Support NeoGAF

[Lanrutcon]

Revelations 2 was bullshit. Obviously I got the bad ending.

 

[Shotgun Kiss]

I don't mind bad endings so long as they adhere to at least one of the following:

A) It's quick and easy to go back to the point that locked you into the bad ending, and reverse it. For example, it's ridiculously easy to get the bad ending in Persona 4, as you have to answer a series of questions correctly to avoid it. But it's OK, as the bad ending comes immediately afterwards, and you can reload to before that point after getting it.

B) It's blatantly obvious that you're doing something that will result in a bad ending. For example, going the Genocide route in Undertale.

 

[croten]

I agree with the sentiment that there should be no bad endings but when I think of a bad ending I think of a badly written one or and unsatisfying one. The most recent example that comes to mind is Life is Strange. Without going into spoilers I found the ending I picked to be way worse than the ending the game wanted me to pick and I guess that's the point but I don't see why you couldn't make both endings worthwhile. I don't need a happy ending or an ending where the characters live happily ever after but maybe make it more than a sad car drive. In that ending I didn't feel anything, not guilt or sadness, just a lack of satisfaction.

Then again I suppose I don't mind it so much in a visual novel like 999 so whatever.

 

[woopWOOP]

I like different endings.

But it's annoying when you got to be perfect or 100% some collectible to get a good one instead of a bad one, like with the Oddworld games. You forgot to save a few slaves? Guess you'll be getting murdered by said slaves at the end then!

 

[Nightbird]

Multiple endings are garbage in non choose your own adventure type games. see Persona 4. That was terrible.

Nah, the way it was handled in Persona 4 was great.

I simply made the wrong decisions and thus got the bad ending. Also, I am able to replay from that point and correct my mistakes.

 

[myco666]

Maybe you should read what is written on the screen During the QTE scene it you show a prompt to switch character. It's there for a reason. Maybe you are also a bit impatient? Just replay the chapter the correct way to update your save file.

I love game with different endings. It adds replay value.

Except it doesn't if you are good enough. You are trained to pass QTEs so that you won't die and the mash prompt comes first. If you are fast enough you don't see the character switch prompt and in coop player 2 can't do anything before player 1 manages to pass the QTE. It is really badly designed.

Bad endings can be great if executed well. Like Zero Escape series for example.

 

[Onyar]

I actually get the very bad ending with the Witcher 3, and I feel that it's a great ending because everything finish fucking bad but still with a great narrative quality.

 

[storafötter]

Maybe you should read what is written on the screen During the QTE scene it you show a prompt to switch character. It's there for a reason. Maybe you are also a bit impatient? Just replay the chapter the correct way to update your save file.

I love game with different endings. It adds replay value.

It is not that obvious, especially when playing CO OP. The way the battle is handled encouraged you to use Claire.

I disagree on the premise of not having bad endings, however how that game dealt with it was pretty terrible.

I love bad endings that are interesting.

 

[Lionheart]

But I like bad endings. I wish more games would try the Persona 4 aproach.
You have to earn the good ending. You have all the pieces, you just have to calm down and think for a second. No bullshit, no spoonfeed tips. Just logic.
And it also goes along with the theme of the game.

I do like the endings in Persona 4, but IIRC the combination of choices you make in the hospital(?) is kind of random. If I hadn't used a guide (well I didn't the first time I got there), I would have never guessed those or only until I had tried many times or so. Then somewhat suddenly the game comes to an end and if I didn't know there were multiple endings, I might have just stopped playing and thought: ok, yeah, that was it then. Does the game hint at there being better endings? I don't remember. It might be somewhat obvious, but still.

I'm kind of mixed on the subject. I like multiple endings, but I don't want to have to use a guide, yet I also don't want the paths to be too obvious. But I definitely don't want to have to replay the entire game with no clue on what choices I had to do differently to find the other endings. At least not if the game is longer than around 10 hours.

Edit: Perhaps those kind of games should 'secretly' save the state of your game at the important branching points and only after you have completed them, they could 'tell' you what those points were and give you the option to replay the game starting at those points. In that case, you don't have a clue when playing, you just play your way and get the ending you 'choose', but still have the option to explore the other options easily.

 

[Zafir]

Never been a massive fan. Most of the time they're just used really poorly, especially in Japanese games, where basically ending decisions can be hidden behind the most obscure and random requirements which you'd never guess. Outside of maybe Visual Novels, most of the time nothing else about the game changes either, you just get a bad ending and that's that. Now you get to sit through those 10-20hours again, with no change so you can get to this choice which you screwed up without even realising you screwed up until after.

I remember in Lux Pain on DS which admittedly wasn't a great game anyway, I got the bad ending which meant I couldn't do the last 4 or 5 chapters or something, and as it turned out I missed doing one tiny thing in a waaay earlier chapter. Now on DS you have very little saving slots, so of course I didn't have one before it. It meant I never saw what happens, because I wasn't sitting through all of that stuff again.

Frankly if you're going to do that, at least give me some way of quickly getting back to the choice, be it skip read text in a Visual Novel(most do that now fortunately) or just put me close to where the choice was made.

I've always felt the west does better multiple endings, they aren't just bad or good endings. They're just endings, which change based on your choices. Which makes so much more sense than silly arbitrary "bad, good, or true endings".

 

[Sianos]

But without bad endings... we couldn't have such gems like this!

 

[hans_castorp]

Edit: Perhaps those kind of games should 'secretly' save the state of your game at the important branching points and only after you have completed them, they could 'tell' you what those points were and give you the option to replay the game starting at those points. In that case, you don't have a clue when playing, you just play your way and get the ending you 'choose', but still have the option to explore the other options easily.

The game tells you that that day there is an important decision. And IIRC, strongly advices to save the game.
At least in Golden. I dont remember how was handled in vanilla.

 

[Camp Freddie]

I like multiple endings, but I dislike having one ending that is the 'real' ending while all the others are essentially a "you lose - new game?" screen.

For example Dishonoured did some good variations depending on your 'chaos' rating and what you did in the last mission. One ending was 'good' in the sense of 'and everyone lived happily ever after', but the 'bad' endings were just as well written, but with a ruthless/bitter theme. It was good to see how the ending reflected your playstyle.

 

[mclem]

I don't know, I like it when a game makes you work for the best ending.

I like it when a game makes you work for the best outcome.

I don't like it, however, when a game cuts off the best outcome without fair warning and/or an opportunity to redo it.

The latter feels too much like 'guess the designer's intent', and that's a cardinal sin. If it feels like you needed to read the mind of the designer to 'do things right', that's poor design.

From The Craft of Adventure, a document I cite frequently originally intended for design of text adventures but I think many of the more generalised rules can apply to other genres too:

4. To be able to win without knowledge of future events

For example, the game opens near a shop. You have one coin and can buy a
lamp, a magic carpet or a periscope. Five minutes later you are transported
away without warning to a submarine, whereupon you need a periscope. If you
bought the carpet, bad luck.

5. Not to have the game closed off without warning

`Closed off' meaning that it would become impossible to proceed at some
later date. If there is a Japanese paper wall which you can walk through at
the very beginning of the game, it is extremely annoying to find that a
puzzle at the very end requires it to still be intact, because every one of
your saved games will be useless. Similarly it is quite common to have a
room which can only be visited once per game. If there are two different
things to be accomplished there, this should be hinted at.

In other words, an irrevocable act is only fair if the player is given due
warning that it would be irrevocable.

(There are exceptions. It's fine to cut off the optimal conclusion if you make it very apparent the event that did so and it's fine to do so for games that are structured around replay - I've no such issue with Astro Boy or 999, for instance.)


All that said, I don't know this specific example. It may be the case that there's very clear flagging that you've not got the optimal result in that instance, and there may be a chance to reload for a do-over.

 

[2+2=5]

Bad ending itself isn't a bad thing(otherwise multiple endings would be bad), the problem is how you get an ending

1)in general games with multiple ending shouldn't be long because we need to replay them to see every ending

2)games with many endings should absolutely have something to let us choice the path without making us wasting time with futile parts we have already played, like in VLR

and in general, multiple endings or not, games should give us the choice to replay the level/chapter we want without replaying the entire game.

 

[Kresnik258]

I love bad endings. Tales of Xillia 2's blew my mind. Genuinely didn't even know that I was heading towards it when I made those choices.

Also kinda enjoy the brief bad endings in the DanganRonpa games - they don't overstay their welcomes but definitely get the point across.

 

[SilverArrow20XX]

I dislike multiple endings and branching stories in general. I avoid choose your own adventure style games. I put up with it when the ending is the only thing different about the game. Then I just go for the good ending and watch the bad endings on youtube. Revelations 2 pissed me off too. You completely lose out on the final boss battle just because of a single QTE multiple chapters back. Didn't take too long to replay from chapter 4 though.

I like extended endings though. Like when there's extra scenes after the credits if you beat the game 100% (when there's no missables). Makes getting 100% more satisfying.

 

[Het_Nkik]

They're fine in games under 6 hours or games with replayable chapters/levels. It's fun to work toward a better ending.

 

[Road of Ease]

The bad end of Silent Hill is probably my favorite end to any game ever. In fact my primary interest when the following Silent Hills came out is what the bad endings were!

I'm trying hard not to be too harsh here but I've always been annoyed with the "Hollywood ending" where movies always have to have a happy end otherwise audiences will be upset and ticket sales will suffer. In this age where everybody complains about the homogenization of video games, to have people complain that there needs to be MORE because they need to feel their time was well spent, boggles my mind.

Spoiler

"Thank you daddy. Good bye."
"Cheryl??? Cheryl!!!"
*dead*

This thread motivated me to find the ending to SH1, and yes, it's just as awful as I remembered (turns out the only thing I did differently the second time was

Spoiler

saving Cybill

). My issue with the ending is not the tragic nature of it and not being ~Hollywood~ enough, it's that it's shit. It's abrupt to the point where it feels like a mockery. It has no emotional punch because of that. And it feels like a punishment because the player didn't take the game "seriously" enough.

And then I looked at what I had to do to get a good ending:

Spoiler

a bunch of optional rooms with codes that lead to a random-ass vial in a random-ass motorcycle, all of this relating to a character I couldn't give less of a fuck about because he barely interacts with me during my story.

No wonder it pissed me off.

 

[LiK]

I think multiple endings add replay. Also, getting a bad end makes me curious what the good one is and I would def replay for it if it was worth it.

 

[Scrooge McDuck]

If it made sense, maybe.

Garrus look pretty sneaky, Legion looks pretty sturdy, Jack looks pretty aggressive. I should probably send them to the vent/shield/fire squad respectively.

Nope, wrong. They're all dead, bad ending for you.

It would probably makes more sense to judge what people can do based on their explicit skill set rather than from their appearance.

 

[mankoto]

Don't ever play Corpse Party OP

 

[kromeo]

I'm not a fan of it personally because I rarely play games more than once but it's clearly for the benefit of people who do, and judging by a lot of what I read on here there's a lot of them..

 

[Septimius]

Isn't this thread more about how it's bad game design to give you an ending based on an arbitrary thing you wouldn't have guessed would affect the ending?

 

[NinjamicWZ]

Isn't this thread more about how it's bad game design to give you an ending based on an arbitrary thing you wouldn't have guessed would affect the ending?

No, this thread is about how it's good game design to give you multiple outcomes based on moments of player agency that will inherently always have subjective levels of importance.

 

[Black Republican]

but the bad endings in 999/VLR are amazing!

 

[Forkball]

I feel bad for people who got the bad ending in Witcher III. The game is incredibly long, and to play dozens of dozens of hours just to get the world's most depressing ending would sour my mood on the game.

 

[_Ryo_]

OP, I disagree. Multiple paths with endings both good and bad offer a lot of benefits to the player. They can offer extra scenes, extra quests, extra fights, extra items, extra story, and more lore and understanding of the overall world of the games that have them.

And it is very easy to get around having to always restart all over, you just have to save often, in multiple files, then if you get the bad ending, just go back to where you think the deciding factor was and make different choices. Not that hard because for most games it it kind of obvious and if it isnt just read a faq upto the point where it tells you where the decision is, but dont read anything after.

 

[Mephala]

I'm with you OP, but people seem to like their freedom to (sometimes arbitrarily) fail.

Remember ME2's ending and how you could easily send your entire crew to their deaths at the last mission? That's good. /s


Really? Because going through 20~40h to get the worst ending just makes me youtube the rest to make sure I won't waste another 20h by picking the wrong choices again. Playing with a guide in tow is rarely if ever fun.

Yes really. At least for me. That isn't to say all bad endings work like this for me though. A good game with a single ending leaves me wanting more. A good game with multiple endings leave me wanting to see the other endings. Quite often my second playthrough is significantly faster as well.

You also mention needing a guide, this has less to do with games having a bad ending itself and more to do with how to unlock the better endings.

The quality of the ending Bad and Good as well as the enjoyment of the gameplay comes into consideration heavily. This is why I guess many people can run multiple playthroughs of the same game (such as TLOU) one after the other.

 

[synce]

I think bad endings are fine but Revelations 2's system was a clusterfuck. There's no way anyone would know how to trigger the good ending without looking it up online

 

[Mephala]

I think bad endings are fine but Revelations 2's system was a clusterfuck. There's no way anyone would know how to trigger the good ending without looking it up online

I agree. I also don't think every game needs them. I'm perfectly fine with RE having a single ending to be honest.

 

[Son Of D]

Final Fantasy X-2 always had the dumbest method of getting the best ending. Having to push X multiple times at a part of the game where you have no reason to and then pushing X during a specific scene in the ending.

No hints or clues about this by the way so you'd have to buy the guide or look online to even know about this.

 

[Yopis]

Don't mind bad endings at all. Really cool to have more than one in any game. Persona 4, Wing commander series, all had this option. Stop being 5 years old.

 

[SeanTSC]

I think bad endings are fine but Revelations 2's system was a clusterfuck. There's no way anyone would know how to trigger the good ending without looking it up online

Uh, tons of people in the Revelations 2 thread did it without having to look anything up. And regardless of that, it's one of the easiest endings to change ever with a simple chapter select and jumping back and forth and a non-issue.

 

[Manu]

At least with Revelations 2's ending you can replay like, 30 minutes of the game and get the good one.

I got the bad ending in Witcher 3 and there's no way I'm replaying 50+ hours for a different ending.

 

[Spieler Eins]

I only found Igavania true endings irritating. They make Revelations 2 look like the most logical thing ever.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

I still say Persona 4's "bad ending" is a more interesting end to the plot (as revealed to that point) than the eventual good/perfect endings, which IMO take away a lot of the more interesting parts of the story and turn it into something far more generic and commonplace.

 

[_Ryo_]

Yeah. I actually started playing Final Fantasy X-2 recently and after I play a while I always watch let's plays to see other people's reactions to the part I just played, so in doing this for this particular game I learned there is a fuck ton you have to do to, in order, very specifically to get the true endings. I have restarted the game 7 times from the beginning so far bc I always find out I missed something when watching the lets play

Skip reading some tutorials? Gotta start over.
Don't heal via Moogle at the start of the game? Start over
Skip a cut scene? Start over.
Don't get chest every chapter? Start over.

Game annoyed me to no end. I mean, it was already pushing it with the battle system, randomly voiced characters, mission style gameplay and limited exploration, so with the very pedantic requirements to get the true ending I just gave up. Nope fuck that shit.

 

[Dyna]

I like different endings.

But it's annoying when you got to be perfect or 100% some collectible to get a good one instead of a bad one, like with the Oddworld games. You forgot to save a few slaves? Guess you'll be getting murdered by said slaves at the end then!

If you're talking about Oddworld: Abe's Oddysee you didn't need to save every mudokon to achieve the good ending, you needed to save more than half of them which is definitely doable even on the first playthrough.

 

[IronLich]

It really depends on the game.

Visual Novels/Narrative Adventures where there are multiple choice outcomes, that's whatever. That's been around the genre since its birth. That's their DNA carried over from CYOA books from the past.

A game where you have to replay the entire thing from scratch from start to finish again... nope. Bad game design no matter how you slice it.

Even a shit game like X-Blades does this. Tap into dark magic at any point, here have the bad ending... which is something they insinuate AFTER the fact.

If you have a game with a double digit runtime, then don't waste my time hiding a favorable outcome behind arbitrary nonsense. At least in OP's example, you only have to replay one part of the game, and then immediately fast forward to the final chapter to get your better ending, not BACK TO START like it's a board game.

 

[Son Of Sparda]

Revelations 2 had a bad ending.....?

 

[ghostjoke]

I just realised that this thread is due to someone being unhappy with a Resident Evil story.

 

[formasymphonic]

See, I understand the value of having a bad ending in a game, but I have never one intentionally played a game to get its bad ending.

I can't put in a whole load of hours into a game just to watch everything go to shit. I'll just watch it on YouTube instead.

 

[djtiesto]

I don't mind a "bad end" as long as it's

A) Obvious why you got it, i.e. choosing to join the Dragonlord, or dying against Lavos.
B) The game gives you a New Game + where all your time/investment in leveling up your characters won't go to waste if you made the wrong choice (Chrono Trigger once again)

Then again one of my favorite games of all time is Valkyrie Profile, which has some of the most obtuse methods of getting the best ending you can possibly think of.

 

[Aquillion]

I don't mind a "bad end" as long as it's

A) Obvious why you got it, i.e. choosing to join the Dragonlord, or dying against Lavos.
B) The game gives you a New Game + where all your time/investment in leveling up your characters won't go to waste if you made the wrong choice (Chrono Trigger once again)

Then again one of my favorite games of all time is Valkyrie Profile, which has some of the most obtuse methods of getting the best ending you can possibly think of.

Valkyrie Profile is a special case. It's based on Ragnarok, so the "main" ending was always intended to be the bad one, with the "good" one as a hidden easter egg.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Definitely up there for whiniest complaint I've ever seen here, and there have been some major ones. Games aren't all ego boosting power fantasies, nor should they be.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

I just realised that this thread is due to someone being unhappy with a Resident Evil story.

Granted, the stories have only been bad since...CV maybe? Prior they were just rather basic and perhaps even negligible.

I'll agree with some, without having seen the ending yet in REv2, that the requirement is odd. Nothing of the event really indicates why it would effect the next chapter, especially with what happens early on in said chapter. That said, I think bad endings should still be around.

Edit: Ah, I see the big change having completed the game. However, getting one or the other ending doesn't really say hey, this is what you should do to change it. It's a really simple change despite that, so it's not bothersome.

 

[Duxxy3]

I like the multiple endings. Gives me a reason to replay the game... unless it's Bioshock 1 or 2. There is no chance I'll ever get the bad ending in Bioshock 1 or 2. Anybody that does is a monster.

 

[AtomicShroom]

I like the bad ending when it's done in the fashion of Igavanias, where it allows you to still go in afterwards and get the good ending by fixing whatever it is you missed on.

But yeah I gotta admit that it's a poor implementation when it happens at some unobvious point throughout the game, and that you have to play through the game all over again in order to make things right.

 

[SeanTSC]

I like the bad ending when it's done in the fashion of Igavanias, where it allows you to still go in afterwards and get the good ending by fixing whatever it is you missed on.

But yeah I gotta admit that it's a poor implementation when it happens at some unobvious point throughout the game, and that you have to play through the game all over again in order to make things right.

Yeah, it sucks when that happens. However, RE Revelations 2 was probably the worst possible example to bitch about when it comes to "bad ends" due to how absurdly easy and fast it is to change. OP should have picked a real example of it being done poorly.