After The Last Main Story Quest...

[Jojobobo]

So, after the last main quest do you still want to be able to adventure? Personally, I would as I don't like feeling like the world stops once the last quest is done. However, this might not work with some endings (those where you character ends up in another dimension, an apocalypse occurs or that sort of thing) and it can sometimes make the ending less climatic (the ending slides of the Fallout series of how you changed the world certainly wouldn't have the same impact if you could strut around the world afterwards). Also to make this work the devs would have to put time aside to make people react to the events at the end of the game (IIRC one of the main reasons JE Sawyer didn't include it in FO:NV), which is made especially difficult depending on how many different endings the game has - but hey that "enhance the whole game" fund has to go somewhere right?

 

What do you think?

[UncleBourbon]

I'd like to see some post-ending adventures - especially that ability to go do the mega dungeon afterwards. I think an important component of that, though, would be having the NPCs react to the ending - even if they aren't aware of the player character's involvement.

[limith]

I would like a NG+ of sorts. There is a JRPG that I played recently which has 3 branching main plots and customizable NG+ options (carry over levels, carry over items, carry over gold, carry over achievement unlocks, enable NG+ maps, enable NG+ quests). The replayability for it was great since on each NG+, there are additional characters and maps and quests you can unlock that are only available in a NG+ (and additional new unlocks for the 3rd playthrough) as well as benefits such as armor benefits (1st playthrough you can choose 1/3 bonuses for an armor upgrade, 2nd playthrough you can choose 2, third playthrough 3). Each map also has a challenges option for completionists (wouldn't be bad, similar to the full sync option in Assassins's Creed series) with unique item rewards.

 

A dynamic ending would be good of course.

Edited October 23, 2012 by limith

[Jojobobo]

Sorry, forgot about NG+, should have really stook that in the poll too.

[ScornAUT]

Depends on the campaign's overall length but more content is always welcome; and NG+ could also be a good thing as long as the whole game isn't designed around that idea like most ARPGs.

[Parallax]

I'm really divided on this question.

 

On the one hand, I do certainly like the idea of being able to travel and do things once the main quest is done. It adds to the feeling of the created world as an actually existing place, and allows for players to have greater choice how they go about doing the quest (wanting to do the plot quest before tying up some side quests, rather than having to do it the other way around).

 

However....well, I played and completed Skyrim not too long ago. I had a long and boring summer with little to do, so I played it a fair bit, as I do love exploring in a computer game. After getting my character to about level 40, I decided to pursue the main quest to completion and then go back to the others once I'm done. Only, I didn't. After completing said quest, some of my enthusiasm for the game seems to have dwindled, though of course there are other reasons why I haven't gone back (illness, work commitments, other games). But at very least, I think some of that is because I did something I don't normally do, and pursued the main quest before tying up the side-quests I was interested in.

 

It depends on what the main quest is, as well. If it's something of world-threatening proportions, or has some kind of very large impact which changes how the world is, I kinda think such a plot, if not requires it, certainly builds up tension by it being the final quest you undertake. Everything else is done, every last possible resource, character, spell or weapon that could have been acquired has been. You're never going to be more ready than you are now, and there is no going back. This is it, the final and ultimate challenge.

 

But there is no guarantee the main plot is going to be of that kind. And perhaps, with the main story, whatever it is, allowing the game to continue once it is over would work.

 

There is also the question of how exactly the expansion pack is going to work. Perhaps the expansion will take place after the end of the main quest and allow for returning to old areas while pursuing this new storyline. I wouldn't be adverse to that, actually. Although equally it could be that the expansion is integrated into the main game, much in the way Tales of the Sword Coast was, in which is something of a different matter, of course.

 

I guess what that wall of text is saying is that it's too early and I have too little information for me to say one way or the other which I prefer.

[Espadon]

It really depends on the game. I think it's hard to say when i haven't even tried the game yet. But it's rare that i want to continue playing after beating the main quest. This is particular true in story driven rpgs. If the game was to keep me interested, it would probably need plenty of guilds and sidequests, and they would need to be close to the main quest in quality. Even so, i usually prefer to do all those things before i beat the game. Obviously, it also has to make sense. The world after the main quest has to reflect the ending. My character would have to be alive, my party would still need to be together, or atleast most of it, and i should be able to see the consequenses of atleast some of the choices i made during the main quest whenever it makes sense etc.

 

So, after the last main quest do you still want to be able to adventure? Personally, I would as I don't like feeling like the world stops once the last quest is done.

 

That's not how i look at it. To me, a strong single player roleplaying game is kind of like a virtual novel, as much as it is a second life. So when i finish a game, it feels more like finishing a good book. It can be bittersweet of course, but every story has an end. Also, i think games with a clear and meaningful ending has more potential to stay with you long after you're done playing as opposed to games where you just keep playing untill you get tired of the game. This isn't necessarily true of course but i think the potential is bigger when the developer doesn't also have to worry about how the world is gonna react to the player after the ending. Besides, we already know there will be atleast one expansion and perhaps even new games where you can import your character, so it's not like it's completely over when the closing credits roll.

[Shaz]

For me, it really depends on the story. Sometimes a story wraps everything up, or makes it so that continuing to play would be severely meta-gaming or just unfitting (the hero - you! - sacrificed yourself to save the world, but you can continue playing as long as you want, if you just ignore the fact that you are supposed to be dead!).

 

I love being able to continue wandering whatever world I'm playing in, because there's plenty of times I've completed a book or a story but didn't feel like I was personally 'done' with it yet, or didn't feel ready to walk away from a world and characters I got attached to. This is particularly true in games, where I might not have completed everything, whereas with a book I've at least read every word, which makes it not as bad to put it down and walk away from as it is with a game I'm 'not finished with'.

 

So it all depends on if it makes sense to be able to continue playing, and if it would be easy to allow us to continue playing. Does the Main Story Quest work alright if it's completed before other things, and allow the player to continue with minor quests after? Or do you really need to wrap everything up before finishing the Main Story Quest?

Edited October 23, 2012 by Shaz

[Blackstream]

As others have said, it really depends on the story. Chances are, since they are going IE style which will be a very linear storytelling style, the end of the game will be such that you really can't just go adventuring more.

 

Really, I wouldn't want a game like this to have post game content unless it was actually harder and more challenging than the main content. Skyrim has that advantage of enemies leveling with you so you can continue to play and have it be fun. But a game like PE, the quests would likely just be mopping up what was left, which won't be very fun unless there's an uber bonus dungeon to do or extra end game content unlocked or something. Who knows what they're planning with the expansion(s). Could be anything.

[Tychoxi]

I'm kinda ambivalent, but I prefer for the game to just finish. In the past I have always wanted to play a game where the world continues after you finish it and you get to witness the changes in each town and even get some small interactions or quests... but in the end I think that even if they were to dump resources into doing that it would just feel sterile and instead of going out with the bang of the endgame you go out with a limping meh... I say we save the witnessing of "changes" in the world for the expansion! And the sequels!

 

I would like a NG+ of sorts. There is a JRPG that I played recently which has 3 branching main plots and customizable NG+ options (carry over levels, carry over items, carry over gold, carry over achievement unlocks, enable NG+ maps, enable NG+ quests). The replayability for it was great since on each NG+, there are additional characters and maps and quests you can unlock that are only available in a NG+ (and additional new unlocks for the 3rd playthrough) as well as benefits such as armor benefits (1st playthrough you can choose 1/3 bonuses for an armor upgrade, 2nd playthrough you can choose 2, third playthrough 3). Each map also has a challenges option for completionists (wouldn't be bad, similar to the full sync option in Assassins's Creed series) with unique item rewards.

 

A dynamic ending would be good of course.

 

I utterly abhor the "unlocking" of things via second (or third!!) playthrough. It just feels like the game is punishing me for... not having played it yet?? B- but... I just bought the damn thing! It's not my fault I haven't finished it yet! For you, I would finish ir a thousand times, and replay it a thousand more... but I can't do that before getting the game! You expect the IMPOSSIBLE. Oh, my Gods! Why?! I just, I can't... why can't I ever please you? What do you want FROM ME?!! Huh?!!

 

Ahem, so, finishing the game is reward enough I say! Seriously think about it: in your example you are not being rewarded with some candy, you are being "rewarded" with features that should have been there in the first place! I remember in Dungeon Siege 2 (it's a very good game, no matter what you people say!) you had to finish the game like twice before you "unlocked" all the party-member slots, that's just plain wrong.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Tychoxi

[Larkaloke]

Ambivalent. I do not mind if I am able to keep adventuring after the main quest is over, but I never have actually done it when it is an option unless a new expansion comes out -- and that, of course, can happen even if you couldn't otherwise explore after the main quest.

 

I consider the whole "New Game +" thing to be more a question of the ability to export and import characters than of whether or not one can continue playing after the main quest is over, but said export and import function would be a nice thing to have for the harder modes.

[Terror K]

For me it depends purely on the form the story takes. If it makes sense for my character to continue on post-ending, then yes... I'd like to be able to play on and do sidequests and other things afterwards, but I'd also want the world I'm in to reflect that the main threat (or whatever the main plot involves) has been resolved. If the ending and story doesn't suit an open-ended approach where my character can keep going, then I'd prefer it just end, and I can save other playthroughs for a more completionist approach if need be.

[nikolokolus]

I voted "no" but I suppose I'm somewhere between there and "ambivalent." I've never seen a game with a strong narrative focus do this and have it work. However In an action game, NG+ is fine and for a game where exploration and "sandboxing" are the thing, then I guess it's fine, but for PE? I'm just not getting the vibe that continuing the game after the main conflict is resolved is going to be optimal.

 

Whatever, it doesn't really matter I guess.

[Striky]

I would welcome it - it worked in Fallout 2, and NPCs did react somewhat to the events, at least in New Reno and VC, if I remember correctly. Plus, I got my character to level 94 or so just wandering the wasteland.

 

However, if the story is something like Torment, then it wouldn't really make sense. I trust the devs will consider pros and cons and just do what will work.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Striky

[AgentOrange]

No, as a narrative focused game I want there to be a clean ending to the character's story. I don't mean the ending itself needs to be clean cut and easy to understand, I'm fine with ambiguity, but I don't want the game to be dragged on in an effort to allow the player to "tidy up" loose quests and such; it always ends up lessening any impact the ending may have had when you prance around doing odd jobs afterwords. I thought New Vegas and KotOR 2, and some other games I can't think of, did it fine, where there is a point where it becomes very clear you are on the path of no return, and that is your chance to finish up anything that needs taking care of.

[Eldmore]

Yeah like some heartfire expansion, marry a women and turn her into a vampire and adopt children! No please don't put anything like that into this game... Once I finish reading a book I close it unless I want to read it again.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Eldmore

[Gyges]

Sure, but only if i get an almost insurmountable task. Like one last monstrosity in the mega dungeon, or a puzzle solvable only by a key element found with the last boss.

[vv221]

I want an epic ending, and have to wait for P:E 2 (to where I will be able to import $CHARNAME)

I don't feel frustrated at the end of BG 1 when I kill Sarevok and the game ends: my task here is done, everything else is trivial! If I had felt otherwise, it would have mean that's the ending was not perfect.

If there is something I missed in this playthrough, I will still able to do it in the next(s).

[Jarmo]

I voted "no" because I dont want to do that. I'm done when "the story" is done.

But its not like I'd actually get my knickers in a twist if the option is there. I'm just not going to use it.

A bunch of RPG's have had the option and I never used it.

 

What I do want is the last quest followed by the big the end, roll on credits with some epic music.

If there's a question of "do you want to keep adventuring" after that, it's all the same to me.

 

What I don't want is *pling* "main quest complete + 25 000 XP"

with a note of "you can now export your character or keep adventuring".

 

Give me the proper cinematic ending and if someone wants to continue after that, it's no hair off my back.

[Labadal]

If it makes sense from a story point of view, why not? But I can't say it would bother me if I couldn't. It wasn't an option in most of my favorite rpgs.

[Pshaw]

This is tough because it depends on how the game is made. In most cases I'd prefer it end and go to an epilogue. Preferably a DA:O type epilogue where consequences of my actions are recounted and I get to find out what happened to my party members but I digress. This may be largely because I do a completionist play-through the first time and every time. I do everything available to me before continuing on main story missions so when the game is over for me I've already completed all the content. As such I'd rather have a nice satisfying ending than the ability to wander around the world exploring things I've already explored.

 

However I totally understand people wanting to still be able to explore the world if they didn't see everything or if there are challenge modes of some sort to complete afterwards. So long as the main character doesn't die in the ending or the whole party disbands after the mission is completed I don't see any reason why you can't have a nice epilogue and still be allowed to explore and adventure afterwards. After all an epilogue explaining the long term results of your actions doesn't mean you can't do more adventuring in the short term.

 

Gun to my head if I have to pick one or the other, unless we're talking about more sandbox games like Fallout 3 or the Elder Scrolls series, I'd rather have the game end.

[LadyCrimson]

In action-loot-hunt games, I almost find it a must because I want to be able to continue to hunt for that random phat loot with my high level chrs.

 

Typically in RPG's however, I don't care much one way or another. It sounds good in theory to continue playing, but since I tend to be the sort of player who tries to find every nook and cranny the first time through to begin with, there's usually nothing much left for me to do in that regard. And if I want to find out what would happen with other quest choices etc. I either play again or load an earlier save etc. But I don't mind if the option is there, as long as doing so doesn't invalidate the ending of the game in some paradoxical way or something.

[SunBroSolaire]

I would like a NG+ of sorts. There is a JRPG that I played recently which has 3 branching main plots and customizable NG+ options (carry over levels, carry over items, carry over gold, carry over achievement unlocks, enable NG+ maps, enable NG+ quests). The replayability for it was great since on each NG+, there are additional characters and maps and quests you can unlock that are only available in a NG+ (and additional new unlocks for the 3rd playthrough) as well as benefits such as armor benefits (1st playthrough you can choose 1/3 bonuses for an armor upgrade, 2nd playthrough you can choose 2, third playthrough 3). Each map also has a challenges option for completionists (wouldn't be bad, similar to the full sync option in Assassins's Creed series) with unique item rewards.

 

A dynamic ending would be good of course.

I love NG+. If they let you carry levels over, that would fee them up to make some really brutally hard sections and hidden content, because even the less hardcore players would have the chance to clear it in NG+.

 

I'm also a huge fan of unlockable content, but I think ideally any content should be possible to unlock on the first play through. I don't love the idea of being forced to play three really long campaigns to collect everything.

[kabaliero]

i should be able to run my stronghold after the game is done

maybe some random quests a la skyrim

some random mongolian hordes tryin' to BREAK DOWN MY SHCITY WALL!

and, well, you know

just to keep a guy busy

 

some hidden ultimate bosses a la FF Weapons

an arena maybe with "the longer you stand, the harder it gets" mode

some random threats to the village folk u care about

or to your treasury and slaves livestock, if u don't

some after-main-plot-only books to find, stories to read

like in Fallout 2, but not cheaty stuff

just some little fun glittery prizes

to take time and wait for an expansion or a mod or a DLC c:

 

just... nice things...

 

edit: oh! oh! and! dear lord, ofcourse: an artifact collection! gather them all around the world, hard to find, hard to get, through people, through doings, acts or certain inactivity; and, say, to get them all, u gotta go through hell which by no means will be possible to complete by the end of the main plot

 

so full of ideas sometimes

every dev i meet hates me for that

Edited October 24, 2012 by kabaliero

[Katrar]

It seems that a game that will probably have expansions (or at least one expansion) and maybe some kind of dlc in between (just speculation, don't shoot me lol), might benefit from a "credit roll" upon completion of the game then a dump back to the world to finish side quests, explore, be able to take advantage of expansion/dlc content, etc.