Most Obvious Plot Holes (spoilers ahoy!)

[Reg5879]

I want to point out the entire plot of CoD:MW2.

Oh, example? Well, the catalyst for the invasion of America is the terrorist attack in a Russian airport where there was one American corpse..... Okay.

To think that Russian security was so lax there that they didn't check the cameras to see who else was involved, or that American intelligencia wouldn't be out there doing a massive CYA job to prevent such an invasion from happening by their fault is lowbrow thinking at its utmost.

The entire plot for Modern Warfare 2 was one big facepalm after another.

Don't forget to add how easy it was for Russia to invade America.

 

[KwaggaDan]

There's this one plot hole in Assasins Creed II that really bugs me:

Spoiler

So, after Ezio stops Rodrigo Borgia from getting the Piece of Eden, we fast-foreward a few years in the Animus. Our faithful (if a bit douchy) British friend then suddenly realises that Borgio was a pope. So the expert historian just now realised that the main evil guy and head conspirator was once a POPE? I knew he was a pope from my 10th grade history class!

Yeah, but if you became a computer technician and lived in hiding for 10 years or so, how likely would it be for you to recognize that name?

And he really was more of a computer guy than a historian.

No, he was introduced as a the historian, and expert in Italian history. The chick, Chloe, I think is the Techie...

 

[Richard Hannay]

4) Because the story of Harvey Dent the man is important to keep hope of a better Gotham alive. Batman 'doesn't exist' and is already considered a vigilante, so he's able to take the heat instead of ruining the legacy of the good Harvey Dent.

And they didn't blame Dent's crimes on the Joker because? ?

I can't think of a good reason; I think this is still a plot hole.

 

[azncutthroat]

snippet*

About playing MW1, yes I did, and it was almost as bad plot wise. My argument was that world history shouldn't be ignored when slopping together storylines. NATO, in fact, was developed mainly as an anti-Soviet collaboration.

Umm...really, wtf?

Spoiler

MW2 IS NOT A FUCKING DOCUMENTARY. SURPRISE!

And what fictional story in any form of medium hasn't at some point deviated from world history? I find it largely biased how you point out MW2 in particular.

And about the launching of the ICBMs, the whole subject of why nuclear force was completely absent, outside of the EMP, is up for question. But that doesn't change the fact that the plot as a whole wasn't like swiss cheese, but more of a spider's web, where the vast majority was holes, and the minority was cohesive, coherent writing.

It's your right to criticize MW2's plot however much you want. However, I would consider your criticisms premature due to your demonstrated lack of understanding of the plot.

 

[KwaggaDan]

Pardon me for my ignorance, but why is that a ridiculous plot twist? I thought it actually worked fairly well, and the following scene (where Sam goes nuts) set the scene perfectly.

Spoiler

because she died. She was dead. And for her to just magically come back completely unharmed and happy to see her supposedly dead dad is pretty lame. It's magical plot filler. And yes it set up the scene nicely, but it was still a massive plot hole.

 

[azncutthroat]

Modern warfare 2 SPOILERS!

In response to all of the MW2 posts (although the whole story doesn't make a lot of sense) I would say that the major hole is that the attack on the airport even takes place. At the beginning of that mission your boss (the guy who betrays you in the end) tells you how hard it has been to get you secretly into Makarov's group thing and also how much of a total tosser Makarov is (i.e. already known to responsible for acts of genocide e.t.c.) so why don't you just shoot Makarov in the back of the head. I mean assuming you know that the attack is going to happen, and it must be pretty obvious when your rolling up to an airport with enough guns and ammunition to make Stalin blush, then any normal human being and especially a trained soldier would kill Makarov and his mates when the opportunity arose. I mean they don't need any evidence of Makarov doing something bad to order an assassination of him, they already know he's an enemy and this is a prime moment to kill him and save 100s of lives. Didn't make a lot of sense to me.

I assume you've never heard of the concept of "infiltration", "undercover agent", "immunity" or "sting operation"?

 

[megamanenm]

Heavy Rain, when Madison finds who the killer is, she gasps and looks shocked. All fine and dandy, oh, besides the fact that THEY NEVER MET.

 

[ninjapenguin981]

Spoiler

The only one I can think of is The Dark Knight (I know, it's not really gaming, whatever.)
As much as I love that movie, it's just littered with inconsistencies.
Why would Joker give two different versions of how he got his scars?
When would he find time rig two entire boats?
How can he join a soldier parade without anybody noticing the big lip scars?
Why is Batman taking the heat for Two-Face?
And most importantly: Why is defeating ten henchmen single-handedly more difficult then a single person with a knife? Or a dog, for that matter?

I think everyone else has answered this one pretty well, I'd just like to point out on the last question is that Batman doesn't kill people. The only way he could defeat the joker would be to kill him as he seems pretty immune to pain. This is why the joker is so potent to batman.

 

[capin Rob]

Spoiler

The only one I can think of is The Dark Knight (I know, it's not really gaming, whatever.)
As much as I love that movie, it's just littered with inconsistencies.
Why would Joker give two different versions of how he got his scars?
When would he find time rig two entire boats?
How can he join a soldier parade without anybody noticing the big lip scars?
Why is Batman taking the heat for Two-Face?
And most importantly: Why is defeating ten henchmen single-handedly more difficult then a single person with a knife? Or a dog, for that matter?

I think everyone else has answered this one pretty well, I'd just like to point out on the last question is that Batman doesn't kill people. The only way he could defeat the joker would be to kill him as he seems pretty immune to pain. This is why the joker is so potent to batman.

He didn't kill the joker, he left him hanging there by his feet, so the cops could get him,

 

[Richard Hannay]

Heavy Rain, when Madison finds who the killer is, she gasps and looks shocked. All fine and dandy, oh, besides the fact that THEY NEVER MET.

Oh yeah! That bugged the hell outta me at the time?

 

[ultimateownage]

Wow, almost all of these aren't has much plot holes has they are complaints due to lack of suspension of disbelief.

 

[shadyh8er]

God of War 3

Spoiler

Athena tells Kratos the reason Zeus was so obsessed with killing him was that he was overcome by the evils released by Pandora's box. Really? It wasn't because Kratos was being a douche and killing everything just like Ares? Not to mention Athena clearly stated in God of War 2 that Zeus wanted to end the whole "son killing father" trend. I interpret this to be a sad attempt to make Kratos look like a hero.

 

[thejdcole]

Why would Joker give two different versions of how he got his scars?

The reason is because he's messing with his victims heads. I think he gives reasons which he believes will disturb that person the most, because of past experiences they might of had maybe.

 

[thejdcole]

Modern warfare 2 SPOILERS!

In response to all of the MW2 posts (although the whole story doesn't make a lot of sense) I would say that the major hole is that the attack on the airport even takes place. At the beginning of that mission your boss (the guy who betrays you in the end) tells you how hard it has been to get you secretly into Makarov's group thing and also how much of a total tosser Makarov is (i.e. already known to responsible for acts of genocide e.t.c.) so why don't you just shoot Makarov in the back of the head. I mean assuming you know that the attack is going to happen, and it must be pretty obvious when your rolling up to an airport with enough guns and ammunition to make Stalin blush, then any normal human being and especially a trained soldier would kill Makarov and his mates when the opportunity arose. I mean they don't need any evidence of Makarov doing something bad to order an assassination of him, they already know he's an enemy and this is a prime moment to kill him and save 100s of lives. Didn't make a lot of sense to me.

I have to agree here. When i played this level I thought, if this guy is the head honcho and is such an asshole... can't i just take him out now and get it over with?

*Edit* sorry about double posting.

 

[sagacious]

In Half-life 2 *prepares for flame* Near the end, when Gordan Freeman is infiltrating the citadel, why doesn't he grab onto the BACK of the coffin-cart? at least that way when he gets up to Breen's office he will be free and able to move around.

p.s. I don't know how to do a spoiler box.

 

[VGStrife]

Spoiler

Plus, they would have searched the box on his way in.

Spoiler

I assume the gun was in his holster upon entering, rather than the box. The other items could all be easily hidden (it was just phone stuff and paper, right?).

More to the point, how did Ethan get the box back out without it going off?

 

[GrinningManiac]

Harry Motherf*ckin Potter

Last Book

Harry has been (apparantly) killed by Voldemort. Voldemort doesn't want to fall for the same trick twice, and decides to send someone over to check the corpse for signs of life...

Who Does He Send?

Option No. 1 - Bellatrix Whatsherface Bonar Carter. Hot Goth Chick Woman, basically. Fanatically loyal, hates Harry to the core, will instantly and happily murder Harry if he IS alive, and will never betray/lie to Voldy.

Option No. 2 - Mrs. Malfoy, the mother of the child Voldermort has been manipulating, abusing and enslaving. A woman who hates Voldemort more than anything, and one whom Voldy dosen't know that well. She could quite easily betray Voldemort in the hope of Harry saving Malfoy.

He picks No. 2

She goes over, finds Harry is alive, asks him if Malfoy is alive, lies to voldemort and says Harry's dead.

Voldemort belives her and picks up Harry with his wand. Even if she HAD been telling the truth, Voldey has neglected to check himself, especially considering the boy in question is now hovering a foot above his head and is very easy to just check for a pulse or something.

It was a needlessly long and drawn-out book beforehand, but afterwards it was just plain stupid.

 

[MattRooney06]

The original Fallout 3 ending:

Spoiler

Forcing the player to die or sacrifice lives even though there were two companions in the game that rendered this completely unnecessary thanks to their immunity to radiation.

That's not even a plot hole, that's really just a moral choice if you wanted to you can send FAWKS (if you have him) to go and activate the purifier...and you don't die

Actually when you ask him too he says somthing like

"this is your fate not mine"

when you ask CHaron (a character who is healed by radiation, and is bound by contract to do whatever you say) he says somthing like

"there are a lot of things i will do for you, this isnt one of them"

either you have to go in, or lyons does

 

[Citrus]

Why is Batman taking the heat for Two-Face?
He is a decent person, and by exposing Two Face, they'd show that the one politician everyone believed to be incorruptible is not. Seriously? They explained it extremely clearly when the police Chief's sun asks him that exact question.

Answers in bold.

You're right about the others, but this one is still a plot hole, because it would have been just as easy to blame Two-Face's murders on the Joker without the side-effect of Batman getting hunted by the cops. It's a wonder why Commissioner Gordon didn't suggest that.

A big part of Dark Knight's plot had to do with the fact that Batman's very presence would cause criminals to step up to his level, costume, MO and all. so blaming everything on the Joker would only further that belief. Also, Dent is Gotham's white knight, the incorruptable figure, so it's REALLY bad if it gets out that the Joker is responsible for Dent's turn into Two-face. So overall the best course of action is to pin everything on the original source of the costumes, Batman. So even if Gordon himself had misgivings about it, and believed in Batman's agenda, for the greater good of Gotham, it was the lesser of the two evils.

But when you consider all the people the Joker killed and how much of a stir he caused (and all the people he could have potentially killed with those boats) it's silly to suggest that the reason they don't blame the Joker for the few people Harvey killed is because it would "further the belief" that Batman's presence was causing criminals to step up to his level. Obviously it was, and Gotham saw that when the Joker straight-out told everybody via the news that Batman was making things crazy. Taking the bartender and driver that Harvey killed and saying the Joker did it would be nothing compared to all the other acts of violence he committed and people he killed.

And yes, I know why they want to save face for Harvey (pun not intended). That's why they'd be blaming the Joker. It's just a plot hole, or at the very least some very illogical judgement from Batman and Commissioner Gordon.