After The Last Main Story Quest...

[Kaldurenik]

This is hard to say... We know nothing about the plot except that the main character will have something happen to him/her. We dont know if its even possible for the main character to continue with his/her adventure... For all we know (s)he might die. Also i guess that they will do something like BG where each character get their text / voice explaining what happened to them after the end. If that happen you cant have your character walk around doing whatever.

 

 

Also not a huge fan of NG+...

Edited October 24, 2012 by Kaldurenik

[GhostofAnakin]

Generally, I just prefer it if the game were over when the last main story quest is completed.

 

I've yet to play a game that kept my interest after the main story. Usually all that's left is minor quests that I need to wrap up, which typically aren't enough to keep me playing. I tend to just start a new play through instead.

[-Zin-]

Dragon Age isn't perfect, but it had many right elements to an epic story. You do a lot of stuff, working towards one greater goal. There are side-quests, but they don't overshadow the main goal. In fact, the main quest has a lot of optional things you can do or ignore entirely, but if you ignore it, you probably won't feel as satisfied in the end. If you invest into the companions, the characters, and the story, then you'll get emotional and intellectual value from the game. It's satisfying seeing all the work you have done play out in a rewarding outcome you've been working towards. It's because of you that the Kingdom now thrives.. or is in shatters.. But you did that. And you worked for it.

 

After Skyrim was completed I didn't feel there was much to be done. I had completed EVERYTHING before the main quest... Not that I had to. The side-quests had nothing to do with the main-quest, and I often forgot about the main-quest because it didn't feel that important... Neither did the side-quests. It was all just... stuff.. Well congratulations Skyrim. You managed to make a dragon threat seem dull and forgettable.

 

To quote Egoraptor: Think of it as comparing a high class desert to a bag of chips. The high class desert being a well-told story that tugged a little on your heart strings, versus the bag of chips that is just designed to go on forever even though you don't want/need more. In the end, you'd value a high class desert because even though what you had was shorter, it had greater complexity and made you notice the finer details. You felt different after tasting it. Or you could just be a ****ing pig and eat it all.. Om nom nom nom :D

 

But for me: Have an ending. Pick it up where you left in the expansion or the sequel. In the sequel I would like it to be the same character too.

[Halberd]

I don't really care much about exploring and doing things once the game is over. If the storyline is alright for it and they can do a good job at it then sure.

 

I would much prefer it though if they just had post-ending adventures/quests/content. Maybe this would have to be a DLC which some of us detest but it really depends on the cost and how much content we are getting and etc.

 

For example the Shadow Broker DLC for Mass Effect 2 was very much worth the money I spent on it.

[Carmelle]

It's a tough call...

 

I generally like to be able to finish all the quests in whatever game I'm playing. In Skyrim, I tried to go around and finish as many side quests as I could before completing the main story line (and I did a hell of a lot of them). But after a while, I really wanted to know what happens in the main line, so I went and completed it. Then I barely touched Skyrim again afterwards. Partly since nothing really seemed to change in the world after completing the main line. Those guards are so mean to the savior of the world I suppose it was just odd that this amazing quest, that was so incredibly important, did nothing. But also, the side quests were mostly so minor (after having completed all the main arcs) that I just felt like I had nothing else left to look forward to after completing them really.

 

In Mass Effect, certain quests become unavailable as you progress in the main line. So this meant that every time I completed a main story line quest, I would go around and search everywhere for any possible side quests, so I could complete them all before going on to the next story line segment. In ME3 where there were so many side quests, and doing this became such a chore, after a while I got tired of it and stopped; I've still yet to finish ME3 (though that's probably more a factor of work+school at this point, but still). If it was easier or quicker to discover the quests, without having to go through umpteen loading screens between each area (run between levels in map each with a loading screen, load into ship, load galaxy map, load destination cluster, load destination planet, run to and load each planet level, run around all of each level and see if any npcs wanna talk to you, get back to ship, repeat for other planets), I'd have probably been ok with it. But it just felt like I was spending more time running around for the side quests than actually playing the game. At the same time, I really enjoyed all the content and didn't want to miss any.

 

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed both games and spent tons of hours in each... but... I'd love for some sort of happy medium between these two cases. I'm not entirely sure what that is, but then, that's why I'm not the game designer

 

My thoughts anyways...

 

The easy way is to follow the Skyrim route. It satisfies BOTH sides of the fence. It just means if you want to continue afterwards, you deal with the consequences of it not being worked into the game world as you may think it would have. But you at least get to experience all the other content you missed on the way. Doing it the ME way means you have to do another play through to get through all the side quests. Personally, I don't do a re-play through until a long time after my first play. Unless I can take the entire story on an entirely separate branch, it gets repetitive going through all the same things again, for me. Part of the magic of these games for me is the discovery of the story and what will happen next. Once I already know, it's kind of boring It's like giving yourself spoilers.

[Monte Carlo]

Given that this game is meant to take us to about 12th level (in analogous D&D terms), the ending might be a bit tricky. We have an XP and, hopefully, a sequel.

 

So the ending of P:E needs to be satisfying, consistent with the power-level but not The End (BG1 fell down considerably in this respect, asking you to 're-set' the Sarevok battle to play TotSC).

 

So, depending on how the game ends, I'd be happy to mosey about, finishing stuff (maybe bits of the mega-dungeon for example). It would be a nice twist from the norm.

[Sensuki]

I think I prefer a hard ending, however it does depend on what they are planning to do for the expansion, whether it is a continuation of the story (like ToB) or side-additions like TotSC.

 

I think I'd prefer TotSC style personally, but maybe not quite as thin.

[ComMcNeil]

I would like it to be a clean cut ending, but the player should be warned about it in a way. So, like BG2, you basically got a pretty good idea before you faced the first irenicus form, that this is going to be the end of the game. Keep it like this.

 

Also, as Sensuki said, depending on the expansion (which will come definately as we know) it may not even be viable to play on after the ending. If you look at BG2 though, story wise it would have been not that big of a deal if you continued adventuring after killing irenicus, as the bhaalspawn story arc may have just happend a little later then.

[OldRPG'sAreGood]

Generally I dislike it when the game continues after an "ending". To me the last quest is kind of peak point, after which it's just downhill from there. And I get a feeling that the game basically says: "Hah, lol, ur not dun yet!" when it throws me back into the game even after a claimed "ending". A proper ending for me, please.