Thoughts on multiple/bad endings.

[Profit]

There's nothing more frustrating for me upon completing a +10 hour or even 5 hour game and finding that the ending is only a basic/bad one. I rarely want to complete a game again just to find a better ending.

I understand their use in a short game (<3 hours). But in longer games, I feel it even takes away the value-for-money of the game. Why restrict the player to a poorer quality presentation? I can't help but feel a player will have a better impression of a game if it gave a good ending regardless of the effort the player decided to put in.

The fact that a player has sustained interest for +10 hours on reaching the end should suggest to devs that the players expects a good closure. At most I would like devs to make the task more managable than repeating the entire game or completing it 100%. What's worse is a lot games don't even indicate there are multiple endings.

I also wonder if developers know just what percent of gamers complete a game till the end (just looking at the files on traded in mem cards suggest most players don't bother with full completion/progression; 2nd hand multi disc games also show later discs are less worn out.).

[Spatial]

When I had more time to play stuff I used to love multiple endings. But the older I've gotten (and subsequently the less time I have to play stuff) I've grown to hate them / ignore them.

Plus it also bugs me when the inevitable sequel comes out and you spend most of it piecing together which version of events happened because yours doesn't run canon. They worked much better in the olden days when games tended to be a bit more `one-shot`.

There's very few recent games that I've gone back to view other endings (unless it's a simple decision right at the end).

[BeyondJumpFish]

I agree, if you've played the game for 10+ hours the last thing you want is an ending which sugests you've:
A. Played the game wrongly somehow and are gifted with the "Bad" ending
or
B. Haven't fullfilled all of the requirements and are gifted with the "Half ending".
On games like the first Resi Evil it was great and had me replaying countless times. But having endings which reflected on your game performance on something like an RPG or recently Mass Effect is a bit of a pain in the ass, and a let down.

[dogen]

When I had more time to play stuff I used to love multiple endings. But the older I've gotten (and subsequently the less time I have to play stuff) I've grown to hate them / ignore them.

I feel the same. I usually just accept which ever ending I finish with, and view the others on youtube, if I really feel the need.

[Concrete donkey]

For multiple endings my feelings are based on how its implemented. I?m not a fan of the FFX-2 way of doing things that you get a better ending the more you tick all the right boxes. That said, though I didn?t get ?the best? ending in that game, I got one which I felt was fitting and true to the plot so for me I have no issues with that particular game but I do with the idea.

When you get endings based on the choices you?ve made, like in KOTOR, Deus Ex and Bioshock; I like it. You don?t like having the bad ending in Bioshock. Well, if you got it, you know what you did and you earned it. The idea that our choices matter ? Yeah, I got no problems with those kinds of multiple endings. I may try the game again with something different. I might not. I can say with certainty that if I did play Bioshock again, I?d get the same good ending though.

[toythatkills]

As above. I've no problem with multiple endings if they're implemented well, like BioShock as an example.

When I get a bad ending because I missed a single obscure item that isn't even relevent to anything or something, I feel a little hard done by.

[eastyy]

feel sorry for the people who played castlevania symphony of the night and only knew about the first ending..........as you miss out on half the game there

[JazzFunk]

I like the way the Darius games handle their bidnizz.

What if, in terms of an adventurey/role play-y type game, there were about 4 (max!) savepoints where you could make game-changing decisions, then return back at a later point from the same decisive save point, and completely change what you were gonna do. If the game was an 8-10 hour job, maximum, then it'd be all great, wunnit?

[Ouenben]

Beyond good and evil had a. well evil ending. getting hopes up for a sequal (originally a triology right?) unfortunately it seems unlikely to unearth

[Flabio]

The endings of games don't get anywhere near as much attention during development as the beginnings, because the vast majority of players don't finish games. Sad but true.

[fallenangle]

I too particularly hate the obscure triggers/actions required for different endings as found (or usually not found) in the likes of the Silent Hill games. I think there were 7 endings possible in the original and one good(ish) ending required finding an item and then, hours later, in the middle of a fight somehow realising you could use it. Daft.

I've also come across one game the little known PS Chaos Break, an otherwise reasonably competent RE type thing which in trying to provide what I only later realised must have been the opportunity for various endings, actually torpedos itself.

If you fail to complete one long and involving but seemingly optional task halfway through, the game sets itself on a short linear path to the bad ending whatever else you do. I think about a third of the game is denied to you in the crudest way possible. All progession is blocked and all you can do is simply go back, exit the facility and trigger a bad ending FMV.

Give me real and clear choices for endings, as in Deus Ex but otherwise I think the multiple endings feature is just a cheap way of trying to give a game replay 'value' which fools nobody. Like others here have said I can rarely be bothered to explore them all even in games I've really enjoyed.

[Profit]

Silent Hill is an excellent example. Why do the devs waste time of with all the alternative endings? How many players are going to say "Yes, that was a nice ending, but I'd like to have the option for a crapper one"!

There's no reasoning for it from a creative or marketing sense. It makes a game less appealing to all but the 100% completists (who will probably buy the sequal and do 100% regardless of multiple endings ).

Maybe it's a throwback to bygone days when when the cost of a game equaled a few weeks living cost rather than the impulse buy they've become.

[eastyy]

well thing is....so many endings are just rubbish and brief

its really annoying when for example playing through a story heavy game which has lots of cutscenes only to be rewarded by a poxy 2min cutscene .....its just so much like they could not be bothered

deus ex had multiple endings......but they were all rubbish and short

[toxicninja]

There's no reasoning for it from a creative or marketing sense. It makes a game less appealing to all but the 100% completists (who will probably buy the sequal and do 100% regardless of multiple endings ).

or.. maybe they're trying to make people buy the strategy guide to find out how to get the endings they might not even know about. imagine getting a bad ending on a game and not even knowing that wasnt supposed to happen. I bet that happens now and again to some people. If they're going to put multiple endings into their game they should take a cue from fallout and show you how the little things you did affected things. weather you did good or evid the ending in that game made you feel like you'd accomplised a lot. I guess it was a quite in depth game but the way you affected things were often simple.

[abigsmurf]

The first silent hill is one of the worst examples. Next to impossible to figure out what you need to do to get better than bad/bad+ endings and what's worse, if you don't pick up the red liquid as soon as you see it, you'll go into dark Silent hill and when you come back all the doors will be locked so you can't do it.

I quite liked the FFIX approach. You get a standard ending and it's impressive (as squeenix endings are) but if you do some of the extra content and get certain items, you get brief scenes involving minor characters during the ending that flesh them out a bit.

The Kingdom Hearts approach is also pretty good where if you do certain tasks you get a fanservicy CG 'trailer'. In KH2 they messed it up a bit by requiring you to do far too much (if you played normal mode)