is the "ending" the most important part of a game?

[NeverwinterKnight]

judging from the threads about kotor2 and vampire:bloodlines, of those who enjoyed the games, the one complaint (or atleast the most common complaint) was how crappy the ending was, to the point of it ruining the entire game for some people. is this an anomaly or is the ending the most important factor, atleast in terms of people remembering their experience, in the entire game?

will a great game for 9/10ths of the game be considered "disappointing" if the ending is crap? will a mediocre game for 9/10ths of the game be remembered as better than it truly was if it had a fantastic ending?

imo, assuming the rest of the game was average or better, the one aspect of a game to make it memorable seems to be its ending.

thoughts?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Don't forget Lionheart. It started off good and then shame spiralled down to lameness.

The ending is fairly important if for no reason other than that's typically your last impression. I know there's been movies I've enjoyed up until the ending, and a bad ending ruined the entire experience.

 

[Fez]

A good ending is what makes you come back for more. It's why magazines like PC Gamer and Amiga Power before it ended on a high with a whimsical funny page at the back. The old, crappy way of doing it was to put all the good stuff at the front, with the highest reviews first and then have them go down from there, meaning by the end of the magazine you felt depressed for reading it, instead of gratified or amused - and who is going to go back for second helpings after that? Only the most hard-core, at least.

You see the same thing happen in soaps who end with cliff-hangers at the end of each episode "YOU ARE THE FATHER OF MY BABY!" "YOU SHOT FRED!" (DUN DUN DUUUUUN!). A bad or flat ending leaves a bitter taste to the whole thing after it and as it is the freshest in your memory, it has a tendency to color your thoughts of the whole thing.

There's a lot to be said for going out with a bang in the entertainment industry.

 

[dunduks]

Ending is fairly important to me, but if a game is very good, it hurts twice as much and leaves a bitter aftertaste, if only becouse you know how much more great the game could be if it would not end in such a hurry/mess/whatever. However as far as Vampires or Kotor 2 goes - while the endings did feel rushed and messy, it wasn't that bad since it gave you at least some general idea what happens, the worst case for me was Anachronox, I simply enjoyed that game so much that I am still pissed at Eidos for ruining the devs of this game and burying the licence

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I think endings are important as they bring finality to the entire gaming experience. As Saint said, they're your last impression, and last impressions, much like first ones, can change the entire perception of it.

 

[obediah]

It depends on the type of the game to me. I'f you're playing a game with a sweeping story arc and wrenching cinematics then you are going to expect a big ending. If planescape had ended with the foozle falling dead and immediately switching to a 8-bit picture of a cake w/ "You are teh Win! Don't do drugs." it would have still been an excellent game, but I spent weeks in awe about how cool the ending was.

Regardless, the ending is the last impression the game makes on you. So while it might not have a great affect on how good the game is, it seems like it would have a inflated affect on whether or not you recommend the game.

Lionheart was an entirely different beast - it was half the game that was stillborn not just the ending.

 

[Fez]

If PS:T had an ending as you describe it, it would have been a slap in the face and it would have soured it for me, despite the rest of the game being exellent. I'd have been annoyed that the developers had suddenly fucked up at the end.

 

[Oyarsa]

Most important is compostion - how well the component parts of a game work together to pull off the project. This includes narrative structure, which includes endings. An ending should be bittersweet - relief that I've succeeded coupled with regret that it is done. Too much of the former and the journey was too toilsome, too much of the latter and there was insufficient closure. If the ending were the best part, though, its unlikely I'd get there to find out.

 

[Trash]

Duh

I strongly believe that a strong beginning, an interesting middle and a great ending are needed in any game/book/movie.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

I totally think endings are an important part of a game, but perhaps not the most important. That's reserved for actual gameplay. But if I work my butt off getting through a game, I like to be treated to a decent ending. And, no, that doesn't mean it has to be 30 minutes of high quality CG or anything. It just has to be decently written and give closure. Having multiple endings is great too, but only if you have multiple paths leading to them and not just some cop out way to get them all.

 

[Stark]

here's another way of looking at it: the ending only matters if the earlier part of the game is good enough to make you actually complete it.

I've made some foolish purchase in the past where I couldn't even make myself complete the game, so whether the game in question has great ending or not didn't matter at all.

 

[Stark]

And, no, that doesn't mean it has to be 30 minutes of high quality CG or anything.

Actually i prefer some decent looking CG at the end. For an rpg it's normally a 20 hour or more investment so i do hope to be rewarded with some nice CG at the end.

Having multiple endings is great too, but only if you have multiple paths leading to them and not just some cop out way to get them all.

heheh, reminds me of Dues Ex. The lamest way to end an otherwise good game.

 

[PennyAnte]

I tend to play RPGs several times through, and probably enjoy toying with character mechanics and min/maxing more than anything. By the second time through, I'm skipping as many of the plot development dialogues, cutscenes and so forth as possible. So "The End" is not as important as it is in a book.

With KOTOR 2, I played it first light side, taking the time to savor all the narrative and story elements. But I was already looking toward the next play through and character build by the time I got to the end.

The fact that the end was a lame let down of a tedious combat maze was a downer, yes. But replay softened the blow. I just worked through it as quickly as possible. I wanted to check out the narrative while working for Czerka, see the dark side quests, etc. The third time through, I didn't care about plot at all.

I guess I expect a series of good short stories from an RPG like KOTOR, not a good novel. I want each planet (or most of them) to be good and unique. If one is not so good (like Malachor), I can overlook it. Or just use it as a "proving ground" for my character build.

I take games in pieces, I suppose. I don't look at them exactly the same way I look at other types of entertainment.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

A good Ending makes a good game great, it something that should be a punch so you will remeber it and want to play it again.

 

[Stainless]

The reason why I disliked the ending of KotOR2 and V:BL was because it had such a shitful leadup to a real pisspoor ending.

It was just a slap in the face after putting up with all the crappy combat waves, and then get a lame ending, when you KNOW they could of done better. Quite frankly, if you can't release a game without rushing it, then don't release the bastard.

In general views, I enjoy a good ending. I like to know what happened to my character, or the plot afterwards, or even get some pretty CG.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

I thought the ending where the prince opens up the sarcophogu(sp?) and gets blown up while jack sits and watches it with the mummy was pretty satisifying. But, hey, to each his own.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Yeah, the climax is extremely important in any book, game or movie. Don't forget the denouement or epilogue, either. It's one thing to end the game with an awesome ending in which Irenicus, the Master or what have you is defeated, but the game needs to conclude with a denouement, like the slideshow in Fallout detailing your actions and their effects in all the places you visited, and the character stories in Baldur's Gate 2.

Some games can have a good climax, but completely leave out the denouement or epilogue. For instance Half Life 2. I actually liked killing the Administrator, but the game didn't explain anything of what had happened at the end. That was pretty bad, really.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

Halflife 2's ending is partially responsible for my disdain of the game. That's also the one thing I really hated about the original HL was the ending. I mean, if you're going to leave a game open for a sequel, at least still give us a decent ending with some form of closure on events.

 

[Greatatlantic]

The most important part of judging any game is the part that is so bad that you don't want to play anymore. Not all games have such a part, but the later it is the better. That being said, the ending is usually the most rushed part of any game, and the part most likely to dissapoint. Take Omikron. The gameplay up until you defeat the first major demon was pretty good. After that the game felt incredibly linear, and the ending was so incredibly atroscious.

Bad Endings (opinion)
NWN (just a showdown with increasingly powerful monsters... then a quick 60 second clip)
KotOR (how many Sith Apprentices do you have to kill?)
KotOR II
Half Life II (incredibly anticlimatic, unaswered questions aside)
Bloodlines (the actual ending was OK, the lead up of respawning enemies was not.)

Good Endings:
Fallout
Arcanum
Morrowind (thats right, no ending, just the game that goes on, and on, and on... actual showdown with Dagoth Ur was, well, gay)

 

[Surlent]

I like solid titles, executed well from the beginning to the end. Well who doesn't anyways ?
If the game attempts to telll a story, which most crpgs do, then like every story the game has beginning, ending, climax etc.... If one part is poorly done then the story feels lacking or in worst case leaves plotholes and inlogic events that don't make any sense (on the part of storytelling). And ofcourse in the end everyone expects great ending demos.

Open endings and "deus ex machina" type endings (no ref to DX series) are another thing completely, because they are intentional especially if the dev wants to make xpansion/sequel.

So yeah, ending plays good part of the game and should not be rushed, but neither any part of the game. But realities step in and there are timetables, so rather make a short game with less features from the start than start cutting down stuff in the middle of development. But then there's competition in quality. >_<

 

[Eclecticist]

The ending is the climax of the story. Any game with a narrative has to have an ending, it is imperative, and whether it is good or awful greatly affects the believability and overall quality of the story.

So no, the ending is not the most important part of a game, but it is possibly the most important part of the narrative of a game. And in many people's minds, these narratives ARE the most important part of their games.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Epilogue is important, too. I want to know what happened to my character, especially if there's a sequel coming up. That's what Baldur's Gate lacked. After the statues crumbled and Sarevok died, I didn't know what happened to my character. The game should have at least had an Epilogue chapter narrative, where the narrator says how your character, along with a few of his companions, journeyed south to the city of Amn for some reason or another.

 

[Saran]

As i said over at the Obsidian forums, yes, the ending is one of the most important parts of the game.

It gives all of what you did previously "meaning", at least as far as the storyline is concerned.

The first RPG that i ever played was (gets ready for shitstorm!) Final Fantasy 7 on the Playstation, a couple of weeks after that i bought Baldurs Gate, then the sequel and so on.

Until i played FF7 i didnt realise just how compelling a storyline in a computer game could be, up until then i had played platform/shooter/strategy games, and so i tended to view games as a fun way to waste time rather than a hobby. (As for FF7, come on, we all have to start somewhere! )

Since then i have played the fallouts, arcanum, morrowind, the deus ex games and so on, infact CRPGs is probably my favourite genre.

But the thing all of the games i enjoyed had in common was story, sometimes it might be a bit childish (FF series) , sometimes a bit nerdy (games set in the D&D universe), sometimes a bit angsty (FF8), and sometimes utter shite (Dues Ex 2, the shortness and the general lack of depth in the NWN main campaign, all of the FF games past 8)

Yet all of them that had a decent ending were, well, fullfilling for lack of a better word.

Kotor 2, Vampire BL (at least as far as the leadup till the end is concerned.) and as someone mentioned earlier, Morrowind and the crappy showdown at mount doom, oops, i mean red mountain, were disappointing.

Vampire had the bit with jack, the metuselah (spelling?) and caine looking on as the bomb went off, morrowind had the massive world that meant you could really get into your character, this meant that the game still registered as time well spent when i looked back at them, but kotor 2?

Ages spent saying the same stuff over and over again to the jedi council, pointless arguments with Kreia that are meant to lend a "Darker" tone to the game but end up coming across as if the developer is trying too hard to say "Look at us, we made star wars.........FOR ADULTS!!!!!"

And lots more, but all of that would have been fine, if it had all been tied up, as it was in the first game. (while Kotor 1 didnt have the depth of 2, at least it wrapped up nicely.)


What we get instead is a broken experiance, all of the stuff you did to earn the trust of your party was worthless, you miss out on vital information if you dont "cheat" and give answers that go against everything the character you are RPing believes in, and worst of all the hack and slash crap of Malachor V.

All in all a waste of time, half life 2 left you with questions becuase valve intend to answer them in the sequel, Kotor 2 left you with questions becuase their wasnt enough time, and none of them will be answerd in the sequel, why?

Becuase all of that stuff they left out is not "canon", unless they implement it in an expansion the crappy ending will be the one they continue Kotor 3 on from, and all the time you spent on the sidequests in Kotor 2 will have been for nothing.

In other words: Waste of time, i would have gotten more entertainment out of sacred than i did out of TSL, hell, at least IWD 2, another hack n' slasher, had a proper ending (Im unfamiliar with the complaints some people had with it since im not really the sort of person that visits game forums that often.)

Ahh well, fuck it, despite all of the shitty things i have found in other games not once have i posted a complaint on the official forums, yet Kotor 2 even made me post here, despite the fact im normaly happy just to pop in every now and then to read the latest anti-exitium stuff and to see if anyone has found a good CRPG.

(Shit, as you can see by the length of my post im not used to posting on forums, looks like i need a bit more practice condencing my opinions before i post regularly. )

 

[DemonKing]

I think from a hard core player's perspective endings are important - but remember that we are only a fraction of the audience. The vast majority of casual gamers who picked up Baldur's Gate, for example, never finished it (according to Bioware)...so it's pretty obvious that when time and budget is running short, it's usually the ending that gets shafted...it probably just seems like it's a bigger issue than it is for most gamers because the kind of people who post on developer message boards and whine about crappy endings are usually the hardcore minority.

Saying that, a good ending can really round out a gaming experience - I don't think FO, for example, would be remembered quite so fondly without the delightful irony of the closing sequence. Conversely, a game like HL with one of the all time crappiest endings ever (lobbing rockets at a giant floating baby after a series of frustrating jumping puzzles) is forgiven by most simply because the ride up to that point was so memorable.

 

[PennyAnte]

Conversely, a game like HL with one of the all time crappiest endings ever (lobbing rockets at a giant floating baby after a series of frustrating jumping puzzles) is forgiven by most simply because the ride up to that point was so memorable.

This goes down as one of the funniest descriptions I have ever read. I might as well add that we were lobbing those rockets into the giant floating baby's cracked-open head. What kind of LSD trip inspired that one, I wonder?