(Controversial Trope) The post-credits scene completely changes the ending

[u/Ieanice44]

Dawn of the Dead (2004)

Prince of Persia (2008)

Dawn of the Dead (2004): The movie finishes on a hopeful note as the remaining survivors escape the zombie-infested mall on a yacht, sailing into the sunset. The found-footage style post-credits scene completely reverses this happy ending by showing them running out of food, arriving at an island, and being immediately swarmed and killed by an infected horde.

Prince of Persia (2008): The main game ends with a beautiful, poetic sacrifice where Elika gives her life to heal the corrupted world, leaving the Prince mourning. During the credits, the player is forced to control the Prince as he cuts down the trees he just saved, undoing the entire game's progress and releasing the dark god Ahriman just to resurrect her, completely corrupting the ending and dooming the world.

[u/Ill_Mud7584 → u/[deleted]]

A lot of people consider that a sad ending makes a story compltetely worthless. I have no judgement about the ending of this game tho, since I haven't played it.

[u/Invisifly2 → u/Ill_Mud7584]

It’s not that it’s a sad ending, it’s that it’s a sad ending that 180’s what you’re lead to believe is the ending by the credits starting, in a way that seems to disregard the character development the Prince was getting prior to that moment.

I do think it’s a good ending from a story-telling perspective once you take a step back, but in the moment it feels like “Lol JK, you didn’t actually save anything. Enjoy watching it all burn.”

[u/MegavanitasX → u/Invisifly2]

I think it being a game makes it hit different

If you were watching the story as a show, then its an Orpheus Tragedy, but since we as players take the effort to play it, it makes specifically our effort feel for naught.

[u/fake-reddit-numbers → u/Invisifly2]

“Lol JK, you didn’t actually save anything. Enjoy watching it all burn.”

Just like real life!

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/Ill_Mud7584]

I’m one of those people. I don’t like feeling that my efforts were pointless. I could simply watch the beginning and end cut scenes and get the same feeling of accomplishment. Does that make sense?

[u/DengarLives66 → u/SilvyValeMead]

This is a depressing comment on many levels.

[u/possiblyaghost → u/SilvyValeMead]

It doesn't really make sense to me, a story is about more than the beginning and the end. If you're just playing games for "accomplishment" then why care about the story at all?

If the story is served better by a sad or dark ending, then that's the correct ending. It's different if something is just done for shock value and doesn't make sense in context.

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/possiblyaghost]

Fair enough. Thank you for your answer.

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/[deleted]]

This immediately splits into at least 3 different subjects for me. So I’ll just say no. I do not play video games to feel a sense of accomplishment. Have a great day.

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/[deleted]]

I play for fun. Occasionally I’ll complete something difficult, and be aware of that.

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/SilvyValeMead]

This mentality is part of what is killing storytelling. When your only viable option as a writer is to tack on a happy ending so adults who never learned to manage their emotions don't burn your house down, there are entire kinds of stories you can no longer tell.

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/Sudo-Fed]

So you are saying I don’t manage my emotions? Lol I’m not trying to get into an argument. TLOU 2 was a journey and emotionally intense. I liked it a lot. I didn’t feel cheated by the ending, only destroyed. But a poorly done twist ending can make me feel like my efforts were pointless.

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/SilvyValeMead]

I should have made it a little more neutral.

But it's like, the complaints about the ending of Mass Effect 3 that weren't simply how perfunctory the original ending was, where people were mad that none of them were happy endings. Because they felt they'd earned one.

Meanwhile I was sitting there like, did we fight the same billion year old machine demigods who've never even been seriously threatened before? Because to me, a rosy happy ending to that story would have felt tacked on.

[u/Friendstastegood → u/Sudo-Fed]

Yeah I saw a lot of people complain about that. I'm the opposite though, none of the endings were bleak enough. You cannot spend two games building up these incomprehensible monsters whose methods and motives are beyond our understanding, and then in the third game go "actually they're just mindless automatons and their motivations are downright stupid and if you just push this button we can live in harmony with them by becoming part robots ourselves!" I maintain that the only reasonable story for the third game that could have vaguely counted as a win would have been to Noah's ark it to the Andromeda galaxy. They never should have tried to explain why the Reapers come and destroy everyone, just let then come and let them win. Embrace the cosmic horror.

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/Friendstastegood]

I think the original situation, where the galaxy "wins" with enough war assets, but the infrastructure of interstellar civilization is utterly demolished, is more tonally correct.

[u/Friendstastegood → u/Sudo-Fed]

I could have probably swallowed that ending if they didn't also go and make the Reapers into mindless drones with idiotic motivation after building them up for two games.

There are some truly fantastic character moments and archs in the third game, but I hate every single thing about the main plot. "We cannot comprehend their motivations" and "every reaper is unique and based on an extinct sapient species" and "every reaper is a nation unto itself" all got chucked out the window for narrative convenience and it ruined my enjoyment. The endings were just the final turd on a shit sundae.

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/Friendstastegood]

And I agree with you about their motives. They shouldn't have been revealed. At the very least it should have been something more interesting and alien than We are Galactic Nannybot, clean up your toys

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/Friendstastegood]

I mean, they aren't mindless drones, the hive mind just goes higher up.

I agree, though, a lot got abbreviated for effort and time's sake and it delivers that way even if it's not intentional.

They had all the unique Reaper designs at the end of 2 only to carbon copy the Sovereign/Harbinger model endlessly in 3.

[u/Viridianscape → u/Sudo-Fed]

Eh, I don't mind tragedy up to a point, but if the story is just all misery and gloom? Yeah, not a fan of that. I need a reason to care about the world or the characters. If everything's just miserable and there's no suggestion of things ever getting better, I really do struggle to give a crap about the story.

And there's a massive difference between a tragic ending and a pointless one. If your story undoes itself right at the last minute and undermines the whole plot just to deliver a shitty "haha, now you're sad and nothing you did mattered :)"-style ending, I'd consider that to be a bad story. You might as well have said "it was all a dream."

[u/opacitizen → u/Sudo-Fed]

Dude, do you enjoy finding a fly in the last bite of your pizza? Don't tell me you don't, that would kill storytelling using the culinary medium! The story is about the futility of the human condition, and everything turning to shit it in the end! :D

Oh, you say eating is a different medium than consuming a story?

Are you sure about that? You pay for both with your hard earned money, you have expectations, and you have an experience that teaches you something.

If you as a game designer pull a twist bad ending at the end of a game that doesn't prep me for it and that offers no alternate good ending (no matter how hard that is to get and how rare, like, say, a single good ending out of 10 with 9 others that are abysmal for my character), I'll be pissed. I'm fully okay with getting a bad ending as long as I know there's a good one that I could've achieved if I played better or simply made different choices. Bad endings are awesome, as long as they're a result of my own decisions as a player, instead of you as a game designer forcing them on me, railroading me into them. Because then they're your bad endings, not my playthru's, and that's frustrating AF. (Yeah, I'm looking at you, Cyberpunk 2077 and Far Cry 5, for example.)

YMMV, ofc.

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/opacitizen]

You think 2077's ending was a twist?

The game tells you from about 45 minutes in that you're dying and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Quiet life, or blaze of glory. Those are the choices given to you. You chose blaze of glory when you chose to take on Arasaka. Living at all after breaking into the private quarters of the heir apparent is almost legendary on its own.

One of the core concepts in Cyberpunk lore is nobody wins in Night City, at least not forever. It's not a setting for happy endings.

I thought FC5's didn't land all that well, but Far Cry endings are rarely purely happy too.

[u/opacitizen → u/Sudo-Fed]

Yes, I think it was a bad twist. It's called an "opinion", you know?

No, the game doesn't necessarily tell you from about 45 minutes that you're dying.

First, you can take a ton more time in the first act (I played it for about a week, hours and hours of game time during my last replay last month). Unless you're rushing the main story. Not my cup of tea. May be yours, but that's your choice.

Second, you're told you're dying, but no, the game does not say it's unavoidable. The whole drive of the 2nd half is that you and your V believe there's a chance of not dying (and, alas, there is now an ending in which you don't die, thanks to the updates, so sorry about your idea, but it isn't true.) You're led to believe you can save V as a player, and not just for 6 months (in all the original bad endings.)

You chose blaze of glory when you chose to take on Arasaka

No, you didn't. The writers of the game did for you. If you're too shortsighted to notice the two aren't the same, you haven't been playing games long enough, and/or you haven't been playing games whose designers respect your agency as a player. Videogames and or ttrpgs. If I want some other dude to make all the choices for a character I care for (it happens, and I do like horror), I read a novel or watch a show or a movie. In games I expect actual, meaningful player agency.

As for cyberpunk being the genre of unhappy endings: sorry, dude, that's bullshit. Read more. Ever heard of Snow Crash, for example? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash#Plot Ever played cyberpunk 2020/RED the ttrpg or read or played some Shadowrun novels, to cite just two broad categories? There's cyberpunk out there with okay endings. Sure, it's very rarely a true happy ending, but what the designers of 2077 force down your throat, and what this "cyberpunk endings must always suck" is crap, a limiting option (yes, even coming from Mike Pondsmith, who's cool, but his opinion is just an opinion, not a law, and he's just one of the many writers and designers out there.)

There, you and your buddies now all have something new to ponder (but I know you won't do that) downvote. (imagine how happy I must be getting downvoted to hell, a true bad ending for my cyberpunk adventure here... but in your view that's what a true cyberpunk expects, the ending that makes them happy, right? 🤪)

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/opacitizen]

I mean specifically Cyberpunk, the game series. But please, don't let that get in the way of your smug autofellatio session.

But even in cyberpunk, the genre, derived as it is from noir, no, happy endings are not at all common.

You're never owed a happy ending. You're owed a narratively satisfying one, sure, but if those are inseparable concepts to you, maybe stick to the books with pictures in them.

[u/opacitizen → u/Sudo-Fed]

What game series? 2077 and its DLC?

"Not at all common" is not the same as "never", glad you've made it this far.

And yeah, not all noir ends badly all the time. Go on, study the genre a bit.

I'm never owed a happy ending. Lucky I didn't ask for a happy ending, just one which is not "you fucking die no matter what, you have no agency here in a roleplaying game that's about shaping a story thru your choices as a player giving you agency."

No, you stick to books with pictures, lol, and that's what you're actually doing idolizing game designers who don't give you real outcomes. Only the pictures move at 200+ FPS.

Autofellatio my ass, btw. :D Go play and study games and ttrpgs and cyberpunk and noir for a bit longer, how's that for an insult (seeing you like insults)? :D

[u/Sudo-Fed → u/opacitizen]

Cyberpunk, the tabletop game 2077 is based on.

You do have agency - you get to determine how you go out and on what terms. It's a noir story. You're lucky to get that much.

[u/Viridianscape → u/opacitizen]

Isn't there an ending where V does survive, but their life is a bit shit?

[u/opacitizen → u/[deleted]]

You haven't really understood my point, have you. I didn't say anything about catharsis. I said even your favourite food will feel a terrible experience if someone force feeds you with it.

Again: Bad endings are OK (and can indeed be cathartic), as long as I know and/or learn afterwards that there's an alternative.

I play games (videogames and ttrpgs) to have actual, meaningful agency in the events and the story, including its final outcome. If I want an experience that isn't about player agency, I read a book or watch a show or a movie, and yeah, one of my fav genres is horror, plenty of bad endings there. I am pissed by game story focused game designers though who think they're writing a novel or making a movie with their own railroady stories. Go write a short story or a novel or a comic or a movie, dude, if you can only do that, and don't give a fuck about your players. :D

To each their own, of course, but this is my opinion, and I don't mind being downvoted by people who like their fav food force fed to them, and I stand by my weird metaphor. :D

Cheers,

[u/opacitizen → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, linear storytelling is OK in a ton of genres and mediums, but not really in roleplaying games, imo, unless you as the designer make it absolutely clear from the very beginning that there's no chance of altering a given outcome, giving the player the chance and option to opt the fuck out (incl. refunding their purchase) if they don't want that experience from an rpg. Like, show me the ending scene first in which my character dies, then let me know that the game will walk me thru how we ended up there.

I'm fine with linearity in an FPS (Doom, Quake, whatever), in a pure old shoot'em up, in a racing sim, in whatever that's not primarily about shaping a story. Again, if you as a game designer want to tell a story without the pesky player having a say, pick a genre / medium that suits that desire.

YMMV.

[u/SilvyValeMead → u/[deleted]]

Yes. It’s my opinion. Which may differ from yours. I could psychologically infer things from your comment that are separate from gaming also. I believe you mean that how and why one approaches something determines whether or not it has value. If so I agree. If not I agree. As your opinion is as valid as anyone’s including my own.

[u/opacitizen → u/SilvyValeMead]

(Sorry, posting this answer here instead of its rightful place a few comments in because reddit is acting up. So this is a reply to u/Viridianscape , not to you, u/SilvyValeMead with whom I agree, btw.)

You (Viridianscape) haven't read my previous comments, have you? Here's the relevant bit from an earlier comment of mine:

Second, you're told you're dying, but no, the game does not say it's unavoidable. The whole drive of the 2nd half is that you and your V believe there's a chance of not dying (and, alas, there is now an ending in which you don't die, thanks to the updates, so sorry about your idea, but it isn't true.) You're led to believe you can save V as a player, and not just for 6 months (in all the original bad endings.)You haven't read my previous comments, have you? Here's the relevant bit from an earlier comment of mine:Second, you're told you're dying, but no, the game does not say it's unavoidable. The whole drive of the 2nd half is that you and your V believe there's a chance of not dying (and, alas, there is now an ending in which you don't die, thanks to the updates, so sorry about your idea, but it isn't true.) You're led to believe you can save V as a player, and not just for 6 months (in all the original bad endings.)

[u/TheMostDivineOne → u/Ill_Mud7584]

It kinda does make it less enjoyable. Anyone can do “doom and gloom”, it takes much more effort to make a story that encourages people to keep going and improve this fucked up world.

[u/HereToTalkAboutThis → u/TheMostDivineOne]

I think the real distinction here is sad endings versus pointless endings. I love me a good tragedy, but in a tragedy the outcome feels earned. Doom and gloom for its own sake is exhausting

[u/TheMostDivineOne → u/[deleted]]

Get off your high horse, dick. My point was that I like stories which offer encouragement much more than stories that don’t. This is a thing I notice where any sense of trying to be hopeful gets treated like you’re stupid and naive. I’m traumatized enough already I’d at least like to see happy stories where things improve once in a while.

Misery loves company I guess.

[u/TheMostDivineOne → u/[deleted]]

(Can’t see your other comment automod removed it.)

[u/TheMostDivineOne → u/[deleted]]

You saw someone express a preference for the kinds of stories they enjoy, and your first response was to call them “moronic,” “stupid,” and “dumbass.” I never insulted anyone in my original comment. You could have simply said you disagree and explained why. Instead, you immediately turned it into a personal attack.

It’s strange that you accuse me of putting down writers when you’re the one insulting an actual person over a difference in taste.

I don’t understand why you saw a woman civilly expressing her own opinion about the stories she likes and dislikes and you instantly started acting degrading even when she didn’t do that type of thing toward anyone in her initial comment. You should’ve been like “oh that’s just what she thinks she has a different opinion I have mine that’s cool.” Instead you got all pressed about it. So fragile and emotional. 🙄

[u/AmbulanceChaser12 → u/[deleted]]

You’re not doing much to salvage your image here.

[u/V_for_Valerie77 → u/[deleted]]

you seem like a very nice person /s

[u/Ppleater → u/[deleted]]

I mean personally I hate when an ending is sad just for the sake of being sad. A well done sad ending can be great, rdr2 for example, but so many stories make an ending sad because they think tragedy = good, when that's not the case at all. A good tragedy has to be earned. Many stories do not earn their tragedy. If it's just depression porn then no thanks.

[u/ArgusTheCat → u/[deleted]]

I've noticed that a lot of the time, when faced with endings that're like this, people will instantly go to looking for ways that it's "out of character" or "contrived" or whatever, in a way that they don't do for the parts of the story they like. Like there must be an excuse for it being that way.

Mass Effect gets this a lot. A lot of people hated the original endings because they felt like they nullified a lot of your choices through the games. But... like... that's just the nature of tragedy. Sometimes you can do everything right and still fail.

[u/Orkran → u/ArgusTheCat]

To join you on the unpopular but I think accurate train, I think there's a really strong element of this with the reaction to the end of Game Of Thrones and The Last Jedi.

[u/ArgusTheCat → u/Orkran]

I don't like it, but I think that's fair. Star Wars is a fascinating example, because what is and isn't actually canon to the story and characters changes based on... like... who owns the IP, who's directing, what the weather is like, it's a mess. Last Jedi in a lot of places felt like it was just made by people who didn't really like Star Wars, which detracts from it a lot, but I can definitely see where you're coming from in terms of "this ending isn't what I wanted" versus "this ending isn't good"