Ending Slides are a Cope

[Please No]

I'm on a journey, dozens of hours long. The journey spans over the entire realm, with me questing here and there, resolving conflicts, slaying beasts, finding legendary treasure - making 'choices' and suffering their 'consequences,' so to speak. And I don't seem to be seeing any of these in the actual game.

Is the timeframe just too small to observe long-term consequences? Perhaps. Why should it matter to me what transpires after I finish my journey, though? Cui bono? Obviously the developers benefit from talking you into the idea of consequences surpassing the game timeframe. You're talked into giving a shit about the secondary world beyond the gameplay proper. In other words, you're being duped, my friend.

Ending slides are a cope. They exist to take away your sense of accomplishment. You assume that the nonsense present in the slides must've been the natural consequence of what happened in the game, reactive to your choices. It's simply not. They assume your in-game character will not give a shit what happens afterwards, therefore you have no business getting any gameplay bits. It's a poor GM's trick to tell you what happens to your character, ignoring your agency.

If you can't do nothing about X happening, don't mention X in the first place. Why tell me of these grand rebellions and times of prosperity, and wars, and beast invasions? Hearing about these, I want to participate in-game, try my hand, get into cool fights, beat cool enemies, get cool rewards. Did my character retire, or something? If they went someplace else, where's my sequel?

Oh Maxie, it's not *your* story anymore. Fuck off, Storyfag. It's a game, and all the exciting bits therein exist to challenge and entertain me, the player, not a bunch of NPCs.

Why is this post downvoted so hard? It's 100% spot on, if you aren't going to make some point with an epilogue then the ending should be just that, an end. Not a list of things that should have resulted from your choices but changed nothing about the game.

Endings with slides are better than endings without slides.

Looking at Planescape Torment in particular, but I suppose the idea there was to fill you with disappointment so it succeeds in that regard.

No, it was perfect and a stupid slideshow would have detracted from it. Your choices changes the ending, but after that it ends, as it should. Imagine wanting to wreck that.

 

[Storyfag]

crispy's entire life is an ending slide.

And LCG's not on it.

 

[Maxie]

Why is this post downvoted so hard? It's 100% spot on, if you aren't going to make some point with an epilogue then the ending should be just that, an end. Not a list of things that should have resulted from your choices but changed nothing about the game.

The reason why so many are recalcitrant to the idea that ending slides are an offensive cope is that being a platitude hurling relativizing animal like Darth Roxor is more socially acceptable - it's simply safer to mumble out "b-but some ending s-slides are c-cool and give you a p-postscriptum" instead of standing resolute and yelling at the top of your lungs "IT'S FUCKING SHIT IS WHAT IT IS."

 

[Citizen]

Why is this post downvoted so hard? It's 100% spot on, if you aren't going to make some point with an epilogue then the ending should be just that, an end. Not a list of things that should have resulted from your choices but changed nothing about the game.

Hello reddit, there are no downvotes on codex. Every button is precious and positive in it's own unique way

 

[Darth Roxor]

The reason why so many are recalcitrant to the idea that ending slides are an offensive cope is that being a platitude hurling relativizing animal like @Darth Roxor is more socially acceptable - it's simply safer to mumble out "b-but some ending s-slides are c-cool and give you a p-postscriptum" instead of standing resolute and yelling at the top of your lungs "IT'S FUCKING SHIT IS WHAT IT IS."

 

[Silly Germans]

I'm on a journey, dozens of hours long. The journey spans over the entire realm, with me questing here and there, resolving conflicts, slaying beasts, finding legendary treasure - making 'choices' and suffering their 'consequences,' so to speak. And I don't seem to be seeing any of these in the actual game.

Is the timeframe just too small to observe long-term consequences? Perhaps. Why should it matter to me what transpires after I finish my journey, though? Cui bono? Obviously the developers benefit from talking you into the idea of consequences surpassing the game timeframe. You're talked into giving a shit about the secondary world beyond the gameplay proper. In other words, you're being duped, my friend.

Ending slides are a cope. They exist to take away your sense of accomplishment. You assume that the nonsense present in the slides must've been the natural consequence of what happened in the game, reactive to your choices. It's simply not. They assume your in-game character will not give a shit what happens afterwards, therefore you have no business getting any gameplay bits. It's a poor GM's trick to tell you what happens to your character, ignoring your agency.

If you can't do nothing about X happening, don't mention X in the first place. Why tell me of these grand rebellions and times of prosperity, and wars, and beast invasions? Hearing about these, I want to participate in-game, try my hand, get into cool fights, beat cool enemies, get cool rewards. Did my character retire, or something? If they went someplace else, where's my sequel?

Oh Maxie, it's not *your* story anymore. Fuck off, Storyfag. It's a game, and all the exciting bits therein exist to challenge and entertain me, the player, not a bunch of NPCs.

Showing that a small subset of possible ending slides are shit, does not prove that all ending slides are shit. Your conclusion is not convincing. Ending slides can be shit or can be good, there is no one-size fits all.

 

[waken]

Just don't give me a KOTOR2 ending.

 

[Shadenuat]

Western RPG ideal is that RPG must be Huge, have all systemic freedom (I can go anywhere, kill anyone and rob them of their stuff) but have narrative richness of a linear rpg. It is no wonder developers end up using pattern endings as a out of jail card.

In a simpler game, with smaller world, premade protagonist and less ways of interacting with world, you can get away with giving player more roleplaying opportunities. It is interesting how in most JRPGs I played recently, there are multiple endings you can choose + you can fail during game + True Endings. It is easier to do in a streamlined format with more abstract gameplay (like, map + text quests + fight, or, visual novel + dungeon, or linear travel through 3 main cities with teleporting between quests ).

Also, player character is too often a game changing persona, and narrative is based around EPIC world shattering events. But if you allow this truly to manifest, you just will destroy your world and your Super Narrative and, well, the game. So developers hold the world in a state of status quo during gameplay and change it when you're done with the game.
Ironically I think if you take away from player much of their power, you may end up with giving them more choices. (Thief, Deus Ex)

 

[BING XI LAO]

Ending slides are NOT C&C. They don't count. I still like them though.

 

[Ol' Willy]

I hate to agree with Maxie... but ending slides are really cheap. You know, some movies employ the ending very similar to ending slides, when after the resolution you are shown what happened after with each important character. And it's usually the most trashiest movies that employ that. In the games, this feels the same.

Imagine Fallout 1 without ending slides. You deal with the Overseer and cast off in the desert. That is, the impact is immense; but ending slides dilute the desired effect, ending is protracted and loses its effect. Don't give me so much information; I don't need near-instant gratification for my actions for fucks sake, leave some intrigue for the future titles or imagination.

 

[Joseph Stalin]

Arcanum and Pathfinder: Kingmaker are doing ending slides right, especially the former title - they cover not only the obvious choices (party members, factions etc.) but also minor, hidden quests, as well as anything having a snowball effect (who the hell got the ending slide for the halfling alchemist on their first playthrough, or the best ending for dwarves)?

 

[Lurker47]

Imagine Fallout 1 without ending slides. You deal with the Overseer and cast off in the desert. That is, the impact is immense; but ending slides dilute the desired effect, ending is protracted and loses its effect.

And now the C&C arguments have cycled into the storyfaggotry as is the natural progression of a Codex debate.

Ideally, the best ending slides would be synthetic to the main story because of their prose, their good writing. I don't think there's an example of this- yet. Ending slides aren't the right call for every RPG, even if they're done well.

Don't give me so much information; I don't need near-instant gratification for my actions for fucks sake, leave some intrigue for the future titles or imagination.

The reductio ad absurdum of this sentence is quite funny. "If I do a quest, why should I see the outcome of it in THIS game? Shouldn't I just start out in the next installment with a new hat?"

 

[Twiglard]

Without ending slides people bitch about lack of C&C. There was a large butthurt against non-RPG Life is Strange for having a binary choice ending despite C&C influencing endings throughout 5 parts of the game. It somehow wasn't a "choice" despite characters living or dying in the last act -- because it wasn't part of the ending or denouement. Ending slides respect story structure.

 

[Ol' Willy]

And now the C&C arguments have cycled into the storyfaggotry as is the natural progression of a Codex debate.

Slides are not C&C.

The reductio ad absurdum of this sentence is quite funny. "If I do a quest, why should I see the outcome of it in THIS game? Shouldn't I just start out in the next installment with a new hat?"

No. Consequences inside the game are good and count as a real C&C. Show me how my actions affected the situation in my time-span, without leaping in the future. If the consequences are protracted a little (quest finished in the first third of the game, consequences are visible in the last third) then it's just fucking awesome.

I didn't word my position quite clear, but what I meant: slides are often used as a cheap replacement for C&C and a gauge to measure the players action. You killed Gizmo - the town flourishes; you killed Killian - Gizmo seizes the power and chokes on Iguana years later. There's no intrigue, no nuances, only arbitrary good and bad outcomes. Fallout gets a pass for this, for it was 1997, resources and finances were limited; modern RPG with bigger budgets have no moral right to use such system.

 

[Twiglard]

I didn't word my position quite clear, but what I meant: slides are often used as a cheap replacement for C&C and a gauge to measure the players action.

The worst recent example was New Vegas with that energy-weapons-selling crime family. You reported them to the authorities and it'll take many years for legal proceedings to start. Talk about unsatisfying.

 

[Please No]

Imagine Fallout 1 without ending slides. You deal with the Overseer and cast off in the desert. That is, the impact is immense; but ending slides dilute the desired effect, ending is protracted and loses its effect. Don't give me so much information; I don't need near-instant gratification for my actions for fucks sake, leave some intrigue for the future titles or imagination.

Imagine Planescape: Torment with ending slides after the final cinematic, just imagine it. Detailing Morte opening up a corner shop in Sigil, Dak'kon returning to Limbo and stuff like that. It'd be like putting a needle to a balloon and deflating everything.

Without ending slides people bitch about lack of C&C. There was a large butthurt against non-RPG Life is Strange for having a binary choice ending despite C&C influencing endings throughout 5 parts of the game. It somehow wasn't a "choice" despite characters living or dying in the last act -- because it wasn't part of the ending or denouement. Ending slides respect story structure.

No, they don't, they are just like Maxie said a band-aid when you won't actually have a proper structure. The binary ending is a problem because it makes everything that came before it less impactful. Branching towards the end is cheap, so that is where players expect much of what they did before to come into play in a good game. Everything in terms of writing and reaction to player choice should be done in-game, as a part of the game. If it needs to be relegated to slides then it shouldn't be in the game in the first place, because they are plot tickets the writers can't deliver on.

 

[Roguey]

Imagine Planescape: Torment with ending slides after the final cinematic, just imagine it. Detailing Morte opening up a corner shop in Sigil, Dak'kon returning to Limbo and stuff like that. It'd be like putting a needle to a balloon and deflating everything.

I have enough faith in Avellone's writing abilities for him to keep up a proper tone, not unlike the ending slides for Dead Money, Old World Blues, and Lonesome Road.

 

[Please No]

Imagine Planescape: Torment with ending slides after the final cinematic, just imagine it. Detailing Morte opening up a corner shop in Sigil, Dak'kon returning to Limbo and stuff like that. It'd be like putting a needle to a balloon and deflating everything.

I have enough faith in Avellone's writing abilities for him to keep up a proper tone, not unlike the ending slides for Dead Money, Old World Blues, and Lonesome Road.

Maybe, but it is the format itself that is a huge part of the problem. He didn't need slides, the characters you interacted with changed during the game, the places you visited had their impact felt then and there. If he had slides in mind when writing the rest of the game it would have been worse off for it, I'm sure of that. You'd have that kind of trivial choices as in Fallout, who runs Junktown? Does it matter? Instead the writing in Torment focused on what was important instead. Everything that needed to be addressed were so during the game, not after it.

 

[Verylittlefishes]

Old Words Blues had funny ending slides.

Otherwise I think Dark Souls ending (you burn for humanity and THE END) is somehow more straight.

 

[Please No]

Come on now, Roguey, you know I'm right and that Maxie is also correct in his thesis. Did the slides in New Vegas actually do anything for you? They are extraneous at best, detrimental at worst.

 

[Lurker47]

Slides are not C&C.

That wasn't the implication.

I didn't word my position quite clear, but what I meant: slides are often used as a cheap replacement for C&C and a gauge to measure the players action.

This was the implication (of what was meant by "arguments about C&C")
You ignored half of the post to laser-focus on what was essentially a joke.

There's no intrigue, no nuances, only arbitrary good and bad outcomes. Fallout gets a pass for this, for it was 1997, resources and finances were limited;

This is not fundamental to ending slides. They are merely another tool for developers to use. You said yourself that they can be used as a gauge or a replacement but they don't have to be.

To imply they're inherently bad, no matter how they're written or what kind of game they're in (as opposed to just being a good indicator that the game doesn't have a lot of good, diverse C&C), is either disingenuous, an arbitrary preference ("uuuh it'd make sequels kind of clumsy!") or just dumb. This isn't addressed specifically to you- more just the general idea of the thread.

no moral right

Bro, what

 

[Ol' Willy]

You said yourself that they can be used as a gauge or a replacement but they don't have to be.

They don't have to, but they usually are. As I said, ending slides are just one step away from "best ending" shit (in case of limited possibilities, they are almost it). "Oh no, I didn't get the positive outcome for this city, oh woe!" - this is a trick to promote more playthroughs without the in-game C&C. Not only that, but this funnels the player into one chosen line - usually "good" or "evil" playtrough. To get the positive ending for Hub in Fallout 1 you supposed to kill Dexter. But I don't want to kill the guy - I usually do some work for him; therefore ending slides show me the "bad" ending for Hub, despite that there were no precursors to it aside from one Dexter-related condition.

 

[Ol' Willy]

 

[Sigourn]

Ending slides are a cope. They exist to take away your sense of accomplishment.

Pretty much. I've never finished New Vegas, meaning I never saw the ending slides. Which explains why I thought most of the "choice and consequence" in the game was mostly "choice" with little consequence, because all the good shit is reduced to a couple of lines of text telling you the consequences of your action, i.e. the equivalent of making up consequences of your own in your head.

Problem with ending slides is that they are more interesting than the choices you make yourself. Examples:

• In-game: kill Tabitha. Consequence: though some super mutants and nightkin continued to journey to the legendary Utobitha, they found little trace of its existence. Some eventually found their way to Jacobstown, but many wandered off into the wastes, confused and disheartened.
• In-game: don't complete Volare, win the game with the Legion. Consequence: the Boomers defended themselves against many attacks from the Legion, but they eventually fell to the Legion's superior numbers. The Legion enslaved the Boomers and erased any memory of their existence from the wasteland.

The consequences, which you don't see, are far more interesting than the actions you do take.

 

[Grauken]

Also, another big brain thought - I'm pretty sure you're shooting yourself in the foot if you add ending slides to a game that's going to end up having a sequel, since the ad hoc/irrelevant stuff you put in the slides kind of binds you from there on. For example, I'm pretty sure Gothic 2 would be less cool if Gothic 1 had "ending slides" because I strongly doubt they had all the roles for all the characters that "survive" Gothic 1 already established after the game ended, and especially those who come back in NOTR.

Probably the reason Fallout 2 didn't continue with the story of the Vault Dweller and did the time jump, if you think about it. They could have easily done a sequel immediately set after the end of the first part, but the ending slides probably killed that