tragedy in media

[qwewee]

I just realised something recently. not many video games these days go for a tragic ending. now hear me out. I do realise that there are really well done tragic video game endings, my personal favorite being shadow of the collosus (I'm man enough to admit it made me cry). But the question I have is, why is this so rare? Not just in video games either but in cinema as well I haven't seen a story in a long time where the protagonist loses. Now to be clear I'm not counting things that were resolved positively in a sequel or most of a group gets wiped out. I mean the protaganist loses 100%. With video games I'm a little more lenient because the designers might be too afraid that the player may feel betrayed, as if their time spent playing the game was pointless. The thing is that in tragedy the meaning is in the struggle, not the conclusion. Anyone agree or disagree? I could see this becoming an interesting conversation.

 

[F4LL3N]

I guess the 'mainstream' want a happy ending. I quite often think after watching a movie, "that would have been even better if X happened".

 

[Svane]

When it comes to games the player "is" the main character and somehow identifies with that character they are playing. The developers know this and I believe they rather want you to feel "good and happy" when completing their game(s). I think it's a lot more risky, and really hard, to make a tragic ending, or sad ending, really good and appealing for the player(s).

 

[Astoria]

It's probably because there's enough misery in real life and people like to pretend that it always ends up happy. I don't mind a but of misery though and actually in many of the stories, that I may eventually write, there are sad endings. It's also a hard thing to do, have a sad ending but still have the audience get some satisfaction out of it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think the main problem with tragic endings in games is franchises.

It's not so much the sense that the public might think their playtime didn't matter, but that if the protagonist loses (usually meaning death) the franchise can't continue. Depending on the type of game, ofcourse.

 

[Extraintrovert]

Your question is inherently flawed, because "the protagonist loses" is not the only definition of tragedy. There are many other elements of tragedy, and many more methods for its implementation, and you should examine whether a work uses these instead of such a narrow classification. Generally speaking, when someone complains about how "work type [X] is no longer made" then the problem is with the person, not the works in question.

If you really need examples of works that end badly for the protagonists however, then try the Downer Ending [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DownerEnding] page on TV Tropes, although obviously beware of spoilers coming out the wazoo.

 

[Blunderboy]

Sadly the public can't seem to handle anything that doesn't end with the 'good guys' winning.
Just take a look at the original ending to Dodgeball. It test screened really badly, so they had to reshoot it.
Stupid test audiences.

 

[The Madman]

I can think of a couple games with more 'tragic' endings. But yeah, they're not terribly common in games for the simple reason that there are few games that really suit that sort of story-telling.

Most people just play games to have fun after all, and that's fine. Same goes with any other entertainment genre actually, the vast majority of movies will have happy endings after all as will most books.

 

[Zhukov]

Because tragedy is not conducive to power fantasies.

 

[Shymer]

There are a raft of different types of endings you can bring to a narrative (and not all games have narratives - so we are only looking at a subset of games). You might broadly characterise them into four types.

1. Protagonist achieves their goal and positive tone
2. Protagonist achieves their goal and negative tone
3. Protagonist does not achieve their goal and positive tone
4. Protagonist does not achieve their goal and negative tone

Just to clarify the reference to a 'tone' of ending - but there are endings where the protagonist's victory comes as too great a cost - or the protagonist realises that the goal they were striving for was actually a bad thing. On the other hand you can have stories where the protagonist fails, but finds hope - or achieves a secondary goal, which carries a great value.

In a game, where (usually) the protagonist /is/ the player, in order to capitalise on the sense of achievement that a game provides to 'goal-orientated' gamers, 1. and 2. are clearly preferable. In a book, or film, authors feel more free to play with endings which are negative - but in games (eg. Borderlands) where the goal is not achieved, it can deflate the whole experience.

I thought the original Force Unleased had an interesting multi-layered ending that made the experience very worthwhile, for example.

 

[omega 616]

I just realised something recently. not many video games these days go for a tragic ending. now hear me out. I do realise that there are really well done tragic video game endings, my personal favorite being shadow of the collosus (I'm man enough to admit it made me cry). But the question I have is, why is this so rare? Not just in video games either but in cinema as well I haven't seen a story in a long time where the protagonist loses. Now to be clear I'm not counting things that were resolved positively in a sequel or most of a group gets wiped out. I mean the protaganist loses 100%. With video games I'm a little more lenient because the designers might be too afraid that the player may feel betrayed, as if their time spent playing the game was pointless. The thing is that in tragedy the meaning is in the struggle, not the conclusion. Anyone agree or disagree? I could see this becoming an interesting conversation.

All I can say FFX.

Spoiler

it had the person you play as turn out to be a dream

So not only did you die, you never existed in the first place..

Plus other things that you find at the end of the game

If that isn't a tragic ending I don't know what is.

 

[GiantRaven]

Tragic endings are the best. It's what made LA Noire's ending so utterly wonderful.

 

[Dark Claw13]

You know, I read somewhere that someone changed all of sad stories that Shakespeare created and gave them a happy ending. Because people liked them better apparently.

 

[Haagrum]

Maybe I'm the only one, but I felt that the ending of Dragon Age 2 qualifies as a tragic ending.

Spoiler

Let's see... your protagonist has lost all or almost all of their family. Some of your friends may have deserted or turned on you. One of your companions has murdered the only person who could have brokered a peace out of an escalating situation and driven one side into a murderous revenge rampage. The other side has resorted to desperate measures just to stay alive, with the consequence of you having to kill them to stay alive.

You did everything you could, and it wasn't enough to stop all hell breaking loose. On top of that, you've lost your friends (other than possibly your lover), and don't get me started on how broken your friends themselves have been in the whole experience.

Sounds like a real downer ending to me, even if it sets up the next game nicely.

 

[Episode42]

It's rare in movies because in general people don't want to see people fail after supporting them for 90 minutes and it's even worse with games.
After spending 30 hours with a character, succeeding at doing challenges, missions etc not too many people would then honestly be happy to find out that all their effort was in vain.
The final kicker is, of course, that often these games are more fondly remembered, years after release.
Then of course 99% of companies won't just slap a bad ending onto something for the sake of it as it will almost always test poorly.
You have to remember that the average consumer is pretty thick.