I'm not sure about Spec Ops. Did any of those endings count as good endings?Adept Mechanicus said:
Good Endings that You Didn't Like
- Thread starter Brown Cap
- Start date
I know this one's been mentioned many times in the past, but Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening.
If you've played it, I probably don't need to say any more.
If you've played it, I probably don't need to say any more.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten about that. I see your point now.Edl01 said:
Kind of like how...
...you get to play as Luigi when you beat Super Mario Galaxy 2?
That kind of reward?
No worries, entirely understandable. I wasn't as clear as I should've been.Candidus said:Ah, pardon me. Raine asked a lot of questions that I feel are explained by a second completion, and all you said was that you echoed him. So I assumed you were in the same boat.Exius Xavarus said:
Somebody already said Dishonored? Aww...
Erm, two examples because I'm greedy:
The other...
Erm, two examples because I'm greedy:
I would say Halo 3's Legendary ending. The normal ending offers closure and seals the story up nicely, then the Legendary ending is just like saying "But wait! There's more!" ending it on the cliffhanger so fanboys can still assume that Chief is alive.
The other...
Is Silent Hill: Downpour. I got the best ending, and it's quite nice and everything. However one of the main 'antagonists' says a line which implies that you didn't kill the paedophile at the start of the game and that he had to do it for you. If this were true there would be no reason for Murphy to end up in Silent Hill and it left me with a bad taste in my mouth the second time I saw it and properly thought of it.
Yeah, the ending choices to Fable 2 always confused me.canadamus_prime said:
First up, the evil choice is money. Why would i ever choose that? Owning real estate makes money constantly generate even when you aren't playing.
Then there is the issue that you mentioned. You can resurrect all of Luciens victims except your sister, partner, child and dog OR your sister, partner, child and dog.
Why not leave out three or four tower victims and get the family back as well?
What an absurdly artificial limit.
Truth be told, I've never read the book. It's on my "to read" list now though since I want a proper ending and everyone keeps telling me it is far, far better. D:Lovely Mixture said:
I recently replayed this one on my PS3 (finished on the PC first) and I forgot how screwed up the "ending" was. No vault to a barely-there story with a big boss that's not so hard to kill. Really the only reason to play the game was for the loot yet I found myself going through half the game with the same kit. Rather have Diablo II....Kyr Knightbane said:
For me...um, what game have I finished recently? Can I just say Mass Effect 3 and be done with it? I liked the ending (maybe less the stupid Starchild) because I didn't want my Shepard to live yet I was sobbing and felt sad for weeks. It's a hero's journey after all, let's complete the Campbell cycle here! (Yes, I understand the other problems with the ending, I just choose to ignore them so I can still love the franchise.)
Curious. I can see where Sherlock, at least in this adaptation, would become popular: he solves high profile cases that get into the news, he screws around with people's perceptions (as seen in the first episode), and particularly with this episode he gets caught up in the crown jewels. If nothing else, the man who is tied to the crown jewels is warrant a celebrity status.Adept Mechanicus said:
As for Doctor Who, not all of these mysteries solved were on Earth. In fact, one whole season was devoted to E-Space which happens to be another dimension. For mysteries solved on Earth (when the Doctor actually solves a mystery and doesn't do something else), they're usually set far in the future or way in the past. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it was the New Who that brought the series closer to contemporary times whereas Classic Who kept to either the future or past. And who would remember a strange looking fellow, who may have a different face the next time you see him, that just so happened to run across your path one day? Particularly during great events when civilizations fall because, well, other things are happening!
The Doctor never was a high-profile character, even in his more flamboyant incarnations (like Four), but Sherlock loved the mysteries that brought the most spotlight, no matter how much he hated the latter, because they were fun.
Although Eleven does break the mold for the Doctor, imho, when it comes to the spotlight. Probably why I never liked him too much. Much prefer the days of Five who would rather play a cricket match or even Two with his endearing companions (still trying to finish The War Games).
Virtually any game Bethesda has made. I'm to the point where I go into the endings not expecting anything more thna a bunch of still slides and some exposition.
Raine_sage said:
I always looked at it as your character giving the rest of humanity his will to live. If you get one of the endings with either Quinna or Mercedes they say something along the lines of how your character was now in everything, a part of everything. I imagined it as him allowing humanity to forge its own path, its own destiny. Just because the Seneschal can create things, does that mean he creates all things? Does he decide who gets pregnant and who dies as a child?
I believe that what it really was was that the Seneschal's all just took what the previous rulers told them at face value. The entire premise of the game is looking for and creating your own truth, being a separate entity who could forge their own destiny apart from the unending ring, and therefore I think that your character having ended his reign as Senschal and leaving nobody in his place would be akin to giving humanity its own destiny. As the Dragon said, you won a future for the world and its people, but what that would mean would depend entirely on you.
I would assume it didn't adversely effect the world, as the sky was no longer black and stormy as it had been between killing the dragon and becoming the Seneschal.
Of course, the ending gets a retcon in NG+ when you meet up with your old Arisen and Pawn from the previous playthrough.
I believe that what it really was was that the Seneschal's all just took what the previous rulers told them at face value. The entire premise of the game is looking for and creating your own truth, being a separate entity who could forge their own destiny apart from the unending ring, and therefore I think that your character having ended his reign as Senschal and leaving nobody in his place would be akin to giving humanity its own destiny. As the Dragon said, you won a future for the world and its people, but what that would mean would depend entirely on you.
I would assume it didn't adversely effect the world, as the sky was no longer black and stormy as it had been between killing the dragon and becoming the Seneschal.
Of course, the ending gets a retcon in NG+ when you meet up with your old Arisen and Pawn from the previous playthrough.
Isn't that the concept for all achievements these days?
OT: I also didn't care for the endings for Far Cry 3
Good ending, you go home and "feel like a better person." The Bad Ending is getting to rail the native girl, and then she kills you. Credits after maybe 15 seconds of dialogue. Fun game, I loved it, but the endings were as bad as an NES game: it might have well just said "Congratulations for beating the game. Here's a cookie in the form of an achievement."
For me it would have to be Bioshock Infinite.
I mean it was a great ending, but I just wish that they'd never made it so that Elizabeth was Booker's daughter. That really killed it for me. And then I also didn't like it when Booker let Elizabeth kill him - I understand why and everything, but I wish they could've tried to put it behind them or something, maybe go to Paris like they'd planned.
Infamous 2, the good ending has me stop the beast to kill all conduits, but the evil option sounded more logical, we didn't KNOW if the RFI would cure those with the plague, the options are simply guaranteed survival of some, or possible survival of millions, which being possible implies it could very well fuck up and well, we all die....so I think saving the lives that I know will survive sounds more reasonable than risking it all for a CHANCE.
To me, there's two games where i actually loathe the good endings and prefer the "bad" endings instead.
1: Saints Row 3. Just..it feels, after all that silly, whacky crap, it does a 180 and finally delivers on some actual dramatization and characterisation. Johnny's Death was so utterly hollow it may as well not exist, it is done off-screen and has little impact, especially since it happens in the bloody introduction.
2: Metro Last Light. To not spoil, lets just say after the whole journey and taking everything into account, all the missions, all the diaries Artyom wrote etc, it feels much more complete in the bad ending. The good ending has that wierd feel of a deus ex machina and..nothing really gets resolved from it, the whole plot is still left open afterwards.
1: Saints Row 3. Just..it feels, after all that silly, whacky crap, it does a 180 and finally delivers on some actual dramatization and characterisation. Johnny's Death was so utterly hollow it may as well not exist, it is done off-screen and has little impact, especially since it happens in the bloody introduction.
2: Metro Last Light. To not spoil, lets just say after the whole journey and taking everything into account, all the missions, all the diaries Artyom wrote etc, it feels much more complete in the bad ending. The good ending has that wierd feel of a deus ex machina and..nothing really gets resolved from it, the whole plot is still left open afterwards.