately gets back on the genocide bandwagon. It's like if FDR came back to life and ordered an invasion of Germany because they were our enemies in WWII, it's stupid.

don't get me wrong there are many problem in the game, but the one i felt that having chief an almost non entity in the story was the game biggest crime. but you are right the didact in general was a terrible and unnecessary part of the game. he lacked clear motives and only interacted with player twice during a cutsence, he also lack any character development.

Not to mention the final fight. Literally all you have to do is push a button. And here I was thinking the battle against guilty spark was lackluster, but at least bungie gave you control, not a stupidly easy QTE.

 

[wolf thing]

halo 4, how did chief and cortana know who the didact was? this with the bad plot and writting in the game is what made its story total shite, it makes no sense, chief was in crystaisis for years and we had never met a forerunner before and it doesnt help that no one in the story asks any question of anykind about the forerunners. just a terrible story.

I did question this at first, on my second play through I noticed how they knew his name.

When The Didact comes out of his Cryptum, all of The Covenenant reverently say "Didact" while bowing down.

I'm not making excuses for poor story telling here, but reading the books gives much more insight into the Didact's motives.

i have read two of the books, fall of reach and ghost of onxys and they gave little on the forerunners. I dont think i should have to read the books to fully understand a story, the books and the games are two separate thing and should have self contained story's, its fine for them to both refrence each other or share characters and themes but they should have separate plots. no one should have to read books (which are very average and derivative of other, better speculative fiction) to fully understand a story in a game, if they have they have failed as story tells.

for what you have said, that is still not a reason why they would have known who and what a didact was, even if they knew what it was called they have no way of knowing what the didact did or use to do on the rings, in good speculative fiction the main characters would have asked questions, talked or speculated on what the didact was, this could all have been done as battle chatter in gameplay and would have solved one of the larger issues with the game.

there would still be the problem of the spartan 4s and there unexplained apperanse. and the lack of depth in chiefs and cortanas relationship.

The problem isn't just Cheif and Cortana's knowledge of the Diadect, it's the Diadect and his motivations in general. The flood is defeated, the forerunners are practically extinct, humanity has not shown any undue aggression to him, yet he immediately gets back on the genocide bandwagon. It's like if FDR came back to life and ordered an invasion of Germany because they were our enemies in WWII, it's stupid.

don't get me wrong there are many problem in the game, but the one i felt that having chief an almost non entity in the story was the game biggest crime. but you are right the didact in general was a terrible and unnecessary part of the game. he lacked clear motives and only interacted with player twice during a cutsence, he also lack any character development.

Not to mention the final fight. Literally all you have to do is push a button. And here I was thinking the battle against guilty spark was lackluster, but at least bungie gave you control, not a stupidly easy QTE.

it was a shallow and lazy ending to a shallow and underdeveloped character, god this game was disappointing