Unwinnable Main Questline?

[mcmanusaur]

Let me preface my proposition by acknowledging that we're all attached to our familiar cliches and feel-good stories, but I feel that we as a community could possibly break new ground in Project Eternity. Without a doubt, this is the most mature gaming community I've seen to date, and there's one trope whose vice-grip I've never seen the fantasy RPG genre escape: the happy ending. I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I think that- by introducing a couple simply unwinnable scenarios into the main plot-line (preferably in the form of encounters with scripted outcomes)- this game and this community can supersede that fragile and trite model. Winning all the time gets old, and the saddest endings are often the most moving. Do we really want Project Eternity to fall into that same trap of lameness, or do we want something unique? What would be particularly interesting is if the ending was a huge cliffhanger, thereby also creating incentive to buy a possible sequel. Join me in petitioning Obsidian for a different ending, suitable for a different kind of RPG.

Edited November 7, 2012 by mcmanusaur

[rjshae]

I simply can't take this seriously.

Edited November 7, 2012 by rjshae

[mcmanusaur]

I simply can't take this seriously.

Why not? Aren't you bored by the fact that every single game must have a predictably happy ending?

[SophosTheWise]

Why not both? I want multiple endings ranging from cheesy happy to abyssic depressing.

[mcmanusaur]

Why not both? I want multiple endings ranging from cheesy happy to abyssic depressing.

I suppose that's fine, but honestly if happy endings are just a form of pandering to hypersensitive individuals, must we include them at all?

Edited November 7, 2012 by mcmanusaur

[Kai]

What you've sadly ignored when creating this topic is the HUGE amount of games that have sad/depressing endings. Some that are unwinnable like when you fight Kangaxx in BG2, which is simply impossible to pull off. In other games, you often have the option to a sad ending by either go into a fight with a terrible tactics (like in IE games) or by simply not doing any damage to your enemies. And it's not like there's just one single place in these games where you have the option for the sad ending (but dying by the hand of Kangaxx is especially epic, and infuriating after the 57th try or so), it's avaiable pretty much all the time.

 

So I really think that having an ending like that is kinda boring, it's been done literally thousands of times. And that's why I find this topic redundant.

[SophosTheWise]

Why not both? I want multiple endings ranging from cheesy happy to abyssic depressing.

I suppose that's fine, but honestly if happy endings are just a form of pandering to hypersensitive individuals, must we include them at all?

 

Because happy ends aren't just a form of pandering to hypersensitive individuals. There are a lot of very good happy endings in literature, film and gaming. For example Ulysses. James ****ing Joyce.

[Marceror]

Totally mcmanusaur. You're right on the pulse of things, as usual.

 

How about just as you're about to fight the main antagonist a herd of rampaging buffalo happens by and kills your party. There's no way to avoid it. It's just fate. Nature wins the game.

[smithereen]

I have to say the unsolvable main plot was what I most enjoyed about Mask of the Betrayer.

[mcmanusaur]

How about just as you're about to fight the main antagonist a herd of rampaging buffalo happens by and kills your party. There's no way to avoid it. It's just fate. Nature wins the game.

I don't think that would make much sense, personally. There are probably more realistic ways to implement this, such as a deadly plague eventually killing everyone off.

[jezz555]

Is every thread you start some sort of absurd parody of another thread, or have I missed something here?

[Badmojo]

Ack, this is exactly what I do not want. I posted this on my fears when they mentioned having a sequel/expansion.

 

The new announcement talked about PE expansions, which I have mixed feelings about. I am very happy it is an expansion and NOT some silly DLC. However I do have some fears.

 

Fears

- The main game will be short. I want them to release a LONG game like the old games were, I really do not want a short game like todays games. If they are planning for sequels, they may want to feel the need to shorten the main game to hurry up and start on its expansion.

- To be continued/cliffhanger ending - I want the first game to be a COMPLETE game, whatever story its going for, I want it wrapped up in the first game with no major arcs to be left over for expansions or sequels. The next games/expansions should be its own story, that may or may not have some connection to the main story, but the ending of the first game should feel like an actual ending and not have the dreaded 'to be continuted' feeling that so many companies do to try and force you to buy the later games to get the complete story.

- Cut Content, the bane of games in this DLC generation, a bit related to the cliffhanger ending. Stuff that was obvious cut from games to be sold later in expansions. Bioware has been the worst with it since EA bought them out. Major important plot points like the shadow broker, or an important characters like the prometheon to be cut out and sold later. Since PE will not have any DLC (as far as I know) and is going to be expansions, that is good. However, I do not want some major threads to not be answered in the first game, only to be anwsered in the second. Some minor ones are OK, and giving some more information about an event is fine too as long as it was answered in the first game.

- All roads lead to rome, related to cliffhanger endings, I want major branching outcomes/endings based on what I do in the game, not all leading into the same ending with minor cosmetic differences (looking at you bioware). On a related note, I would like the endings to be expanded on a little more than what is usually done in games. In most games, you go in, spend hours/days/weeks playing, then after defeating the big bad, you might get a few seconds cut scenes, or talk to a few characters, or have a brief anouncement of what happens and then its over. It would be nice to have a endings that last a little longer and go a bit more into details instead of filling like a quick pat on the back and saying 'well done, now get out of here'.

 

Basically, cliffhangers,cut content to be sold as DLC, open mysteries/unresolved issues left to the next game, etc are just cheap tricks to force people to buy the sequel. Whenever I see games that have this, it just saddens me. It tells me the devs do not trust their own skills and/or the game is not that good. If the game is good then people will WANT to buy the sequel and do not need any other motivation.

 

I really do not like games that have unbeatable boss/scenario. I don't mind if its really hard, but flat out making an immortal unbeatable character is not really fun and just leads to frustration. Hey, I am attacking this being with everything I have, yet the health never goes down..WTF?!?!? oh, one swing of its sword of doom and all my party die...yea, no thanks. I do not mind if its really strong (but not one swing party killing strong), but it should be deafeatable.

 

I also have issues with saying that being original and have downer ending, um, did you play mass effect 3? Yea, how fun was that ending? Or fallout 3? Its not really new, and also leads to the problem of people pointing out obvious flaws "Why didn't my character do THIS! and avoid the issue" or "WAIT! that totally goes against my characters personality, there is no way he/she would do this" Or "WTF?!?!? That makes no sense!" or "you kidding me?!?!? they said my choices would matter, yet no matter what I do we end up in this same ending! what a waste of time!". I know I will get pissed if all the choices we make go down the drain to the same endings regardless of what we do.

 

I really hope we will have many branching endings so it will feel like we made a difference and not all forced down one path with only the two dreaded all good or all bad ending. I also want the game to finish as a COMPLETE game that doesn't make you feel like you have been shortchanged or forces you to buy the next game because important stuff was left out or the dreaded cliffhanger was put in.

 

I think the majority of us paid money for a complete game, not an incomplete one. If the kickstarter had said, "Hey, we are going to give you half a game that you have to buy the sequel to finish" I think few people would have donated to it.

[PsychoBlonde]

I simply can't take this seriously.

Why not? Aren't you bored by the fact that every single game must have a predictably happy ending?

 

You mean, aside from Kotor2, Nwn2, Dragon Age 2, Planescape: Torment, Arcanum, Oblivion (they killed Sean Bean!) . . . I'd count Skyrim as lacking a happy ending because it LACKS AN ENDING, PERIOD.

 

There are many games without conventional "happy" endings. I'm not sure Obsidian believes in happy endings. Mask of the Betrayer made me so mad I wanted to reach through the screen and slap Kelemvor in his ugly self-righteous FACE.

 

So, I wouldn't worry about this "problem" if I were you.

[Gibbscape_Torment]

Honestly, i haven't played a game with a conventional happy ending in a long time. I don't think this is as rampant as you think, especially within the RPG genre.

[Althernai]

There are many games without conventional "happy" endings. I'm not sure Obsidian believes in happy endings. Mask of the Betrayer made me so mad I wanted to reach through the screen and slap Kelemvor in his ugly self-righteous FACE.

Why? Mask of the Betrayer had a more or less happy ending (assuming of course that you found all of the pieces of the mask). You don't get to make a major change to the nature of the afterlife, but the player character can live happily ever after.

 

I would actually be fine with Mask of the Betrayer method of determining the ending as long as the key factors are a little more obvious than the pieces of the mask (which can be easily be missed even if a player made a pretty good effort at trying to explore). For example, the ending might depend on several optional (but not hidden) quests or may be tied to the mega-dungeon.

[Tigranes]

I like unhappy endings. Or rather, ambivalent ones.

 

What I'd like to see is a properlly grotesque ending (in the original sense of the word). Everyone who believed in lofty ideals and codes of honour are brought low, embarrassed and degraded, and then it all ends in a big booze-up.

[Karkarov]

A poll with only the option of agreeing isn't a poll. They have already said they intend to make a sequel, so regardless of how the game ends it clearly isn't "ending" the story.

[nikolokolus]

I'll be happy with an ending ...

[kabaliero]

Ok, this thread is a final stroke on the "TROLL" sign for that special someone.

Too bad there's no "ignore all user messages" function.

[Marceror]

A poll with only the option of agreeing isn't a poll. They have already said they intend to make a sequel, so regardless of how the game ends it clearly isn't "ending" the story.

 

This is a staple of the mcmanusaur. Let's all be happy that he's not the ruler of a nation. "You can vote for me, or me, or me! So many options I give to my people!"

[Marceror]

How about just as you're about to fight the main antagonist a herd of rampaging buffalo happens by and kills your party. There's no way to avoid it. It's just fate. Nature wins the game.

I don't think that would make much sense, personally. There are probably more realistic ways to implement this, such as a deadly plague eventually killing everyone off.

 

Oh, right, your idea is clearly... superior. I bow to your more focused sense of morbidity.

[Zu Long]

I am always partial to a choice. It would be interesting if there were a series of choices you could make fairly early on that would lock you into a bad ending. However, there should always be the option of the player to succeed. I don't invest 40+ hours of my time in these games to feel like I wasted my time at the end.

[Tamerlane]

I demand an ending that is actually the middle!

[curryinahurry]

Considering Obsidian is planning on this game being the first series, an ending with the protagonist dying might not be in the realm of possibilities. Plus a branching ending would, of course, lead to a situation where one ending was made canon, which would yield its own set of troubles and griping. That said, a possibility of real failure should always be viable, and failing at the end of the game is no exception, especially if the main quest has been consistent in telling the player what he/ she might need to do to be successful at that point.

 

Also, a game doesn't need for the protagonist to fail in his or her quest for the story to end up a tragedy. In fact, the game could be designed so that the player's successful completion of the main quest brings tragedy upon others; a town, an NPC, or a companion. These sorts of plot resolutions could serve as the basis for the next installment of the game.

Edited November 8, 2012 by curryinahurry

[Bill Gates' Son]

Ok, this thread is a final stroke on the "TROLL" sign for that special someone.

Too bad there's no "ignore all user messages" function.

 

 

If you don't like his post, then don't read his post. I honestly never seen the TC do anything wrong. But I guess having a opinion different from others counts as trolling.