Biggest plot holes in games

[Canadamus Prime]

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

EDIT: Never mind. I misunderstood what "Dark Space" meant.

 

[Akytalusia]

star ocean 3. love it to death. except the ending. the ending is concentrated bullshit. the bad guy wins, the universe is destroyed, and they all lived happily every after. and nothing is explained. you're left to speculate on what happened between those two events.

 

[redmoretrout]

I think it would be quicker to list the games that don't have plot holes.

But the biggest one would have to be Heavy Rain. There are more holes than plot to be honest. Once the big mystery is revealed you realize how little thought actually went into the story. I was going to list all the plot holes, but changed my mind because that would take all day.

 

[Judgement101]

ALL OF ULTIMA 9!
"What's a Paladin?"................the creators need to take a serious look at their games before they release it.

 

[ninjaRiv]

Guys? Guys, look up what a plot hole is, then post.

It's not "characters made a decision that seems dumb or weird" and it's not "something that could have been explained but was left vague". Things that are not plot holes include:

In The Walking Dead

Spoiler

... if you choose not to loot the car, the owner still stalks and kidnaps Clem to punish Lee despite Kenny having a kid and never even questioning whether to steal the food.

That's not a plot hole, it's a convenient characterization inconsistency. If the crazy guy decides to go after Lee, that's what he does, regardless of whether it makes the most sense, it's not logically impossible for it to happen.

Or in Arkham City

Spoiler

Strange threatening to reveal Batman's identity if he doesn't play along but never doing so despite being aware of his escape. Again, that's just something inconsistent the character chooses to do, not a logical impossibility.

Sheesh.

Real plot holes in games off the top of my head? Hm. Let's see... I'm coming up empty. I guess games tend to have simple plots, so it's relatively easy to keep them straight. There must be some, though...

"A plot hole, or plothole, is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot, or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot. These include such things as unlikely behaviour or actions of characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in the storyline"

Basically, the stupid action of a character can be a plot hole. Your point about Walking Dead is valid and so is the bit about Strange, to a point, but most observations here are correct.

But, before you reply, here's the captcha for this post: Agree to disagree.

Fallout 3 is one of my all time favourite games but the ending was pretty horrible. I tend to avoid getting that far when I replay.

That Wikipedia entry is just very poorly written and utterly inaccurate. Instead, on TV Tropes:

"Note that a Plot Hole is inherently a contradiction: A Plot element that is merely left unexplained is not a Plot Hole unless its occurrence is impossible according to the setting's rules."

That is actually correct. When they say not to trust Wikipedia at face value they mean articles like this one.

I didn't say anything about a plot point being left vague or unexplained. That's down to poor writing, not plot holes. The definition you've got there from TV Tropes doesn't mention characters and, if anything, backs me up on that.

A character's decisions can be labelled a plot hole if it contradicts everything you know about the character. Like I said, your Walking Dead example was perfectly valid; That's not a plot hole. But the Hugo Strange one is only valid because it can be argued that nothing about his personality suggested he was really going to do what he said he was going to do.

You see character based plot holes in family movies and shitty action flicks a lot. I will admit that this is, again, down to poor writing and stretches the definition (any definition) of Plot Hole but it still counts.

 

[ninjaRiv]

I really don't want to be a dick about this, but it's a pet peeve of mine. A plot hole is a plot hole, inconsistent characterization is inconsistent characterization. Those are fairly technical and precise terms and they mean what they mean.

Can an instance of inconsistent characterization be so extreme as to cause a plot hole? Maybe, but I genuinely can't think of any examples. It's a different thing if a character reacts to information he or she doesn't have, for instance. That's a plot hole because there is a break in logic. Somebody doing something that is out of character is just that.

For the record, the key part in my quote was the "unless its occurrence is impossible according to the setting's rules" bit. Unless it's logically impossible for the depicted events to have happened in the way they are shown, it's not a plot hole, it's something else.

It gets fuzzy when it comes to ignored plot devices. Somebody pointed out that in Harry Potter time travel exists and is readily available to the characters, yet nobody thinks to use it to foil Voldemort's plans. That almost kinda works as a plot hole, but it's a bit messy around the edges, in that it's the result of a deus ex machina being used halfway through the story and not written off, so the bad writing happened in the deus ex machina bit rather than in the later ignoring of it. Still a plot hole, I guess.

This was mostly what I was getting at. But also, I'm looking more at in depth character analysis and why sudden changes in personality would be plot holes. Granted, that's not the topic and probably isn't where any of this here conversation SHOULD go but that's where I was with that. Mostly, though, I was just disagreeing because little things like that make me confrontational.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

 

[Abomination]

Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3

Spoiler

during the hallucinogenic sequence where you have to kill Hoyt,

what the hell happened to all the guards?

It just irked me a little. Not enough to be an "oh my god this game sucks because it missed a few details" moment (not like I have those, anyway), but still, what the hell?

The answer is simple

Spoiler

YOU did. The death/murder of Sam before your very eyes by the person you, at this point in time, hate above all else sends you into another drug-addled, rage fueled hallucinogenic killing spree. You will notice how Hoyt's commentary throughout the QTE become slightly more desperate - this is because you are slaughtering his men successfully to get to him. He is likely pissing himself.

 

[tendaji]

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

Well Relays are like a fast travel between areas. So there was a relay at the Citadel and a relay off in Dark Space that they were camping. When it activates they can get there much quickly than flying from dark space to the very first active relay they come across. It was more about Arrival, where they ambush the central government and then spread out. Instead they ended up having to start at the very fringe worlds (Batarians) and work their way to the Alpha relay (which was blown up) and then they had to work their way to the NEXT relay. Sure they can do it through standard flight, but the Relays would have been far more efficient and would have been far more effective in terms of attacking the other races.

 

[wintercoat]

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

Actually, it took the Reapers half a year to get to the edge of our galaxy, rather than the instantaneous teleporting in the Citadel relay would have allowed them. Their MO has always been to pop into the galaxy through the Citadel, fuck shit up and take control of the Citadel, shut down the relay network for all but their use, and take over the galaxy system by system. By stopping them from using the Citadel, you both pushed back their invasion and slowed them down. The real plothole comes from the fact that the Reapers didn't go after the citadel until the very end. The whole thing would've been much easier for them if they did, as not doing so allowed people to flee the major systems, fight the Reapers on multiple fronts, and allowed a unified resistance amongst the different races.

 

[Vrex360]

Well there is sort of one in Spec Ops the Line. Let me just start by saying that I love Spec Ops the Line, however I can't deny that as chilling and powerful as the ending is and the twist certainly was clever in a way of defying genre, one aspect doesn't make sense.

Spoiler

It is revealed that Konrad, the main antagonist who Walker was in contact with, was in fact dead and had always been dead ever since the team first arrived in Dubai. So what was really happening was that Walker had gone insane, partly due to the guilt of the Mortar incident, and the part of his subconcious that knew he was doing wrong was projecting itself as the smug evil Colonel who he could now view as the 'bad guy' that he had to kill in order to be the 'hero'.

Now that works very well but where it falls apart is the fact that:

Spoiler

During the whole thing while Walker is blatantly talking to himself and recieving mission objectives from nowhere and mistaking two corpses as a pair of prisoners that they have to choose which will live and die... that two Delta Force operatives are with him the whole time and still obediently following him even after atrocity after atrocity is committed.
I mean seriously, it was a great chilling twist but who the hell would still be following someone this obviously crazy? If he's talking to himself nay, arguing with himself and taking orders from himself and looking at two corpses and saying 'we have to pick which one lives' then it's pretty obvious he's no longer fit for command. And yet they still follow him all the way to their deaths. It makes no sense and it really leads me to wonder what the other two characters were actually seeing while Walker was going bananas.

Of course there is also the possibility that:

Spoiler

The two delta force guys were already dead and Walker was just imagining them too.

That could make it make more sense.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

Well Relays are like a fast travel between areas. So there was a relay at the Citadel and a relay off in Dark Space that they were camping. When it activates they can get there much quickly than flying from dark space to the very first active relay they come across. It was more about Arrival, where they ambush the central government and then spread out. Instead they ended up having to start at the very fringe worlds (Batarians) and work their way to the Alpha relay (which was blown up) and then they had to work their way to the NEXT relay. Sure they can do it through standard flight, but the Relays would have been far more efficient and would have been far more effective in terms of attacking the other races.

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

Actually, it took the Reapers half a year to get to the edge of our galaxy, rather than the instantaneous teleporting in the Citadel relay would have allowed them. Their MO has always been to pop into the galaxy through the Citadel, fuck shit up and take control of the Citadel, shut down the relay network for all but their use, and take over the galaxy system by system. By stopping them from using the Citadel, you both pushed back their invasion and slowed them down. The real plothole comes from the fact that the Reapers didn't go after the citadel until the very end. The whole thing would've been much easier for them if they did, as not doing so allowed people to flee the major systems, fight the Reapers on multiple fronts, and allowed a unified resistance amongst the different races.

Well I got the very distinct impression that the Citadel was the Reapers only major means of entry. Maybe I just misunderstood what "Dark Space" meant.

One that's been bugging me since the end of Mass Effect 2 (haven't played 3, so maybe someone who has can sort this out for me), but it's established in the first game that the Citadel is the only (known) way for the Reapers to get into our Galaxy from Dark Space and yet at the end of Mass Effect 2 it's implied that a huge invasion is on it's way and that was the whole plot of Mass Effect 3 was it not? My question is how the hell did they get here? We shut down their only known way in in the first game.

They just fly there directly somehow...Space magic that's how!

Whatever the case, it kinda renders all the shenanigans from the first game kinda moot, doesn't it? After all, if they could just fly in whenever they wanted, what the hell did they need the Citadel for?

Only because the 2nd game sucked.

See the idea I think was that stopping sovereign was supposed to give Shep time to build alliances and prepare for war and find a way to stop them. The problem is that the 2nd game doesn't go anywhere with this, rendering the previous struggles completely moot. You might as well just start off at ME3 and not bother with anything prior.

Not really relevant (the fact that the second game sucked according to you) since the only reason I mentioned the second game, aside from the fact that it's as far as I got in the series before I gave up on it, was that the ending introduced the impending Reaper invasion; which, as I said, I was a little confused as to how that was possible.

 

[Narfo]

Modern Warfare 2. The whole Russian invasion of the U.s. doesn't make sense.

First off, after the mission "No Russian", wouldn't the Russian authorities have launched a massive investigation, which would involve identifying the three other gunmen? Which would, in turn, reveal that the leader was a known terrorist and madman.

Two, since when is it considered sane to declare war on a country for the actions of one crazy-person (who wasn't actually crazy)? Some may cite the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and WWI, but I (preemptively) counter that there were already factors and men/idiots who were pushing for war and the assassination was just the straw that broke the camel's back. As far as we (and the game) know, war is declared for the sole reason of an American being involved in the slaughter.

Three, the entire invasion force is shown to be attacking from the Pacific and the Atlantic. The Pacific? Yeah, I can buy that, since Russia has direct access to the Pacific Ocean. But the Atlantic? No way. That would mean that Russian forces had to either a)launch from the Barents Sea and make a long sea trip, b)take a massive road trip through Europe, or c)fly massive armadas over Europe, all of which involve (illegally) passing through the borders/airspace of almost every major European power.

Four, how do you launch a massive, full scale invasion force in the digital age, which has almost-instantaneous-communication and satellite surveillance, without anyone noticing until the last minute?

And finally, the coup-de-grace, the most glaring hole the Russian invasion in MW2 has. The entire invasion force: all the men, the equipment, the armor, the aircraft, the supplies and ammunition. All of that was gathered, prepped, organized, and mobilized, within the span of three days.

No sense at all.

Don't get me wrong. I don't hate MW2. It's a solid and enjoyable shooter. It just didn't think things through.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Bioshock. Your character has just regained his free will and is now free for the first time (in his life or since coming to Rapture) to do as he wishes and to not have to follow orders. You are immediately given orders and lead down linear paths for the rest of the game. (Less a plothole and more a more a narrative failure but still relevant).