[EDITED]how would you react to a distopian ending to a game

[thespyisdead]

So i am trying to write a story to a game, and i came up with an ending to the game where you fight the final boss and you are kicking his ass, and just as you deal the finishing blow, he transforms into something big and crushes you and your party like a bunch of flies.

My question is how would you react to this kind of distopian ending to a game: would you demand your money back, or would you feel that this was a good ending to a game or something else.

please comment as much as possible on this, as it would be interesting to hear from every gamer. Also it would nice to hear how people take distopian endings in general.

captcha: happy rlappy

god damn that thing is sentient, or something


EDIT:after reading the comments, this is what i think will be a be better ending than the lolkill i proposed:

somewhere in the middle of the story, the protagonist and antagonist face off, the antagonist not being at his strongest, because he has not preformed the ritual needed to release the power of the artifact that he stole. the antagonist is naturally overpowered, and sees that should the protagonist not be slowed down, he will not have the time to do so, so he puts a curse on him, that in time will kill the protagonist. he also during this battle tell, that were he to be stopped a much greater evil would befall the world, but no one believes him naturally, after that, he teleports away.

despite the curse, the protagonist presses on. during the last battle he wins just by a thread, and as he does, he succumbs to the curses effects. as the rest of the party emerges from the battle, the greater evil starts invading.

*credit roll*

is this better?

 

[SlaveNumber23]

Provided its done well, I would welcome such an ending purely because its something rather fresh and different. I suppose it would be rather difficult though to pull it off without making your audience feel ripped off or unsatisfied but I think it could work well in careful hands. I'm certainly not going to do something as silly as demand my money back even if I witness the absolute worst ending possible.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well what you are talking about there is having all their work go to waste... how would you feel it that happened?
I for one would be mighty pissed.

If you can come up with some reason that makes the journey not be in vain then you could possibly sell it, but it is walking a very fine line.

 

[Zhukov]

So long as there was a point to it besides, "Haha, look how unconventional my game is!"

 

[Karoshi]

Dystopian ending suggests not just defeat, but failure that goes far beyond a boss battle. It would mean that the world is changing for the worse, and those endings do work in rare cases.

Spec Ops: The Line did something similar and I really loved it. Bioshock would have been a better game if it ended encounter with Andrew Ryan and we ultimately failed - it would have emphasized the message of the game and make it something truly unusual. Still, I get why the developers opted for a "happy ending".

As for your idea... meh? Sounds a bit like ME3 ending, to be honest, and that ending was ass.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

So long as there was a point to it besides, "Haha, look how unconventional my game is!"

Beat me to it; these are my exact thoughts.

I'm not entirely sure how you can pull it off. It'd be pretty anti-climactic to up and suddenly kill your cast. You'd have an automatic bad guy wins scenario and the only way to change it is to pull in other characters from the story or introduce a new cast right at the end.

I'd say the best way to do it is make it an optional ending. Something that occurs if you fail or you're not powerful enough to deal with it. I can't seeing it being much of a hit, otherwise.

 

[King Aragorn]

I wouldn't mind seeing ALL kinds of endings explored, this one too. Although, it'd need a proper explanation, and for it to be emotional. Not simply rolfstomp. It is a bit of a thin line though, as someone noted above.

 

[fezgod]

If its in the theme of the game, as in you and your party are doomed to fail no matter what, I wouldn't mind it if it was done well.

 

[EHKOS]

If the protagonist survives by a hair and wanders the now terrible planet alone, being reminded of his failure with every scorched crater, then I would love it. But just killing them off wouldn't make it cool. We do need more failure endings, I'm getting sick of the "good guys always win" mindset. Then again I love twist endings.

EDIT; Oh, and what fezgod said, if it seems like they had a good chance of failing anyway, it would make it more believable.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Pull a diabolus ex machina to fuck over the player? I'd just be pissed, unless it really fit thematically with the narrative of the whole game.
Plus, dystopia is not a byword for 'bad'. It doesn't really make sense to talk about a dystopian ending, unless you literally mean that due to the hero's failure the game world becomes a dystopia.

 

[niknar266]

If it was the end of a stand alone game or end of a series and it pretty much ended really soon after the end boss crushing your party I'd be pretty pissed but if it had good epilogue or a way to make it feel like I wasn't cheated by the game I think I'd by mostly ok. Also it depends how integrated it feels with the story it is e.g. fitting the theme as someone suggest above if an ending like this came out of nowhere it would certainly receive a lot of hate (See: The ME3 ending that is still getting threads to this day).

If it was the setup for a sequel and the main character of the party survives to fight another day I would probably be more accepting of it. Could lead in to a good character arc for the protagonist with them reflecting the loss of the comrades and self doubt that they could win next time round.

 

[DaWaffledude]

I don't care how the game ends, as long as it makes sense and actually fits with the game's themes.

 

[darth.pixie]

No.

It wouldn't be bad if the work wouldn't go to waste, but grinding against a boss just before he kills you...it's the D&D "Rock falls, everybody dies". People would replay that boss fight again and again for a different end, thinking they'd done something wrong. It would, quite honestly, upset me if the monster is invincible from the start. Why play? You could sprinkle the plot with appropriate hints and nudges, but you are still depriving the player from achieving an end to his liking.

When playing, the end is the most important part. That's what people remember. Look at the ME disaster. Or the NWN 2 one, where people I know still think they need to punch the developers for that even after an expansion was released. Screwing the player over just for a special, never-seen-before end is bad. A heroic sacrifice, however, will do. The ground shakes and the monster as well as the party dies, or some such. That's understandable.

Just make sure the player is informed of what he's going into.

I'm not against endings in which the PC isn't the hero or doesn't save everybody, but an end in which failure is the only option? It takes away from the satisfaction of having played the game in the first place.

 

[Lionsfan]

So i am trying to write a story to a game, and i came up with an ending to the game where you fight the final boss and you are kicking his ass, and just as you deal the finishing blow, he transforms into something big and crushes you and your party like a bunch of flies.

My question is how would you react to this kind of distopian ending to a game: would you demand your money back, or would you feel that this was a good ending to a game or something else.

please comment as much as possible on this, as it would be interesting to hear from every gamer. Also it would nice to hear how people take distopian endings in general.

captcha: happy rlappy

god damn that thing is sentient, or something

First thing: *dystopian, no I

Second, like others said, if it fit well in the narrative, I wouldn't have a problem. No Deus Ex Machina just to be different

 

[Quellist]

A more Dystopian ending would be for you to defeat the Boss only to find out all his evil acts served a greater purpose, say conquering and enslaving neighbouring countries to unite them and make them able to survive some catastrophe that, divided, would destroy them.

And there you stand, realizing by defeating the evil overlord you have doomed yourself and everyone you love to bitter destruction...

An ending like that would IMO be pretty sweet....

 

[Catrixa]

It'd really help to know what the general game is about, honestly, because there are really two parts to this:
1) The actual story.
2) The player's relation to the game.

Story-wise, it's cool if you want to murderate your main cast, so long as it makes sense and is believable (or you're being a jerk and want a hook for a sequel, I guess). Your audience is happy with closure. If you have a bad dude that wants to destroy the world and freaking DOES, that's closure. If you have a bad dude who wants to destroy the world, some heroes try to stop him, it looks like the heroes will win, but then the bad dude destroys the world, that's going to leave people asking "well, what the hell? Those heroes couldn't kick him just one more time? How the crap did they lose??" (note: you might be able to fix this post-climax, but I'd wager it'd make more sense if there was some sort of foreshadowing that the heroes will lose). If you have a bad dude who wants to destroy the world, some heroes try to stop him, it looks like the heroes will win, but then they just lose and the credits roll: you have a bad ending with absolutely no closure at worst and a weak plea for a sequel at best.

Making this into a game makes it much more difficult (and this is where it'd help to know what kind of game you were making). People don't just want to see what's happening to the main character, they're actively trying to help the main character succeed in whatever it is that they're trying to accomplish. If your game progresses right, you can kill off your main character/party and this will be fine. If you do this wrong, it will feel like all of the player's investment into the game has just been gleefully flushed down the toilet. If you have to ask, "well, then what were the last [however long the game is] hours of my life for!?" you have made a bad game.

My suggestion would be: write some basic story thing, then read it to people. If they think "hey, that's pretty good! We like how the heroes get stomped in the end," go ahead and prototype it (hell, even if they say "we HATE how the heroes get stomped in the end, but we freaking love the story and want to know more some day," that works too). Have (potentially other) people play your prototype. Preferably people who don't know you very well, or friends who are OK with being brutally honest. If the gameplay doesn't feel satisfying at the end, rework it until it does (so, if a slow, grindy, turn-based RPG isn't the place for this ending, you might need to switch it to another style).

Sorry if none of this is terribly helpful; I'm not much of an authority on yond videogames, I just play them a lot.