Has the climax, ending, or resolution of an RPG ever ruined your opinion on it? I very much enjoyed FO3's story until the Lone Wanderer's father died and still tolerated it, at the very least, up until the final assault on the Enclave.
 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
If you tell a joke and ruin the punchline, you ruin the joke.
it always seems like the wasteland as an ecosystem is working fine as long as there are pip boy reapers walking around purging the filth anyway
Pillars of Eternity 1. How the frick do they make setting story around faith/the gods/ and religion and then go "lmao de godz aren't reel stoopid." Fricking redditors.
It still would have been okay, they were presented as man-made, but still very huge and monolithic. Even if they weren't inherently divine, they were created literally out of millions of souls and their composite knowledge and experiences. They were still extremely powerful and seemed to be potentially very alien to varying degrees, not unlike an ancient AI that has long outgrown the limits its creators imposed upon it.
But then PoE2 comes around and they're pretty much humans but more powerful. Which wouldn't have been so bad if they were set up to be more akin to Greek/Roman gods initially, but after the tone of the reveal in PoE1, it was kind of disappointing.
Parts of PoE2 mention things related to gods that are from before the Engwithians did their whole god-making animancy.
It's all like the gods were already there and they just insterted their soul-creations into them, to give them a human-moron in charge.
Well clearly you misunderstood or missed the reason why that’s important. The question of whether or not the gods being ‘real’ or not is posed to you. These gods may have been artificially created but they all have god like powers, spheres of influence and power and are intrinsically tied to the mechanics of the setting (Berath and the Wheel for example). It’s more a philosophical question, with no right or wrong answer. Do YOU think the gods actually being suped up mortals matters? On the one hand you could argue that it does, and everything has been artificially created and mortals need to stop worshipping the gods and start anew, that’s what Eothas thought and why he went rogue. Or you could argue that while artificial, these gods do serve a purpose in life and society. What happens to our cycle of rebirth if Berath dies? Do we get a worldwide waidwens legacy? Will all the godlikes get genocided? What untold effects would ripping the gods from the world have on the world itself? Would the ocean dry up after Ondra dies or will it become unstable and cause floods and tsunamis? Is it worth all the trouble even if the gods aren’t real?
All that’s really up to you to decide (although admittedly you can’t stop Eothas in 2 which is one of the many reasons I didn’t like that game). I feel people don’t give the overall concepts of pillars enough recognition, the dialogue can be hit or miss sometimes being great other times being subpar, but overall the world is interesting, the races are unique and the metaphysical aspects of the setting are quite good imo
The Master
>I want to kidnap everyone in the world and mutate them into a single master race. Also, anyone who hasn't been living in a vault for 80 years will be turned into a giant dumb, brutish work. Those who refuse to follow my plan will be sterilized!
President Richardson
>I want to shoot an aerosol into the atmosphere that will kill everyone on earth who hasn't been living in a vault for the past 160 years! These people aren't human, they're near humans! No, I can't tell you what the difference is.
President Eden
>I want to put this chemical in the Potomac that will kill anyone who hasn't been living in a vault for the past 200 years (even the person I'm asking to do this for me)! To this end, I'm willing to kill thousands of people who have been living in a vault for 200 years.
Caesar
>I, a highly educated mormom missionary, have developed a regressive cult of personality around a pillage economy. The only way my country can survive is if we have an enemy to conquer. I am also rapidly approaching the end of my campaign because once we conquer Vegas, we are approaching the western seaboard. My plan is doom to fail.
Father
>I want to kill random people living on the surface and replace them with machines. The reason for my plots are beyond your understanding. No, the people I'm replacing aren't usually in positions of power. They're usually farmers or peasants.
>My plan is doom to fail.
Yah because the point is that the societies which forum after the fall of the legion will one that can reason both the good of the legion and the good of the NCR and build a society that goes forward instead of backwards
>Caesar
How is it doomed to fail? They didn’t just pillage, they were slavers. In real history all great Empires we’re basically built on slaves/peasantry (including, you know, Rome)
Pillars of Eternity 2 ending sucked ass, especially considering all that talk about the autonomy of kith in relation to the gods
This. Also, it felt so weird, I was convinced sailing there would just be act II beginning, and not the fricking end of the game 20 minutes later. Kinda felt robbed, and now that I'm attempting a replay, I find I just have no energy for it.
>he plays video games for the story
YAAAS QUEEEN!!!
is that binging with babish?
Most RPGs tend to have really shitty endings.
I was enjoying Shadowrun Hong Kong to an extent, until the awful horrible ending happened.
Then i despised everything about Dragonfall but the ending was neat so lots of parts about the game were forgiven.
Disco Elysium however was a garbage game all around and the ending was the final nail on the coffin.
I never thought Fallout 3 had a bad ending, you guys are just entitled and don't want your fictional videogame protagonist to die, you can't handle sacrifice.
hong kong's ending is fine though
judging by your hatred of disco elysium combined with your praise of fo3 the only reasonable conclusion is that you're a troll or you're moronic
>hong kong's ending is fine though
The default campaign sure. But then they added a FBI adventure extra campaign in which they ruin Duncan character and you're offered two choices:
To remain a slave to the ching lady and have your brother threaten to kill you and leave
Or to let all your companions die, let the lotus gang die, abandon being a shadowrunner and go back to Seattle with your brother.
No matter what you pick you end up going back to seattle anyway because if you stay a shadowrunner the old lady sends you there.
>judging by your hatred of disco elysium
Have you considered killing yourself? pathetic troon commie.
I agree with the avatargay. Disco Elisyum is boring and commie propaganda
>let all your companions die
I don't remember this. I thought you parted on OK terms.
No. They are pretty resentful. Isobel is like "w-whatever" but the orc b***h has a meltdown and in the epilogue it's stated that the gang got destroyed.
You don't know what happened to the samurai guy or the old rigger guy.
>You don't know what happened to the samurai guy
i know, i killed his gross-looking ass
>Or to let all your companions die
Nah, it happens only when you choose to side with the whatever that chi eating thing was in main campaign.
>I never thought Fallout 3 had a bad ending, you guys are just entitled and don't want your fictional videogame protagonist to die, you can't handle sacrifice.
No you fricking moron, we're not "entitled", the problem is that the circumstances that make sacrifice the only option are completely non-sensical. Why can't Fawkes just go into the airlock? Why do the ending slides of the game deride us for not pointlessly killing ourselves when we chose the reasonable option that saved lives?
Because it would require for good ending to have 3 out of number available followers which can die on the way to Jefferson Memorial which is kinda gay.
>enjoyed playing hong kong
>didn't enjoy Dragonfall
How? Anon, are you okay?
(But yeah, frick DE, I will give you that.)
>I never thought Fallout 3 had a bad ending
Neither did I.
Were people blindsided by it or did they forget it's written the same as the 50 quests preceding it?
>Were people blindsided by it or did they forget it's written the same as the 50 quests preceding it?
They are just entitled and they think their character should get to live. They want to be a hero but they can't stand sacrifice. In their pretty little heads they can't grasp the concept that canonically the Lone Wanderer didn't have a lvl 99999 giant super mutant following him around in the ending.
It's funny because the game is biblical from the get go yet somehow all the "JESUS BE PRAISED" propaganda flew over atheists heads and when confronted with the decision to die for the greater good they go full "NOOOO NOOOOOO I WANT A HAPPY ENDING BUT I DON'T WANNA DIE NOOOO REEE!"
>In their pretty little heads they can't grasp the concept that canonically the Lone Wanderer didn't have a lvl 99999 giant super mutant following him around in the ending.
Then why make it possible then ? Its just the writers who didnt thought that their lone wanderer would be alone or have a Mutants/Robots in their party.
>Then why make it possible then ?
Gameplay, you stupid frick. Same as how the Lone Wanderer didn't actually have a console of commands in which if you write TLC you can fly.
>Same as how the Lone Wanderer didn't actually have a console of commands
Thats besides the point, the game allows you to have followers. One of your followers even helped retrieving a McGuffin in a Vault full of radiation. Now he says its your destiny to have a nice day instead of doing what he did a few hours ago.
I would've agreed with you if there was no dialogue about that but there is and the writers were well aware of that plot hole.
Now stupid frick. Tell me again, if that was the point to sacrifice yourself, why did they even allowed you to have followers immune to radiation in the first place ?
When they could've simply have a script/bullshit reason to have your followers helping fighting outside of the purifier the horde of Enclave with Liberty Prime and the Lyon's Pride.
>anon, here's a gun, have a nice day in the head so that the villain will be distracted and we can tie him up
>no, you can't shoot the villain, that would rob you of your sacrifice and keep you from being a true hero, stop trying to sidestep your destiny
>your options are only to have a nice day in the face, or to shoot me in the face, nothing else is allowed, also the omniscient voice will call you a coward if you don't have a nice day
> Dude dude having to sacrifice yourself to purify water for the entire Wasteland and save hundreds of people's lives is totally like being stupid and shooting yourself instead of the villain haha!
moron.
>purify water for entire wasteland
>lone mutant walks in, nukes water purifier for lulz
>raiders warparty being of the business speculating on pure water rolls in, nukes the purifier
>1000 other same scenarios
Yeah, nah
Having to stupidly sacrifice yourself for no reason is a lot like stupidly sacrificing yourself for no reason, yes.
It's not a stupid sacrifice, it's actually noble, makes sense and the entire story was built up for it. You're just entitled and don't want your troony Lone Wanderer to die.
Don't play games in which you are a good guy if you hate everything being good stands for.
>it makes sense!
no it doesn't. Grass is green, the sky is blue, and Fallout 3's ending is shit. There's nothing you can do to change this anon
Do you know what roleplaying means, homosexual? Frick off, and die from monkeypox already.
> Well, canonically...
Who- What? Canonically? Who gives a shit about canon, you dense frick? Three of the companions provided are immune to radiation and one is a literal slave that follows orders no matter what. The mutant is canon because his ability to shrug off fatal doses of radiation is a crucial plot point earlier in the main quest, and him offering to join you is an unskippable, scripted event that you'd have to be a moron to reject.
> I don't care about the story and what makes sense
> but i also care about the story you dense frick!!!
No.
You're gonna use companions that shouldn't be there? Fine. Don't complain when your game doesn't make sense. Go open consle and write "killall", you can do it in game, so of course it happened in the story.
moron.
Multiple companions are literally immune to radiation you moronic Black folk.
People are upset at the ending and think it's bad because the ending makes zero sense if you have any of the three in your party, which makes it a bad ending.
Fawkes gets mentioned more than the others because you literally save him from being eaten and he won't spend 5 seconds to go flip an off switch for you when it means your death, for no reason.
You didn't canonically take radiation immune companions with you in the end. Simple as. Having a giant mutant walking right behind you in places like the Brotherhood makes no sense.
>Disco Elysium however was a garbage game all around and the ending was the final nail on the coffin
Yeah and I was enjoying the game too until you cross over to the beach area and it got worse and worse and by the end of the game I hated it.
Me too and even if the ending sucks who cares, I'll be called agay for this, but IG every game I play (if it has a story) well my objective is finishing the game from start to finish, but fallout 3 was the first RPG ( I was like 13/14 when I first played it when it came out, I was bought from the commercial on tv) That made me notice for the first time the old saying
>The trip is about the journery not the finish line
I didn't liked it when I bough it for Xbox that the ending was there and I couldn't continue after activating the jefferson memorial, but loved and made me notice for the first time how I progressed as a character, I mean other games when you finish it just finish, Fallout is genious for me because it trace back your steps and see's it from another point o view, the in game point of view of what you done in your playthrough and eencorauged me to replay it even more. Now I have agood pc, the game of the year edition and a bunch of mods. Fallout 3 is not the best of the bunch as a RPG but is iconic and teached me how to enjoy and play RPGs.
Yeah, the most extreme example for me that comes to mind is Planescape: Torment. More especifically how the game forces you to either kill your mortality, or convince it to return to you, so that you go to your punishment in the blood war, with no option to even try to make peace with your immortality, or just keep on the run, or any other thing that isn't "I will work very hard to make sure that I'm punished possibly for eternity".
Huh? You can also destroy yourself and your mortality for good, no afterlife.
Yeah, but basically there is no ending about "Now that I understand the situation, I guess I just prefer to really be immortal", unless you count literally just stop playing and headcanoning.
bloodlines, tyranny, disco elysium, mankind divided
Bloodlines' ending areas suck, but the finale itself you OPENED it, right? is perfect for such a story.
>tyranny
It's a prologue, blame Fergus
>bloodlines
I agree with
the actual ending gameplay is a fricking slog, especially if you built a character that either wasn't combat focused or didn't use the best weapons (brawler chads where you at?) but I liked the actual ending.
I chose a dialogue choice that I THOUGHT was me merely telling LaCroix to frick off, so I opened it entirely accidentally
Most rpgs fall flat with their endings. It is either mundane kill dark lord bullshit or out of nowhere click one of three buttons bullshit. Great rpg (witcher3, aod, new vegas) should make player want to work towards better/desired endings clearly showing them what they can get instead of serving them unwanted shit on the plate (mass effect/tbh sex/fallouts).
Yes, you posted it. FO3's finale is just the fricking worst. Pretty rare occurrence though.
Plenty of RPGs have bad endings, what are some RPGs with good/satisfying endings?
>2kb jpeg
Actual fricking israelite.
I know you are but what am I?
Stop being a stupid 2kb israelite. I caught you in 4K, homie.
I liked witcher2 ending and me2 suicide mission if you can consider that an ending. Something you can heavily influence to be in your favor. Was also surprised by witcher1 twist (well, both twists, including detective) and arcanum.
Arcanum, Fallout 2 and Age of Decadence got really satisfying endings.
Fallout2? You cant ally with enclave. Its a shit ending.
Enclave is overrated as a faction, now destroying Vault City, making the NCR fascist, having the oppresed humans winning against the Mutants and making the Den as slaving hub in one playthrough now thats satisfying.
Maybe but I want to ally with enclave and go on a mutant slaughter with a frank
But you’re both mutants as well
NWN2:MotB
Xenoblade Chronicles X
the game was amazing. awesome characters, art, atmosphere, music, exploration, mechs, etc. the story was intriguing too as the game kept building up all these mysteries to be solved . . . and then at the end it was like, "Plot resolution? what is that? Peace, out!"
>hates DE
>likes FO3
i hate both
That's consistent, so you're not cringe like OP.
Persona 5
Game was so good until then. Dragged on a bit but it's an RPG whatever with that, damn the ending was cringe
Morrowind. I wasn't allowed to ally with my buttbuddy Ur-Dawg, even though it was teased throughout the game.
Cut content. Ran out of shekels. There's a mod for it though.
Dark Messiah's endings bugged me. They are way too short and don't really clear up what happens to any of the characters or the main town. I am almost tempted to play Heroes of Might and Magic 5 as the plot ties into it.
Fallout 3's ending was good. The only problem with it is that people keep bring Fawkes with them, so they end up ruining the ending for themselves and start blaming Bethesda for something they did to themselves.
cut it out samegay, stop trying to excuse Bethesda for their blatant plot holes
Everything in my post is correct. They bring the "plot hole" in themselves by bringing Fawkes with them. If they didn't bring Fawkes with them, then they won't have anything to complain about.
>DURRRRRRR DID YOU KNOW THAT IF YOU IGNORE HOW THE STORY MAKES NO SENSE IT ACTUALLY TOTALLY MAKES SENSE???????1
That's not what I said at all. What I said was don't bring Fawkes along then you have no reason to complain about the story.
Well just don't bring anything of them, then you have no reason to complain. Simple.
No, your post was incorrect in all regards. Fallout 3's ending is bad, and putting the blame on players is ludicrous. The game introduces Fawkes as an option to walk into the irradiated GECK chamber to retrieve it for you, so when it then hands him to you as an overpowered companion moments before the conclusion it's only natural to perform essentially the same task again. Then even if you ignore him, the game also gives you a robot who's immune to radiation, and a ghoul bound to you by a contract he cannot disobey, and both tell you to frick off if you ask them to press a few buttons. And again, if your game falls flat on its face because the player made the "wrong" choice of bringing in a specific companion the game foists upon them right before the scene, that's the game's fault.
don't even bother arguing with this fricking moron anon, you can't get through to someone who actually thinks Fallout 3's ending was good
Shadowrun: Dragonfall. "Bad" ending specifically.
>get back to the manor
>find Vauclair
>he says he wants to kill dragons
>agree with him
>your crew turns on you instantly, no extra dialogue, the only way to survive after admitting Vauclair has a point is pretending you were just joking
>can't convince him (and offer your help) to devise a way to disseminate the virus without siccing Feuerschwinge on Berlin, even though you can convince him to give up
>apparently there are horrors out there that dragons were apparently keeping at bay
>dragons keep it a secret, even though this knowledge could help them further cement their rule
>the game doesn't do anything to inform you of their existence, even though it has no problem with showing something very rare in-universe like intelligent ghouls
>to add insult to injury, if you'd wait 3 years with killing the dragons, the whole thing would turn out okay. The only reason why horrors wouldn't cross early is because Dunkelzahn sacrificed himself to stop Aztechnology ritual in 2057
Not the opinion of it but Disco Elysium ruined the endings of all other games for me