Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
THE BAD END
Posts
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
Red_Nova
View playlists
CloseDisclaimer: Due to the nature of this topic, there will be an UNAVOIDABLE AMOUNT OF SPOILERS being discussed! Read at your own discretion.
Let's try to shy away from spoiling too many bad endings to games and talk about the logic behind bad endings in general. If you HAVE to actually spoil endings, make things easier for readers by listing the games you will spoil either at the beginning of your posts or just above the hide tags. Thank you!
So... bad endings. I'm not sure what to make of them. One one hand, the possibility of failure is great incentive to play the game properly. One the other, the very idea of playing a game, "properly," goes against the very nature of games.
I've been playing Suikoden 2 lately (holy shit I am loving it, by the way! Go and play it if you haven't!) and I recently got a bad ending. Without spoiling anything, the bad ending (the one I got, at least) was not the result of some arbitrary action I had taken earlier in the game. I was straight up given the option to go for it. At the time though, I thought that it was just the characters showing a little bit of weakness or exhaustion at the situation they found themselves in, so I chose the options to admit that they were tired of fighting.
To my surprise, the game rolled with it. I had fully expected the character I was talking to to suddenly go back on her previous statements and reassure me that we're doing the right thing, but nope! The game took my choice and changed the story accordingly!
I won't go into any more specific details, but that alone actually doesn't lock you into the bad ending route! You already went down a path that makes a fairly significant change to the story, but you still have a chance to return to the main story and continue on. But you don't have to. In order to get the bad ending, you have to practically beg for it.
When the band ending finally came around, I was... actually satisfied. This was an ending that I saw as an option, went for, and achieved. No random action or choice in the past that locked me into it, no invisible roll of the dice to determine the outcome. This was perfect.
So it got me thinking about bad endings in general: there are plenty of games that handle achieving them wildly different than Suikoden 2 did. Some work well, some not so well. Yes, I do think it should be possible to fail at your objective if you don't do enough work, but overall, I don't like the idea of getting a bad ending through some random choice you made earlier in the game. If they don't handle them the way Suikoden 2 (or Silent Hill 2, which is too lengthy to talk about in this initial post) did, then I can't really get behind them as legitimate endings.
What do you think? Should bad endings exist? What are some games you think handled them well? Which didn't? How would you go about designing a bad end?
Let's try to shy away from spoiling too many bad endings to games and talk about the logic behind bad endings in general. If you HAVE to actually spoil endings, make things easier for readers by listing the games you will spoil either at the beginning of your posts or just above the hide tags. Thank you!
So... bad endings. I'm not sure what to make of them. One one hand, the possibility of failure is great incentive to play the game properly. One the other, the very idea of playing a game, "properly," goes against the very nature of games.
I've been playing Suikoden 2 lately (holy shit I am loving it, by the way! Go and play it if you haven't!) and I recently got a bad ending. Without spoiling anything, the bad ending (the one I got, at least) was not the result of some arbitrary action I had taken earlier in the game. I was straight up given the option to go for it. At the time though, I thought that it was just the characters showing a little bit of weakness or exhaustion at the situation they found themselves in, so I chose the options to admit that they were tired of fighting.
To my surprise, the game rolled with it. I had fully expected the character I was talking to to suddenly go back on her previous statements and reassure me that we're doing the right thing, but nope! The game took my choice and changed the story accordingly!
I won't go into any more specific details, but that alone actually doesn't lock you into the bad ending route! You already went down a path that makes a fairly significant change to the story, but you still have a chance to return to the main story and continue on. But you don't have to. In order to get the bad ending, you have to practically beg for it.
When the band ending finally came around, I was... actually satisfied. This was an ending that I saw as an option, went for, and achieved. No random action or choice in the past that locked me into it, no invisible roll of the dice to determine the outcome. This was perfect.
So it got me thinking about bad endings in general: there are plenty of games that handle achieving them wildly different than Suikoden 2 did. Some work well, some not so well. Yes, I do think it should be possible to fail at your objective if you don't do enough work, but overall, I don't like the idea of getting a bad ending through some random choice you made earlier in the game. If they don't handle them the way Suikoden 2 (or Silent Hill 2, which is too lengthy to talk about in this initial post) did, then I can't really get behind them as legitimate endings.
What do you think? Should bad endings exist? What are some games you think handled them well? Which didn't? How would you go about designing a bad end?
Let's just say bad endings allow you to explore negative impacts of the story. A negative turnout, as opposed to sunshine and rainbows.
It allows to demonstrate what could happen if things are left unattended to, left ignored or if the mystery remains. Or even if you just turn your back to what's happening.
If you make it less about "the good end, minus x parts of information", but a different end with negative implications, then it is a good and viable choice.
I think bad games have a good right to exist, especially in genre where you have a lot of freedom in choosing your own path and story. There are a lot of horror games rolling with bad ends as a way of failing to deal with the trauma or whatever is happening.
It also allows to give different views on the negatives and more details to fill in in what is happening since you were caught.
What does not work is if you have a system in which you can miss the good ending by not getting all answers right, but have no indication of that happening in the background.
A system where you gather "points" and end up with some crappy rushed ending which is only a downgrade from the "real", good ending.
There are sometimes bad endings in place where a game over could do as well, in which case it is not replacing a real ending, but just "upgrading" the game over screen.
Of course, seeing it as a "bad" ending by default, rather than a "different" ending might be why it usually is worse than other endings. And serves more as a punishment for not doing it right.
As far as punishment goes for games.. clear actions, clear results.
Make it visible so you know why and what you are doing wrong, you may give an option to amend it/react to a previous choice.
It allows to demonstrate what could happen if things are left unattended to, left ignored or if the mystery remains. Or even if you just turn your back to what's happening.
If you make it less about "the good end, minus x parts of information", but a different end with negative implications, then it is a good and viable choice.
I think bad games have a good right to exist, especially in genre where you have a lot of freedom in choosing your own path and story. There are a lot of horror games rolling with bad ends as a way of failing to deal with the trauma or whatever is happening.
It also allows to give different views on the negatives and more details to fill in in what is happening since you were caught.
What does not work is if you have a system in which you can miss the good ending by not getting all answers right, but have no indication of that happening in the background.
A system where you gather "points" and end up with some crappy rushed ending which is only a downgrade from the "real", good ending.
There are sometimes bad endings in place where a game over could do as well, in which case it is not replacing a real ending, but just "upgrading" the game over screen.
Of course, seeing it as a "bad" ending by default, rather than a "different" ending might be why it usually is worse than other endings. And serves more as a punishment for not doing it right.
As far as punishment goes for games.. clear actions, clear results.
Make it visible so you know why and what you are doing wrong, you may give an option to amend it/react to a previous choice.
zeello
40
In general I probably wouldn't see the existence of bad endings as justifiable. If you saw the bad ending which you got intentionally and liked it, then what? Now you have to restart and get the real ending. So in that sense the bad ending was pointless. At best its an optional cutscene, but a case could be made that those shouldn't exist either, unless it's something lighthearted or silly that wouldn't have the same effect if the player was forced into it or if forcing the player into it is more trouble than it's worth.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
I'd like to know your thoughts on SH2; in a lot of ways I felt like none of it was a "bad" ending, just explorations of different outcomes depending on how one interprets James's mental state. (I also increasingly disliked the implications of the "good" ending.)
I don't care much for Bad End as more than just a different kind of game over; I prefer my endings to be more neutral outcomes of general choices made in the game. As far as what those choices entail, I've never had a huge problem with them being a little mysterious, though having them make some kind of logical/emotional sense is better.
The worst thing is when you have a Bad End predicated on a single choice, and then there's a ton of gameplay past that choice. I played one game like that (in which the choice itself was a little unclear) and got super frustrated that a single option locked me into a long, depressing slog of Things Got Worse.
I don't care much for Bad End as more than just a different kind of game over; I prefer my endings to be more neutral outcomes of general choices made in the game. As far as what those choices entail, I've never had a huge problem with them being a little mysterious, though having them make some kind of logical/emotional sense is better.
The worst thing is when you have a Bad End predicated on a single choice, and then there's a ton of gameplay past that choice. I played one game like that (in which the choice itself was a little unclear) and got super frustrated that a single option locked me into a long, depressing slog of Things Got Worse.
author=zeello
In general I probably wouldn't see the existence of bad endings as justifiable. If you saw the bad ending which you got intentionally and liked it, then what? Now you have to restart and get the real ending. So in that sense the bad ending was pointless. At best its an optional cutscene, but a case could be made that those shouldn't exist either, unless it's something lighthearted or silly that wouldn't have the same effect if the player was forced into it or if forcing the player into it is more trouble than it's worth.
In the case of Suikoden 2, the bad endings are avoidable - up to a certain point - and as long as you have a save before then you don't have to start all over again (and being a jRPG you should always have more than one save. Pro strats, yo.)
Of course, in the case that the game creates a bad end based on your choices, but doesn't change the story, I can understand being upset, but if the game rolls with it and changes the story to suit your choices - significantly enough that you get to play the same game different ways - then it's a great thing. More bang for your buck!
You see a lot of bad ends in horror games and the like, but not so much in RPGs and such. I think Suikoden series is one of the few that has bad endings that you have to choose (and they're careful to allow you to save before-hand so that you don't get locked into a bad situation).
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
Kylaia: I agree with 90% of what you said. The only thing I don't agree with (and this is more personal preference rather than what's right and wrong), is that the bad ending would be the result of incorrect actions. Of course, "incorrect," can have many different meanings depending on the context of each game, so take that with a grain of salt. I certainly agree that it should be made clear to the player that they are about to go down a point of no return, and that they still have the option to back out.
Zeello: But what if there was no "real" ending? What if the bad ending was a normal ending? I agree that the type of bad end where you gain nothing and have to restart can make the player feel like they've wasted their time. But what if the supposed bad ending was in fact a true ending to the game? To elaborate on that...
Sooz: The way Silent Hill 2 handled its endings was perfect. I can't describe it any other way. Jame's mental state reflected the way the player played though the entire game, and the outcome of that ending was the natural conclusion to that play style. Whether James comes out of Silent Hill with one person, a second person, or not at all, and it does a great job of profiling the player and It was perfect, and I've never seen any other game replicate that system.
The extra endings you can get on New Game + are also very welcome. Heck, even the joke ending felt appropriate, since by the time you get it, you've played enough of the game that nothing could really "shock" you anymore.
So yeah. Silent Hill 2's ending systems were perfect. I could gush about them all day.
Zeello: But what if there was no "real" ending? What if the bad ending was a normal ending? I agree that the type of bad end where you gain nothing and have to restart can make the player feel like they've wasted their time. But what if the supposed bad ending was in fact a true ending to the game? To elaborate on that...
Sooz: The way Silent Hill 2 handled its endings was perfect. I can't describe it any other way. Jame's mental state reflected the way the player played though the entire game, and the outcome of that ending was the natural conclusion to that play style. Whether James comes out of Silent Hill with one person, a second person, or not at all, and it does a great job of profiling the player and It was perfect, and I've never seen any other game replicate that system.
The extra endings you can get on New Game + are also very welcome. Heck, even the joke ending felt appropriate, since by the time you get it, you've played enough of the game that nothing could really "shock" you anymore.
So yeah. Silent Hill 2's ending systems were perfect. I could gush about them all day.
As for me, bad endings are very interesting, since they allow you to see an alternate outcome to the story, you may know that the bad ending involves failing your mission, getting a main character killed, or the world getting blown up. But I think the interesting part is finding out how that happens.
And I think that bad endings are allowed to have some uncertainity as how to get them, as long as the way to get them is logical. What I don't like, is if getting the bad ending involves an arbitrary choice there was no way to know about.
Case in point: Katawa Shoujo. I finished one route at it's fullest and I loved that game, but I feel it could have handled better the way you got the bad ending in the Act 1.
See, the main character enters the school one week before the school festival. By the time that festival comes, you must have got into one of the girl's routes. As usual, there are certain choices that will lock you into one route, some of them are obvious, some of them not so much...
But the problem is that there were 4 instances with two choices (you didn't had access to all 4 instances though, since which of them you got depended on your choices through all Act 1.) , and if you picked the wrong answer in at least one of those choices, you didn't got a date for the festival and you got the Bad Ending. It didn't mattered if you picked the right choices or you were nice to the girls afterwards, once you picked wrong one of those choices, you were toasted.
So the moral of the story is: Bad Endings are good in a game as long as they are accesed in a logical way. But if you get a Bad Ending because of something like this, it's just frustrating.
And I think that bad endings are allowed to have some uncertainity as how to get them, as long as the way to get them is logical. What I don't like, is if getting the bad ending involves an arbitrary choice there was no way to know about.
Case in point: Katawa Shoujo. I finished one route at it's fullest and I loved that game, but I feel it could have handled better the way you got the bad ending in the Act 1.
See, the main character enters the school one week before the school festival. By the time that festival comes, you must have got into one of the girl's routes. As usual, there are certain choices that will lock you into one route, some of them are obvious, some of them not so much...
But the problem is that there were 4 instances with two choices (you didn't had access to all 4 instances though, since which of them you got depended on your choices through all Act 1.) , and if you picked the wrong answer in at least one of those choices, you didn't got a date for the festival and you got the Bad Ending. It didn't mattered if you picked the right choices or you were nice to the girls afterwards, once you picked wrong one of those choices, you were toasted.
So the moral of the story is: Bad Endings are good in a game as long as they are accesed in a logical way. But if you get a Bad Ending because of something like this, it's just frustrating.
Rine
1378
I feel Bad Ends tends to be another way of saying a Game Over, just in a longer term fashion. I find the best games with Bad Ends have them as true endings, just with consequences for your actions during the game. A good example are the Ogre Battle games, where if you completely crush enemies, act like an unrighteous bastard, and flip towns to get cards, then let them get flipped to get more, in the end you are viewed as just as bad as the people you overthrew.
Not having them be binary is also very important. If its just one choice at the end, it just feels like you made a wrong choice and you should do it over, not as a series of choices leading to a result.
Not having them be binary is also very important. If its just one choice at the end, it just feels like you made a wrong choice and you should do it over, not as a series of choices leading to a result.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
Not so much a "Bad" End, more a "Welp, this is my life now" End.
author=Red_Nova
Kylaia: I agree with 90% of what you said. The only thing I don't agree with (and this is more personal preference rather than what's right and wrong), is that the bad ending would be the result of incorrect actions. Of course, "incorrect," can have many different meanings depending on the context of each game, so take that with a grain of salt. I certainly agree that it should be made clear to the player that they are about to go down a point of no return, and that they still have the option to back out.
Yeah, I can agree with the notion.
It is just so that I feel if it is just on equal terms with other endings of the game, it usually would not be called "bad end" in the first place. Just a different ending. There are multiple ways for it to be used, at the very least.
If the grand scheme of things remains unresolved and pretty bad while you had good reason to choose the path you chose, then that may be a case of a genuine "bad end" based on vital and logical decision.
First off, I think everyone in this topic is assuming the typing JRPG style of game flow, a linear plot where you make choices here and there eventually culminate into a finale. This is fine, but recognize there are other game types and genres out there as well.
If your game is a choice oriented, slanting on the open ended type, it makes sense for certain choices, and yes, poor ones as well, to have a negative impact on the outcome. Didn't defeat that dragon that you know damn well was rampaging in the countryside? Well, in the epilogue that same dragon burned down a bunch of villages! Sure, it's a bad ending, but it's also what happened. It's the 'real ending' because that's what you did. Is it the 'canon' ending? Maybe, maybe not. But that's the culmination of choices that you made as a player.
Not all games have to follow this formula. I'm totally cool with stories that funnel into one ending, regardless. Cool! But if you're going to have choice, don't make it hollow. Player choice has no real meaning if there's no sense of consequence.
If your game is a choice oriented, slanting on the open ended type, it makes sense for certain choices, and yes, poor ones as well, to have a negative impact on the outcome. Didn't defeat that dragon that you know damn well was rampaging in the countryside? Well, in the epilogue that same dragon burned down a bunch of villages! Sure, it's a bad ending, but it's also what happened. It's the 'real ending' because that's what you did. Is it the 'canon' ending? Maybe, maybe not. But that's the culmination of choices that you made as a player.
Not all games have to follow this formula. I'm totally cool with stories that funnel into one ending, regardless. Cool! But if you're going to have choice, don't make it hollow. Player choice has no real meaning if there's no sense of consequence.
The first game I ever played that had multiple endings, at least that I'm aware of, was Silent Hill. It had four endings. You had certain key choices that you would make; one of those choices, the decision to kill or save Sybill, altered the story, and the other choice, the decision to examine the motorbike in the doctor's apartment, simply had a butterfly effect on the ending. I thought it was so cool and innovative, and you eventually learned that the good ending wasn't even the correct one, but neither was the bad ending. Silent Hill is what I feel is a good example of a game that uses multiple endings. It's a shame that it's sequels based their multiple endings on arbitrary actions the player takes. Metal Gear Solid is another one that did the multiple endings well.
One thing that games often don't do well is branching story arcs. Radiata Stories was a game I ultimately ended up enjoying. It also has two story branches, and you can tell be the quality of writing which branch is the proper one. The best branch is the one in which you follow your fellow soldier and love interest's decision to turn against your people and go to the enemy side. This also leads to the bad ending, which is also the best written, and I think intellectually the most rewarding. The good ending comes after the not so well written story arc in which you choose to remain with the humans in the fight against the fairies. The good ending isn't badly written, and also has it's fair share of tragedy, but it seems bit more hollow.
Well, I did have a point when I started writing this, but I appear to have lost it. Can't remember what it was, anyway. Oh well, I contributed...something...to the discussion.
One thing that games often don't do well is branching story arcs. Radiata Stories was a game I ultimately ended up enjoying. It also has two story branches, and you can tell be the quality of writing which branch is the proper one. The best branch is the one in which you follow your fellow soldier and love interest's decision to turn against your people and go to the enemy side. This also leads to the bad ending, which is also the best written, and I think intellectually the most rewarding. The good ending comes after the not so well written story arc in which you choose to remain with the humans in the fight against the fairies. The good ending isn't badly written, and also has it's fair share of tragedy, but it seems bit more hollow.
Well, I did have a point when I started writing this, but I appear to have lost it. Can't remember what it was, anyway. Oh well, I contributed...something...to the discussion.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
OTOH getting some of the "good" endings in Silent Hill involved doing some stuff that required some weird thinking. ("Huh, there's some weird liquid spilled here. GUESS I'LL CARRY IT AROUND!")
ETA: Then again, I suppose it makes more sense if you got an ending where Kaufmann lives.
I AM REALLY RESTRAINING MYSELF FROM BABBLING ON AND ON ABOUT SILENT HILL
ETA: Then again, I suppose it makes more sense if you got an ending where Kaufmann lives.
I AM REALLY RESTRAINING MYSELF FROM BABBLING ON AND ON ABOUT SILENT HILL
Well, I think that was because Silent Hill's puzzles had a lot in common with the puzzles from classic PC point and click adventures. You had totally random items in your inventory that when used in combination at a certain scene, were somehow totally relevant...like needing an exploding turtle to get past an alien sea monster.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
Except the point in SH2 where you had to combine three random items to make a handle to open a door and I'm like, "This would never actually work also I HAVE A GODDAMN CROWBAR WHAT THE CHRIST"
also endings or some shit
I'm so sorry I can't help myself :(
also endings or some shit
I'm so sorry I can't help myself :(
Yeah, I never understood that. Why the hell can't I use the crowbar to take a door off it's hinges? Those doors must be made of some next-gen titanium shit.
suzy_cheesedreams
1480
GTA games. GTA IV has only bad/bad endings. Overall, I quite like the themes and how they're executed. It's pretty downbeat and cynical, especially for a game where you can go bowling with your cousin between crime sprees.
I was expecting GTA V to have a similarly sour ending, and
Overall, I am pretty apathetic about games with multiple endings. I somehow managed inadvertently to not play any such games through most of my life, and now when I know there will be varied outcomes in a game, I will always make an incessantly good character (if the game allows it) so I don't usually see the bad endings.
Either Roman or Kate will die, depending on your choices throughout the game.
I was expecting GTA V to have a similarly sour ending, and
it would have, had I not chosen the "bromancing frenemies explode everybody else" option.
Overall, I am pretty apathetic about games with multiple endings. I somehow managed inadvertently to not play any such games through most of my life, and now when I know there will be varied outcomes in a game, I will always make an incessantly good character (if the game allows it) so I don't usually see the bad endings.
author=Rine
I feel Bad Ends tends to be another way of saying a Game Over, just in a longer term fashion. I find the best games with Bad Ends have them as true endings, just with consequences for your actions during the game. A good example are the Ogre Battle games, where if you completely crush enemies, act like an unrighteous bastard, and flip towns to get cards, then let them get flipped to get more, in the end you are viewed as just as bad as the people you overthrew.
I got crowned and shot. It was terrifying.
I thought, that bad endings are these ending with explosion and 'to be continued' title. For me, the most important is satisfaction. I need to feel, that my acting mattered or was somehow taken in account at least. For example being randomly killed is usually annoying as hell. It can be hilly if acted well.
The most important is that ending concludes game's story (or gameplay).
This is the one single very thing FFX-2 did wrong. Very wrong. D:
Nonetheless, I do enjoy multiple endings and I don't think you should use the word "Real ending" in like, ever.
Curiously enough, in the Fatal Frame franchise; if I'm not mistaken the canon ending of FF1/2 are both the standard endings, not the 'good' endings. so yeah, take that you 'true' ending! This is referenced in Fatal Frame 3.
Nonetheless, I do enjoy multiple endings and I don't think you should use the word "Real ending" in like, ever.
Curiously enough, in the Fatal Frame franchise; if I'm not mistaken the canon ending of FF1/2 are both the standard endings, not the 'good' endings. so yeah, take that you 'true' ending! This is referenced in Fatal Frame 3.
I don't mind multiple endings at all. I love the extra interaction you get in trying to find that good ending. There are ways to do it wrong, however.
Like this game. You have multiple endings depending on how fast you complete the game overall, with the worst* one received when you take too long. This would be okay if the game itself wasn't hard for all the wrong reasons and didn't suck 20 pounds of balls. Getting through the game once is taxing enough, and to get rewarded with only the most downer ending possible, which suggests that you ultimately went through all sorts of shit for nothing, is like getting the middle finger stuck into your face as a player.
*The main story of the game is that you need to get medicine for a sick king. The worst ending you get is that the king dies when you are "too late."
That being said, I think multiple endings work best when the main game is solid enough to make you want to replay it to begin with.
Like this game. You have multiple endings depending on how fast you complete the game overall, with the worst* one received when you take too long. This would be okay if the game itself wasn't hard for all the wrong reasons and didn't suck 20 pounds of balls. Getting through the game once is taxing enough, and to get rewarded with only the most downer ending possible, which suggests that you ultimately went through all sorts of shit for nothing, is like getting the middle finger stuck into your face as a player.
*The main story of the game is that you need to get medicine for a sick king. The worst ending you get is that the king dies when you are "too late."
That being said, I think multiple endings work best when the main game is solid enough to make you want to replay it to begin with.
