Press Junketeer  Posts: 497 Joined: 19 Apr 2008     | |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1802 Joined: 29 May 2008     | Yeah i absolutely abhor open... |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1813 Joined: 8 Apr 2008     | I can't think of any examples, but an open ending can be good by being a statement about how things are in real life instead of about how there's going to be a sequel. Oh yeah, and now I feel like playing some Sly Cooper. Thanks a lot. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2622 Joined: 27 Aug 2008    | Assassin's Creed was awful for that. I hate the assumed franchise start. You get a sequel if you're good! Not on general principle! Gears 1 didn't leave it open but the second one neatly carried the concept. Half Life 2 would be a good example of tying most of the ends neatly shut at the end of each chapter except for keeping the general tension running. Except for Ep 2. Goddamn I want Ep 3 out NOW. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 884 Joined: 19 Sep 2008     | It depends. Sometimes its leaving it open to continue the story in a sequel which is fine. However, when some games end with a delibrately ambiguous ending, it sometimes seems to me that the writers couldn't think of a satisfying ending, and just decided to go, "Fuck it, we'll make it vague." |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 800 Joined: 25 Nov 2008   | I really don't like it when they leave the ending open just so there is a sequel opportunity. Game developers should finish the story and if the game was good, create a sequel that adds to the story of the first. |
Paperboy  Posts: 25 Joined: 24 Dec 2008     | I agree. It's worse though when the game ends on a brilliant cliffhanger, only for no one to buy it, no sequel to be made and therefore, no closure (i'm looking at you XIII). |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 624 Joined: 8 Dec 2008   | Yeah, I usually dislike open endings. Unless it really fits the story to have a vague, "what if" kind of ending. But I don't like them if it's an open ending just to get people to buy the sequel so they'll know what happened next. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 988 Joined: 20 Oct 2008    | Open endings in games are usually way too open; Halo 2, Assassin's Creed, Crysis, etc are a few examples of how NOT to end a game. Instead of leaving me anxiously awaiting the next game, I usually just feel ripped off, like all the work was for nothing. I do like certain open endings that still wrap up the main plot, yet hint towards a sequal. The thief series did this perfectly. |
On the Record  Posts: 5978 Joined: 7 Feb 2008    | Any worthwhile narrative should tell a complete story in and of itself yet reveal plot threads that can continue on through a myriad of sequels and potentially spin offs. In essence there is nothing wrong with an "open" ending as long as it wraps up every major thread within the story that it told. Always wrap up the main plot, kill off the ( or a) main villain and reveal the fate of the heroes. Cliffhangers and too open endings are lame in long release games. People reference Assassins Creed a lot but I felt the game wrapped up Altairs story nice and neatly, it just left Desmond's story open, which I feel fits my criteria for an okay ending. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2371 Joined: 14 Sep 2008    | I don't like open endings but I despise open endings when there is no sequel! I'm looking at you Psi-Ops. |
Muckraker  Posts: 298 Joined: 27 Oct 2008    | I actually kind of like open endings. Then I can keep on imagining the answers to all those unanswered questions. I have nothing against the ending of Assassins Creed at all. PedroSteckecilo makes good points on that. As for Desmond I have the entire story for a possible sequel in my mind. My guess is that the sequel will greatly disappoint me, because it won't beat my imagination. Anybody like me here? |
Paperboy  Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Jan 2009    | Haha omg, I'd totally forgotten about Sly Cooper.. The Kingdom Hearts ending sucks.. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 397 Joined: 8 May 2008    | I think open endings are fine unless it is in multimedia franchise. But it does have to be an actual ending, with some lose ends, not an explosion scene followed by credits. That's not an ending in any way, shape, or form. |
On the Record Posts: 5978 Joined: 7 Feb 2008 | I forgot about the annoying and super vague Kingdom Hearts endings, man those are annoying. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 549 Joined: 3 Jan 2009    |
Agreed. They just need to accomplish a sense of closure. If the ending is vague and whimsical then you feel like you've ploughed through a game only to be told "Hah, Enjoy it did you? Well F*** you, your princess is in another castle...which is another installment, which you also have to pay for". |
Paperboy  Posts: 41 Joined: 24 Oct 2008    | I think theres got to be a balance. It's almost worse when a game is fully wrapped up but then gets crudely unwrapped (bad analogy) to make a sequel. The end of the Halo wraps up THAT PART of the story but left the actual game world open for sequels. |
On the Record Posts: 5978 Joined: 7 Feb 2008 | Despite what I said earlier about Cliff Hanger Endings, the one for Digital Devil Saga 1 was AWESOME, however the sequel was already made and translated and was released only a few months after the first one. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 397 Joined: 8 May 2008 | I actually rather like all the KH endings. The theme of the game itself is that everything goes in cycle, so it sort of sticks with that. It does get a bit annoying at times, but I think it's a rather clever way of doing it--especially KH2 OP giving the game a lot of extra meaning when played backwards. But then again, I just button mashed my way through the game, and never cared too much about the story to begin with. So I can't say the ending or any other part of the game for that matter means much to me. |
On the Record Posts: 5978 Joined: 7 Feb 2008 | Every game should follow the "Star Wars" formula. At the end of the story the Death Star is destroyed, Luke has used the Force, Han proved he was a good guy and Darth Vader is last seen hurtling off into space. There's still a ton open though, Luke isn't a Jedi yet, The Empire only lost one of its super weapons and Darth Vader could have survived, we also haven't seen the Emperor yet. However if "The Empire Strikes Back" were never made we could "assume" that Vader is dead and that eventually The Rebels will defeat The Empire. If you can't tie up the loose ends with your imagination, then the ending is way too open. |
Paperboy  Posts: 23 Joined: 7 Jan 2009   | I hate open endings as much as everyone here, i prefer if a saga of games comes out, end each story and later pick up down the line, showing that its not quite over for the heroes. For example, the onimusha games tie up and end the particular story, to show you that not all loose ends are tied up, sure, you killed evil boss overlord X, but forget about lackey Y, who becomes the next overlord X. Also, Earthbound for the super NES ended the story nicely, but then threw out a large middle finger to players after they go through the ending and the epolouge. I wont spoil it for you, but they decided to throw a cliffhanger at the end (much like the formula listed above) but it felt tacked on. And the fact they never finished pissed me off royally. (mother 3 never came out in the states, and from what i read was a different story, no true tie in with Earthbound aka mother 2. grr.) |
Muckraker  Posts: 255 Joined: 21 Dec 2008  | Just because a game ends with a cliffhanger or open ending doesn't mean that it is fit for a sequel, there are plenty of books and movies that leave the ending in the reader/viewers head without having a continuation of the story. I like the fact that you don't always get the entire story presented but have to do some work for yourself. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1465 Joined: 2 Jan 2008 | I think every game should end with a super open ending and tons of unanswered questions that make us, the players, think a little bit about the possibilities we've set in motion. And then, right at the very end, the main character wakes up and it was all a dream. - J |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 54 Joined: 2 Oct 2008  | The real trouble with these endings is what games like assassains creed and resistance 2 did. Assassains creed gave an ending that left you going, wtf, well now im very curious as to what happens next and i'm gonna have to wait like a year to see. Wrong. Because ubisoft montreal made a different game altogether a yearish later, at least doubling the amount of time tose anticipant must wait. Insomniac did the same thing with both resistances. But with res 1, the ending was mundane enough that I was fine waiting two years to see what happened next, cause I didnt care horribly. But with res 2, the ending after the cridits was just holy shit enough to peak my curiousity and desire closure sooner, but nope, we'll get ratchet in a year (Not a horrible thing, assured) and then get closure. It's a dick move. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 592 Joined: 19 Nov 2008   | make a poll and they leave me kinda sad, and empty inside. |
BANNED  Posts: 31 Joined: 11 Sep 2008    | if i were you i wouldnt play prince of persia User was banned for: Unskippable: Eternal Sonata. (Permanent) |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 56 Joined: 10 Dec 2008 | When I see this thread I think of 1 game and 1 game only ... Prince of Persia ... To avoid spoilers I will go no further but if you have played the new one you will know what I mean when I say "WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!" |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1465 Joined: 2 Jan 2008 |
That was a little different. That didn't leave any unanswered questions or anything. Not being a "The Good Guys win and everyone is happy," ending doesn't automatically make it an open ending. In fact, I loved the ending to the new PoP game. Didn't really care for the game all that much, but the ending was great, if only for being so unique in this genre. Likewise, AC also had an ending. Altair's story ended. That's the end. No one bitched because we didn't find out if Fred Savage got over his cold at the end of The Princess Bride. Halo 2 was an open ending, because it practically ended mid-sentance and didn't finish any stories. This is really popular with "Part 2s" in movies nowadays, see Pirates or the Matrix. AC and PoP aren't open. A shame you didn't like them, but they do complete the stories they were telling. - J |
Copy Clerk Posts: 56 Joined: 10 Dec 2008 |
Oh no, I did like the ending ... Forcing the player to perform an act that ruins everything they worked for was genius (Still trying to avoid spoilers). It was however an open ending as it leaves you with questions of "What happened to them", "Who is he really", "Was he being honest throughout", "Will he become a corrupted" and it leaves you with a huge number of possibilities. The way I see an open ending is one that doesn't tie off the ends which this one does not as the whole task that was neatly wrapped up in the story was completely undone in a matter of minutes. I do see where you're coming from but I would say this was an open ending. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 497 Joined: 19 Apr 2008 | Thank you for sharing your opinion! I think I need to specify what I aimed at: With "open ending" I didn't mean the end of a game in which it fitted to not explain everything, the wrapping up of a story is my focus. And the ending in i.e. 'Halo 2' simply screamed "F*ck you!" |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1465 Joined: 2 Jan 2008 |
Perhaps we'll simply need to agree to disagree, but I'll try one more time. Note: This post will contain spoilers for Pirates 2 and the Super Mario Bros movie. Super Mario Brothers (the movie) is a story about two plumbers drawn into a world that exists parallel to our own and there's some crap about a meteorite piece and merging and evolution and what have you. At the climax of the movie, the story that the film was telling is resolved. Koopa is defeated, the mushroom king is restored, the worry of merging is eradicated.... you get the idea. The good guys win. Then at the end of the movie, you see the plumbers back in their New York apartment. Suddenly, Daisy bursts in, decked out in battle gear and declaring that they have to come with her because, "You'll never believe it!" Mario packs up his gear and nonchalantly replies that he does believe and that they will assist her. Then the movie ends. This is not an open ending. This is a cliffhanger. The difference is that the story they were telling here ended back in the climax, and now this is just resolution in the form of teaser. Contrast with Pirates 2. Here we have a film where the bulk of the storyline is about Jack finding the heart of Davey Jones to bargain for his soul and freedom to sail the seas. Secondary plot bout Will and Elizabeth settling their love issues. Side plot about the East India Trading Company. Nothing happens and there are no resolutions. The film ends with Jack dead, the heart stolen by Norrington and turned into the EITC, Will seeing Elizabeth mack on Jack and never saying anything about it, and the final revelation that Barbosa is alive again (and eating apples). This is an open ending which *also* contains a cliffhanger. In case you missed it, Barbosa is the cliffhanger, but he does not make the ending open. The fact that the story never reached any conclusions made it open. Prince of Persia finishes the story it tells. Completely. If it were a book, that's where it would end. Yes, there's more that could be told about what happens next, but that's not the same as an open ending. - J |
BANNED  Posts: 1336 Joined: 21 May 2008    |
Agreed. Because it's basically two stories in one, which leads us to believe the same for any possible sequel. Maybe with a different ancestor. But I do think the ending in AC was ok. At least it left you with the tension of the moment and an "I WANT MOAR" feeling. Yeah ok, I love realism and history. It's one of my weaknesses. User was banned for: TIME Makes Everybody Lose "The Game". (Permanent) |
Copy Clerk Posts: 81 Joined: 10 Nov 2007 | As long as it fits in line with the greater story and you actually "End the chapter" at the end of the game. In some franchises it makes perfect sense, like most of the Sierra Adventure series. At the end of the game, that particular adventure is finished and the cast moves on to what ever the world has for them next time. As contradictory as it may sound, if you have an open ending make sure that your game from start to finish is complete by itself without relying upon story and/or plot elements of the future title. I hate games that end on cliffhangers. I don't mind if it's a plot device within the game to allow the focus to shift to some other part of the story and have it resolved later... but don't be a damn tease. There's too much of that going around already. |
Press Junketeer Posts: 497 Joined: 19 Apr 2008 |
Yes, that is correct, but I think the simple addition of a scene would have been absolutely sufficient. For example, Desmond could have met someone who says "I need to show you something", they leave the you-know-what and thatīs it. Simple, yet not so unbelievably unsatisfying as the "I wonder who...?" "scene" |
Reply to Thread
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
I was just wondering how you people feel about the new trend in games to deliberately not finish the story although you played through the game.
Well, I absolutely hate it. It always makes me feel as if I played a half finished game. Take 'Assassin's Creed', 'Halo 2' or 'Condemned 2' for example: These games want you to buy the sequel so badly, they just finish in the middle of the scene.
I think a game should be so good that it wants you to buy the next installment, but it should do so by wrapping up the story. The Sly Cooper games are a good example for this: They finish a game's story, but reference the prior game and the consequences in the sequels.