Poll: Endings where the main character dies

[Something Amyss]

It depends on the game AND the character for me, so I didn't cast a vote. Red Dead Redemption, for example, I loved the ending. Mass Effect 3? Dumb.

It's all about context. Hell, death in Mass Effect 3 could have been a viable deal. But "you have to die now because ponies, it's the only way" doesn't do it.

 

[Alexias_Sandar]

Honestly, depends on the game. Planescape: Torment...your GOAL is to regain your mortality. There can be only one ending to that...the story is about how you go about such, as much as anything...who you become along the way...how belief can change and shape the world. Does that mean it's appropriate to every game? No, it doesn't.

 

[elvor0]

It really depends on the game and how it's handled. I didn't mind that Shepard died because it was a final conclusion to the series. However,

Spoiler: L.A. Noire Spoilers

Everything about Phelp's character told me that he wouldn't just stand by while a massive wall of water was charging toward him. I get that he was depressed about his demotion, his marriage ending (which also didn't make a whole lot sense characteristically), and learning what became of his old war pals, but he never seemed to be in such a deep hole that suicide became a good idea. If he had at least attempted to get out of that sewer, even if he failed, I think it would've made for a better ending.

Maybe I missed something in L.A. Noire, but the ending seemed like it was trying too hard to force us to feel sad about what happened.

Spoiler: Spoilers in response

I dunno, it did seem like he was trying to get out, if half heartedly, it didn't entirely feel like a suicide for me. I think it was more a statement on how corrupt the police force can be, because even that dick in the drug squad that sold you out (can't remember his name) was at Phelps's funeral saying what a great friend he was, a noble man etc. despite the fact that it was his fault he ended up in that situation in the first place, he was a nasty fucker that still never got his commupins. I think the thing that made Phelps' death less poinient is we never really got to see any of his life outside of the missions, the relation ship with him and Elsa was implied vaguely but then suddenly came out of nowhere, if I'm playing the main character, current events within the narrative shouldn't come as a surprise. So although there were elements of Phelps character shown, it just didn't have enough depth. Still loved the game, but it seems like it was missing some detail sometimes.

It's a great way to end a game, but only in moderation. When a bunch of games start using it at the same time (from recent memory; Halo: Reach, Red Dead Redemption, Mass Effect 3), it starts to appear cliche. Which is a shame, because all three of the aforementioned games had endings I enjoyed.

I'd say the ending for Halo:Reach was really good for that, although the character was pretty much a non character, the way it lets you just fight until you can't anymore was a fantastic link between narrative and gameplay. Like you say it's a bit unfair to say it's "cliche" in that context, it's set on Reach, and you're playing a Spartan that wasn't Master Chief, we all knew right from the start that all the Spartans would die, because in the words of Yahtzee "Whenever Reach gets mentioned it's implied as somewhere where a lot of shit got fucked up".

Spoiler: RDR Spoilers

That and John's death was was supposed to be symbolic, given John was a a relic of the old west, in a game where one of the main themes which is present from the very start was the death and Industrialisation of the Old West, by the time we're playing Jack, the "old" west was gone, and WW1 had started, with John being in the name of his last mission "The Last Enemy That Shall Be Destroyed" by the Bureau.

It really annoys me when people complain that you didn't get a choice about killing Edgar, because RDR isn't supposed to be a game with branching options, it's a set narrative delievered through a gaming medium that the writers wanted to tell. By killing Edgar Ross, Jack became an outlaw, which is the opposite of what his father wanted. So not only is John dead, but Ross also removed any chance John might've found of Redemption through bringing his son up well. Also I believe it's left ambiguous if Shepard is dead depending on the ending.

Although I do get what you're saying with it making it appear cliche when they're still great endings, I'm more just sort of thinking aloud in response

 

[SonOfMethuselah]

When it's done well, I actually really like these endings. Oftentimes, stories carry more weight when it's understood that no one in the story is guaranteed to come out of it alive. For example, in Mass Effect 3, (behind spoiler tags, just as a courtesy):

Spoiler

I think an ending featuring Shepard's death actually could have been quite fitting. The entire series is about the choices s/he has to make in order to thwart the Reapers, and the sacrifices inherent in these choices. One's own life is one of, or perhaps the absolute greatest sacrifice they can make to a cause, so Shepard dying actually fits with the theme of the series quite well. That said, it would have had to have been handled extremely well, and my own rather ambivalent feelings about the current 'canonical' ending aside, I feel like that isn't the case.

But if it isn't done well, as in Fallout 3 (again, spoilers more as a courtesy than anything):

Spoiler

and just comes sort of out of left field as a way to ramp up the stakes at the very end, in what is perhaps an attempt to eke out some sort of poetic equality, i.e: your whole family having died for Project Purity (yes, even your mother, though she died in childbirth), and there's no allusion nor foreshadowing, consequently removing any real weight from the moment,

then yeah, it can be sort of an annoyance, mostly because it doesn't really offer any closure. But, overall, it can be an extremely effective method of telling a story, especially if it's established right away that whatever journey the protagonist has to partake in is going to lead inevitably to their death, and they go ahead with it all anyway.

 

[Durgiun]

I don't mind if the main character dies under two circumstances:

1) The main character had his own personality and I controlled him in free roam. An example would be Carl from San Andreas, and that he was a likeable character. Not necessarily a good guy, but someone one could become attached to.

2) It's done rarely. If every character starts dying at the end it would become expected and it wouldn't have that emotional punch to it.

 

[exessmirror]

OP FUCK YOU, IM WAITING FOR THE GOTY EDITION FOR ME3, AND YOU SPOILED SHIT YOU ASSHOLE

 

[scorptatious]

It kinda depends on the game. With games like say Shadow of the Colossus, it sort of works with the game's theme and overall tone.

Spoiler

Okay sure, the main character didn't technically "die" but he did sacrifice his humanity via Dormin for the life of his loved one and ended up becoming a horned baby. Sure, he won't be able to get it on with her, but at least she's alive.

 

[Colonel Joson]

OP FUCK YOU, IM WAITING FOR THE GOTY EDITION FOR ME3, AND YOU SPOILED SHIT YOU ASSHOLE

To be fair, this is a thread about Main Characters dying, spoilers are bound to come up.

 

[RandV80]

I would say anyone who voted 'hate' never played Shadow of the Colossus.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Depends on the context. If his/her death accomplished something meaningful that would carry on into future generations or they were a sacrifice to destroy a legendary enemy then sure, let them go out guns blazing. Unless there's a sequel it won't matter much anyway- the reason you built up your character was so that they had the power and loyal comrades to accomplish the final challenges at the end of the game, the ones where you stop the greatest evil phenomenon in their world at the cost of your own life.

(SPOILERS)

My favourite example of it being done well is Zero from the Mega Man series. After several false starts he finally ends it completely free of the curse of his insane creator, as well as killing another villain who was every bit as despicable as Dr.Wily, and bringing about a new era of peace between robots and humans.

One I didn't enjoy so much was Kratos in God of War, because it didn't accomplish anything. Apparently he just couldn't stand the pain of his past to live on after getting his revenge, despite having born it for years after and being fully aware that humanity is in for a horrible few centuries thanks to his acts. Then again, he is miles away from a traditional hero and I would never call him a coward.

Everyone will be talking about the Mass Effect 3 ending here, but more generally I don't think the hero dying in the ending has become a common enough trend to be detrimental to the experience, particularly if it's foreshadowed well as in Persona 3.

 

[Dr Jones]

If the main character dies, then I get the feeling I (the character) should have just stayed in bed.
It doesn't matter if you've changed the world, if you're not around to see it.

That's a very egoistic approach. What about the billions of lives you saved? Do they not matter, once you are gone?

 

[Eddie the head]

OP FUCK YOU, IM WAITING FOR THE GOTY EDITION FOR ME3, AND YOU SPOILED SHIT YOU ASSHOLE

Don't worry just pretend it didn't happen, like everyone else.

 

[Tigerlily Warrior]

I'll be blunt, I hate endings where the main character dies. And I mean HATE them, with a passion. Especially in RPGs where I spend time building up my character and getting attached to them and then they just up and die. Its infuriating, because I feel like everything I just worked for in that game didn't mean shit. I spent 3 FUCKING GAMES building up my Shepard, characterizing him, leveling him, and ME3 all but one ending just up and kill you.

It all depends on how the game treats that ending. With ME2, if you and everyone in your party dies, its because of the decisions that YOU make. And even if you play the game with a deliberate attempt to have a suicide mission, you go out in a blaze of glory, which is still satisfying.

When game developers decide the game will end by "going out in a blaze of glory" but handle the story poorly, you get frustrated customers. IMHO.

 

[DustyDrB]

Depends on a lot of things. Sometimes, I think it's too cliche. Other times, it fits. And sometimes, it could really go either way.

I actually consider the death of the Warden in Dragon Age: Origins the "canon" ending to the game for myself. But...it depends.

 

[gravian]

I think it really depends not just on the game but also the protagonist. Having Shepard die at the end of ME3 was I think the only way they could do justice to the buildup of the previous games and the feeling of facing a nigh unstoppable enemy. Yes, other members of your party can die going towards the ending but only if you do certain actions or effectively choose their deaths. Having Shepard die seemed to really show how much sacrifice he and the party had gone through and how far he was willing to go. I mean, through the whole series Shepard for fighting for the benefit of or to save humanity or the galaxy, so once the threat was gone it would seem out of place for him to still be around.

And sometimes a protagonist just needs to DIE at the end of a game because having them live a happy ever after would just be wrong. Final Fantasy X and Tidus's "death" being a prime example. And the fan-wank that was X-2.

 

[PsiMatrix]

It depends on the game.

In Halo Reach; we start knowing our character is going to die. Not a spoiler since we knew that from Halo. Reach fell and MC escaped on the Pillar of Autumn beginning the Halo saga. I figured it might be some shoe-in screen death but after ODST I knew they'd at leats try something. So for the final scene, the final level effectively, we get a last man standing match. We hold out as long as we can and take as many of the Covenant with us. It felt like it mattered.


I would've said ME3 as a bad example but with 3 core endings and no canon choice; there's a distinct lack of resolution and one breath scene which leaves everyone hanging. Does the manin chracter live or die? "Yes" is the only answer we seem to get there. Although in ME2 it was a possibility. If you didn't do things right then yes, you could die but it felt right with the story that had been given. Or if you went with the Morinth romance option (what a way to go).

If it fits, if it's built-up properly then it can work but if it's disjointed, if it comes from nowhere or runs contrary to previous efforts it can taint your enjoyment. If there's a choice then it should be an attainable choice between life and death.

Which reminds me; I should play Blood Omen again.

 

[llubtoille]

If the main character dies, then I get the feeling I (the character) should have just stayed in bed.
It doesn't matter if you've changed the world, if you're not around to see it.

That's a very egoistic approach. What about the billions of lives you saved? Do they not matter, once you are gone?

As far as I'm concerned (assuming a blank screen upon death) the world literally ends with me.
so no, the lives of others hold no influence upon my death.

 

[GonzoGamer]

It really depends on the game and how it's handled. I didn't mind that Shepard died because it was a final conclusion to the series. However,

Spoiler: L.A. Noire Spoilers

Everything about Phelp's character told me that he wouldn't just stand by while a massive wall of water was charging toward him. I get that he was depressed about his demotion, his marriage ending (which also didn't make a whole lot sense characteristically), and learning what became of his old war pals, but he never seemed to be in such a deep hole that suicide became a good idea. If he had at least attempted to get out of that sewer, even if he failed, I think it would've made for a better ending.

Maybe I missed something in L.A. Noire, but the ending seemed like it was trying too hard to force us to feel sad about what happened.

Yea, that reeked of pretentiousness. I don't like R*s formula of late where they want you to feel all sad about someone's death but that's just because they're just not good at it. The overwrought melodrama of those moments make me want to laugh more than cry.

It would be fine if it was done well.

 

[Dr Jones]

If the main character dies, then I get the feeling I (the character) should have just stayed in bed.
It doesn't matter if you've changed the world, if you're not around to see it.

That's a very egoistic approach. What about the billions of lives you saved? Do they not matter, once you are gone?

As far as I'm concerned (assuming a blank screen upon death) the world literally ends with me.
so no, the lives of others hold no influence upon my death.

Who said the death of the main character = no epilogue? Red Dead? L.A. Noire?

 

[Inco]

Personally, I enjoy those endings. But only if the death is woven into gameplay as more of a "last stand" scene. If its cutscene based, it just takes me out of it.
The two in particular I really do like, though are :

Spoiler: Halo: Reach

The epilogue, basically enough the main plot has ended, you have done everything you need to as part of your duty. The hitch? your stranded on a doomed planet amongst the corpses of your fallen allies. Vastly outnumbered, exhausted and running out of ammo/working equipment, you make a stand to take out as many as you can before going under.. (well, at least for me that happens.) To me, it just seems memorable and sticks to be one of the better endings.

Spoiler: Spec Ops : The Line

Another post game epilogue that occurs after the main plot, it grants you the choice of how the game ends after the main plot. You can either lay down your weapons and go with the rescue team, or shoot them and start up a new firefight, with either ends with your characters death or with the solders deaths (as part of the plot) this felt as a more organic ending when it came to choices, despite how brutal it was. None of this ME3 shite, where you "died" after choosing one of 3 options from a menu. Back to spec ops, the ending where the character died from the solders had the most impact for me

Disagree with me if you must, but that's from a personal perspective.