Source
r/truegaming•
Marshith

Are true endings detrimental to a game's experience?

Guacamelee was free on Steam the other day so I decided to download it because why not. In general, I wouldn't consider myself a Metroidvania fan for various reasons but I really enjoyed the gameplay and combat. The dated memes were an eyesore but other than that I finished the game in 9 hours and felt accomplished when I beat the final boss. Then the ending came. I won't spoil exactly what happens out of courtesy but I was satisfied with the bittersweet ending I got for the most part. I kinda wanted a bit more of an epilogue but what I got was wholesome in a way. So I started looking into the game's sequel and inadvertently found out that the game I just beat had a different ending. I watched it out of curiosity and seeing a much more typical happy ending for the characters left a somewhat bad taste in my mouth. What it essentially boils down to collecting hidden items.

​

I know that multiple endings aren't all that uncommon in video games but I've never really thought much about it until now. Walking dead season 1, Fallout New Vegas, Fable 3. All these games have multiple endings but you decide your ending through the choices that you make in gameplay. Whether or not you make a good/bad impact on the world is up to you and your personal interpretation of what that means and I'm personally fine with that. However, learning that I don't get to see the true intended ending of a story because I didn't search hard enough for a bunch of hidden items or I didn't complete enough of the side missions just feels cheap to me. I wouldn't say it ruined Metroidvanias for me and I'll probably still buy Guacamelee 2 in the near future but I feel like I retroactively enjoyed the game less because of this.

​

Curious to see what other's thoughts are.

Posted May 26, 2019, 7:02 AM UTC

2337
LaxQuintessence•

God the way Arkham Knight did this really ticked me off. For those who don't know they locked away the "secret" ending - aka the PROPER ending - behind a ridiculous completion wall. Requiring you to finish most of the side missions and collecting the 200+ riddler trophies first, effectively asking you to 100% the game before you get to see a thing that amounts to just a regular ending cutscene in any other game

The icing on the cake is the cutscene itself is a complete disappointment. It's sure as shit not worth the time and effort it takes to get to it. The funny thing is I'd have been a lot more forgiving if they just made it the default ending. I'd have said "eh, kinda lame but standard for a AAA story". But man, making it your "reward" for doing countless hours of mundane busywork is beyond stupid and really soured me

To anyone playing the game who decides on going for the secret ending, unless you're a completionist by nature I suggest just looking it up on youtube and be done with it tbh. It's worth checking out that way at least

24
Radidactyl•

Super off-topic but yeah I found Arkham Knight to be the worst of the trilogy. Lots of "do X but 10 times"-style quests that Asylum and City didn't have. Those were a lot more unique experiences whereas Arkham Knight had basically a single-player MMO style to its missions and played like "Batman Tank Fighter Simulator."

I just googled the true ending because I couldn't be fucked to do the same thing over and over for 50 hours when the game already dragged on way longer than it should have anyway.

9
Sonic10122•

This and my absolute hatred of the Batmobile segments are why I refuse to play Arkham Knight again. It’s really the worst of the series.

3
Zardran•

Meh. It didn't bother me too much. I wasn't going to do all of the side stuff. YouTube exists. So it's not like there wasn't an incredibly easy way to watch that cut scene.

2†
Fantasystaroffline•

That and it doesn't change anything and is just as stupid an ending as the regular one.

-1
WhiteWolfofUtah•

I had no issues with any of the content except for the Riddler trophies. They expect me do to 1000+ trophies for a twenty second cutscene? Yeah right

2
Boese•

You want to know what the worst part about this was? If you completed all but one of the villain captures when completing the story, then in order to trigger the ending cutscene, you need to capture that final villain instead of being able to end with the regular default ending. Of course, the only villain I hadn't captured by that point was the Riddler, so in order for me to get ANY ending, I would need to collect every single Riddler trophy. After lots of troubleshooting and searching, I found out that this was not actually a bug and is an intentional decision. Really ended that series on a sour note for me.

1
gmoneygangster3•

I mean hot take

Sure it wasn't great, but for what the ending did, it makes sense

1
TemptCiderFan•

I don't mind them if they're done right, because sometimes completing all the side missions to get the "golden ending" makes sense.

I just beat Akiba's Beat and got the "true" ending, so I'll use it as an example because it's actually a pretty good one.

In the game, a lot of the optional side events reveal new story information about the characters within the game. In fact, it's very easy to see how the bittersweet "normal" ending of the game would jive with a "normal" playthrough. They both have the same tone in terms of story and character growth, so it makes sense that the normal ending would match tone with the normal story progression.

However, if you complete ALL the side events prior to beating the game, the tone of things changes. You learn new things about the characters, and arguably they get as much character growth during their final events as they did throughout the course of the main game. The main characters are significantly more grown up by the ends of their side events than they are if you don't do them. So having a golden ending where things turn out better as a result of that character growth makes sense, and it rewards players who actually went out of their way to do it.

Of course, hiding a golden ending behind collectibles or worse, a difficulty setting (fuck you, Halo) is a bad implementation of the practice.

10
BurningToaster•

Halo didn't really change endings though, Halo 1 had a joke added in, and Halo 3's added a teaser/peak at the future.

2
Radidactyl•

Depends upon if it's hidden behind unlockables or repetition.

For something like Bioshock, I think a canonical ending is necessary whereas something like Shadow of Mordor which locked the "real ending" behind hours of grinding is clearly a bogus way to convince shareholders people are spending more time on your game.

9
Fantasystaroffline•

But if people are spending more time on your game.. how is it bogus?

0†
Radidactyl•

The same way "Yeah I work 40 hours a week" is bogus when you spend at least 2 of those hours every day on Reddit.

8
JaktMax•

I don't really see a problem with it, it seems logical to acknowledge the extra effort of completing all side missions. In this case you say you were happy with the "false" ending, so I don't know what's so cheap about having an alternate ending.

9
Fantasystaroffline•

Agreed. Multiple endings just encourage more playthroughs if one is so inclined.

4
Nambot•

I think it really depends on the amount of work though. If 100% only takes a couple more hours, then it feels more worth it than if 100% is going to take a couple of hundred.

But it's also important about the content of the ending. Consider the following examples:

  • Crash Bandicoot 2's bad ending has you defeat the game's villain, but one of the side characters then muses about the fact that the villain's space station is still in orbit with the doomsday weapon still operational, just that the villain lacks a power source to use it. The good ending has you actively destroying the doomsday weapon using the power source the villain was trying to collect. This is a good difference, the bad ending has you cause a minor setback to the villain, the good ending has you cause a major setback.

  • Jak & Daxter has a bad ending where you blow up the villains giant robot and stop their evil plan of releasing a deadly poison on the land. The good ending meanwhile simply has you open a giant door that the cast then flies through. This door is completely insignificant to this games plot (though is retroactively made really important in the sequels). This is a bad difference, the bad ending closes off the story, while the good ending is nothing but an unsatisfying sequel hook.

0
JaktMax•

Playing a game just to see the ending is strange thing to do, I don't see it as having any "worth" either way. Whether you 100% a game or not comes down to how much you like the game, the point of the ending is just to acknowledge what you did.

1
WWWeirdGuy•

Like you point out, having the canonical ending being something else than what you experience undercuts a sense of achievement and foregoes an opportunity in setting up the story for the next game. I think the trend that you point out is unfortunate, but can be hard to avoid depending on what authors want to achieve. I don't think "true endings" are necessarily a detrimental thing though, it's just a problem that (for the longest time) has been hard to design around. I feel like developers have been getting a pass for the longest time for just that reason. I think it's good that you bring it up for that reason.

I think a big problem lies in how little focus there is on story in games in general. Games in the mainstream are mainly supposed to be fun through gameplay and sadly not through narrative. Further a lot of RPG's are power fantasies and how do make a character feel powerful or make the world feel alive? You make the protagonist(s)(/player) affect the world. Which is why we get elder scrolls character which is boss of the thiefs guild, mage's guild,warriors guild and be the hero of <a lot of different things>. This is impossible to carry over to a sequel so they jump a few hundreds years forward or backwards. Some games allows you to affect your character(s) and their journey while retaining the main story beats. The bell tower in dark souls has to always be rung, but the narrative can still change between runs because of your character.

There are many ways to deal with endings and how to abridge them between sequels. I think what you are pointing out is an area where the industry can be pretty lazy and where we can improve.

6
LutjaSuki•

I'd add that I think the 'sequel' problem is caused by the demand that combat be the main feature of the sequel - In any kind of reality an epic-level character would almost never directly fight. A true sequel would play more like a kingdom simulator with social events and occasional direct combats against only a tiny number of other epic level characters.

Instead we just get every street thug suddenly being of a level where, by the laws of the game world, they should be candidates for ruling the world.

3
WWWeirdGuy•

Completely agree. In this regard Fable 3 is kind of interesting because the game does progress into a (superficial) "kingdom simulator" kind of deal. Outside narrative heavy games like mount and blade and kenshi there's also some elements of this. Those aren't narrative heavy games or sequels however.

2
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
Ophelia_Grey•

Morrowind also actually demands that you be highly competent in the guild’s specialisation before being allowed to advance to leader.

1
aspindler•

One of the best games with alternatives endings is Chrono Trigger. At some point >!Crono dies and if you beat the final boss before resurrecting him, the ending is his friends bring him back to life!<

A lot of endings in the game changes according to when you fight the last boss, since you can do it very early in the game (but it will kick your ass). But since you can go NG+, you can kill the boss really early, and get different endings.

5
darksier•

I don't mind multiple endings, but what I think is bad is how the general audience or perhaps just media categorizes endings as "the good ending" or "the bad ending". And this often comes down to simply does the protagonist fulfill all their wildest power fantasy dreams or not. Good or bad generally has nothing to do with whether or not the writing was good or appropriate to the events leading up to it.

Now there are poorly developed endings where you can tell that little to no effort was put into a particular ending. But as long as the ending is well produced and fits what has been happening in the narrative, I think it's good and true for the player. The way for a player to get over is for that player to accept the ending as their True ending, and to reject some youtuber saying that "ohhh noo..you got the baaaad ending...here's the TRUE ending that you have absolutely no attachment towards" in far more words. Facing these articles and videos is basically having someone say, "your experience is invalid and here's why", and over time that can have an effect on players and rewire their minds into seeing endings in that way. So when a developer/publisher comes out and says this is the "TRUE" ending, they've basically jumped on that bandwagon. And the problem here is now the words are coming from the source, the artist, and that can lead to the whole creator vs. audience debate on who gets to define and shape meaning our of a work of art.

2
Geodude07•

I don't mind multiple endings if they come from deliberate choices or sacrifices. Something like who you sacrifice to X, or if you were able to beat all the Y...that is fine.

The issue for me is when they want me to grind and do busy work. I don't play single player games to mindlessly do a boring task. I don't want to collect little glowy orbs you've hidden all over the world to be able to get the good ending. Unless that is given proper narrative importance.

It often ruins a game for me if I feel like I have to break off the path of fun to go scour for some collectible. I often want to engage with the story and character.

Some games do side content amazingly though, but it needs to be an actual considered part of the game.

2
Kayorg•

A true ending behind shit like completionist tasks are boring and stupid IMO.

I consider that Persona games does it awesome because to get it you have to make the choices that resonates with the main theme of the game. Ex:

in Persona 3 the main theme is accepting death as a part of life and not fearing it: The choice to get the true ending is basically to take make the decision in which you could save all of humanity or doom it facing the avatar of death.

​

In Persona 4 the main theme is to question everything until you personally get to the truth: Here, first you have to let go prejudices and listen to the murderer, and then decide that you will not let the police resolve the matter, and keep investigating to find the real truth.

​

In both of these examples, the game tests you to see if you understood what is the journey these characters are undertaking. If you did, you know which choices to make.

1
SerALONNEZ•

Persona 4 was bullshit at True Ending route tho, it had too many choices that could lead to a normal ending. If you give in to the rage towards a certain person and throw him to the TV, you get a bad ending. And the twist after the fog is gone where you thought the game was done, if you dont talk to a certain person, the game ends but not the True Ending.

2
Kayorg•

And how is that bad? The game is all about not assuming presumtions and questioning everything until you have the truth in your face. Its only natural that the true ending would be behind the options that keep questioning reality instead of just accepting it, that's what the game is trying you to do. I don't see how that is bad, the game doesn't let you keep playing if you got the "wrong" choice to then tell you "lol no you chose bad then, now you don't get the true ending". No, you see the ending, reload and pick the right option.

If you give in to rage in that option it means that you failed to get the message that the game has been telling you. Don't prejudge people until you listen to their story. You don't get the whole truth withouth listening to the other part. And is not like it doesn't give you any hint, saving is not the same as killing and what that person was telling does not correlate with what people thought that he was.

And the talking with that person at the end is just the answer to the question "how this all began", which if you thought about it, you are at the end of the game and yet that hasn't been answered. I admit that the facg that you have to pick the same choice times to get it is a bit tricky i give you that, yet it aligns with the theme (questioning everything even the gane itself), and how many times in any game have you talked with the same character to get a different dialogue? It was playing with that mentality too.

1
SerALONNEZ•

This isnt about the themes, the whole thread is that True Endings are way obscure to get sometimes. And this is the case on P4, most people follow a walkthrough and I dont think everyone can get the True Ending if they didnt read about it on an outside source. The game does a good job of lulling the player that the game is done after lifting the fog.

And unlike P3 and P5 where the true ending was the obvious choice in the dialogue, it makes a lot of difference

2
Hazakurain•

Fun fact, even with a playthrough I've failed to get the true ending once. That's how cryptic it is.

2
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
folded13•

The thing to remember is that the only reason they pick a canon ending is so that they have a solid point to start the next game at. KOTOR 1 had essentially two endings (dark side/light side), but they are mutually exclusive to an extreme degree. In order to write a sequel that included both endings as a jump-off point for the next one, they'd have had to write two entirely different games.

So when the game is considered entirely by itself, the true ending is the one you get. If you do multiple playthroughs and get multiple endings, pick the one you like best and call that one the true ending. But even with carry-over saves (such as Mass Effect), there's only so far the writers can bend the story to account for ALL of the possibilities.

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
sock-nose•

I think they are. There's a difference between different but equally valid endings and having a hidden away "true" ending. Hiding the actual ending away behind achievements or busywork just makes a story far less satisfying.

0
RampantSegfault•

I hate multiple endings. If I know about it I'll spoil myself with a walkthrough/FAQ on how to get the true ending. And now the entire playthrough is geared towards that one objective. It taints the whole experience in a way.

Plus it usually involves some outrageous tedium or guide-dang-it to get.

0
SageWaterDragon•

I don't mind expanded endings - getting a small extra cutscene in Breath of the Wild as a reward for collecting the memories was nice - but alternate, "improved" endings do bother me. If your story is such that you can change the ending and consider it valid, you did a terrible job of building a story arc.

0