You don't need to go all Michael Bay in a game's ending sequence.

T

tzhu07

Gawd
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
566
Has anyone noticed that in many games the final levels tend to have really bad level design, hordes of enemies, and a multi-stage final boss? And experienced as a whole just feels loud, brash, unimaginative, like a Michael Bay film.

It's like these developers are always going for the climatic high-action Rambo sequences, and they all feel predictable and generic.

How about I DON'T fight a horde of enemies leading up to a 50ft tall final boss? Maybe the ending sequence can have low-action and be a cakewalk with philosophical voice-over shit or something?
 
And then be criticized for being anti climactic? Great plan

The end of a game is always the culmination of all the hours to get to that point and any emotional trip you're taken within the game. Taking out the big bad boss at the end with a head shot like some nameless enemy that you've killed hundreds of at that point already would be completely lame
 
I think it depends on the game.

Something like Call of Duty? Nah; doesn't need it. Something like God of War, hell yeah! Give me a bazillion enemies and let me tear through them with all the weapons I picked up throughout the game -- it's going to be my last shot to use most of them.


I'm kind of with you on the multi-stage bosses, though -- I've never been a fan. Most of the time it doesn't even make sense.
 
I'm all for big finale's, but these days I prefer them to be slightly easier than the hardest part of the game.

This makes for a more satisfying end game experience.

Nothing worse than a pain-in-the-ass end game boss that can only be defeated by learning all the quirks through repeated deaths. A truly great end game experience should be completable first go by a competent and committed gamer.


Best end game finale ever, IMHO: Mass Effect 1! :cool:

Doable on first go and thus holds the story and suspense as it delivers the end game cinematic.


I've lost track of all the end game cinematics that I couldn't care less about 'cos the end game finale riled me up too much. Looking at you Crysis. :rolleyes:


FYI, I play all games on hardest possible setting from the get go. No exceptions.
 
tzhu07 said:
How about I DON'T fight a horde of enemies leading up to a 50ft tall final boss? Maybe the ending sequence can have low-action and be a cakewalk with philosophical voice-over shit or something?
Click to expand...

Deus Ex Human Revolution & Mass Effect 3 failed with this idea. I don't need anymore games to be enjoyable 90% of the way through & then nutshot every plot arch into oblivion.
 
I raged when I got to the end level of RAGE. What an awesome game that was ruined by a horrible ending.
 
spine said:
I'm all for big finale's, but these days I prefer them to be slightly easier than the hardest part of the game.

This makes for a more satisfying end game experience.

Nothing worse than a pain-in-the-ass end game boss that can only be defeated by learning all the quirks through repeated deaths. A truly great end game experience should be completable first go by a competent and committed gamer.


Best end game finale ever, IMHO: Mass Effect 1! :cool:

Doable on first go and thus holds the story and suspense as it delivers the end game cinematic.


I've lost track of all the end game cinematics that I couldn't care less about 'cos the end game finale riled me up too much. Looking at you Crysis. :rolleyes:


FYI, I play all games on hardest possible setting from the get go. No exceptions.
Click to expand...

End bosses should be the hardest fight in the game, but they shouldn't incorporate new mechanics. The fight should be a culmination of the abilities that are refined through the rest of the game. The first DMC was guilty of breaking this, part of the end fight was some rail-type shooter, nothing related to any gameplay in the rest of the game. Heavenly sword was also bad, I breezed through the entire game, then hit a brick wall on the boss and spent time learning how to execute techniques I never used in the rest of the game to beat the end boss.

If a game mechanics revolve around accuracy, the end boss should require you to be a bit more accurate.
If the game mechanics revolve around timing, the end boss should require better timing.
If the game mechanics revolve around QTEs, the end boss should have more QTES with less room for error.
And so on..


It doesn't have to be a major skill jump on the end boss, but reflecting on a game from beginning to end you should notice that you had to get better at mechanics to reach the end boss, and get a little better to overcome the boss.

Having said that, the setting of the climax of the game is not as important for me, I almost always favor gameplay over story, so whether the end is fighting off 2000 horde of enemies, or a single 1v1 fight doesn't matter as much as how the battle is fought.
 
F.E.A.R.

I prefer endings with lots of nasty enemies instead of some dull big bosses you have to kill exploiting an obvious weakness.

A game needs to build up tension in a way that utilizes increasingly challenging level design while steadily introducing new nasty combinations of enemies attacking you concurrently.

Doom 3's build up was amazing imo. Sadly it prepared you for some dull fights. RoE boss fights are pretty fun, though. I liked RAGE very much, though not as much as Doom 3, but ending was the stupidest thing id has ever done in a game. What were they thinking?

In like 99% of the games the final fight is the least interesting one.
 
I dunno...just got through with Dead Space (first one) and I thought the end fight was pretty epic (though short depending on your weapons/upgrades). Can't say much for the rest of the level before that, though...boring as fuck.
 
MavericK96 said:
I dunno...just got through with Dead Space (first one) and I thought the end fight was pretty epic (though short depending on your weapons/upgrades). Can't say much for the rest of the level before that, though...boring as fuck.
Click to expand...

I've seen DS1's ending, which is pretty good. I'm looking forward to seeing how DS2 (finally playing through it right now) & DS3 (doing coop w/ a friend) fair with that though.
 
Although I know a lot of people hated the ending to Fallout 3 I thought it was well made (I didn't play until after they had expanded the game so you didn't die anymore though) ... I got the good ending and I enjoyed the slide show and affirmative statements ... I watched the other endings on Youtube and thought they were well done also

I think as long as the ending doesn't go sideways on you and is aligned with the overall game they are good and I like where the endings validate your choice of endings (where there is more than one) like in Fallout 3 and Bioshock :)
 
Stop playing stupid games and you will not have to make threads like these anymore.
 
The endgame of Max Payne 3 was done pretty much perfectly. It was not much more difficult than other later stages, and the very end was almost too easy, but pretty satisfying. I will also say Max 3 was probably my favorite game since Mass Effect 1. I really hope they have a Max 4 in the works.
 
This thread cannot go on without mention of the ending to ME2 which felt like a terd falling in my ice-cold beer. Up until the ending, the ME series was a turning out to be a story and character-driven, top-notch, RPG with some shooter elements. ME2's ending loudly stated, "from here on, we are foregoing story telling for a bombastic Michael Bay'ed steakhead-fest". ME never got back it's mojo after the giant skelator end boss fight.
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
Deus Ex Human Revolution & Mass Effect 3 failed with this idea. I don't need anymore games to be enjoyable 90% of the way through & then nutshot every plot arch into oblivion.
Click to expand...

Well, DE:HR was actually a mix of both. Right near the end, was that horrid, ridiculous "boss" fight, but at the very end, was the bad "make a choice and read what happens" situation.

Demon10000 said:
I think it depends on the game.
Click to expand...

^This. It depends on the style and arc of a game, though I'm not into the "giant boss battle" thing either, unless it's fits in the scheme of the game itself, such as God of War.

Crysis was ridiculous, with it's "rock monster Transformer" ending. A large boss fight is appropriate for the style of the game, but the creature itself was just stupid.

spine said:
I'm all for big finale's, but these days I prefer them to be slightly easier than the hardest part of the game.

This makes for a more satisfying end game experience.

Nothing worse than a pain-in-the-ass end game boss that can only be defeated by learning all the quirks through repeated deaths. A truly great end game experience should be completable first go by a competent and committed gamer.
Click to expand...

^This is an excellent point, as such a scenario breaks the flow and immersion for me. It should be, not necessarily "easy", but at least within reason, for that satisfying feeling you mention, and to not break the continuity of the game, the flow, which turns too many games into God of War that should be nowhere near such style.

dgz said:
F.E.A.R.

I prefer endings with lots of nasty enemies instead of some dull big bosses you have to kill exploiting an obvious weakness.

A game needs to build up tension in a way that utilizes increasingly challenging level design while steadily introducing new nasty combinations of enemies attacking you concurrently.

In like 99% of the games the final fight is the least interesting one.
Click to expand...

Agreed, on all points.
 
M33X7 said:
Well, DE:HR was actually a mix of both. Right near the end, was that horrid, ridiculous "boss" fight, but at the very end, was the bad "make a choice and read what happens" situation.
Click to expand...

Horrid? I sniped the boss the whole time & barely took damage. One of the easiest boss fights ever & then to be disappointed by ALL of the endings. :mad:
 
bigdogchris said:
I raged when I got to the end level of RAGE. What an awesome game that was ruined by a horrible ending.
Click to expand...
I don't quite get this. Does the entertainment value you get from playing the rest of the game get nullified as a result of the poor ending?
 
The thing I hate worst about a lot of games endings is when the game ends with basically a few QTE events during a cinematic sequence.
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
Horrid? I sniped the boss the whole time & barely took damage. One of the easiest boss fights ever & then to be disappointed by ALL of the endings. :mad:
Click to expand...

I said it was a ridiculous boss fight, I didn't it was difficult or easy, just pointless. Then, as you said, the disappointment of the ending after engaging in some pointless boss battle.
 
Breath_of_the_Dying said:
End bosses should be the hardest fight in the game, but they shouldn't incorporate new mechanics. The fight should be a culmination of the abilities that are refined through the rest of the game.
Click to expand...

So in other words Ocarina of Time? Defeating his people version with the master sword then escaping as the tower comes down hoping to have escaped then to have to face big evil version!!! Epic! It wasn't very hard but OMG it was the most memorable moment in gaming for me.
 
Yea it's a real shame the end of DX:HR didn't live up to the rest of the game.

I remember the end of DX so vividly... and it was such a cool moment deciding what to do and finally taking down that jackass!
 
M33X7 said:
I said it was a ridiculous boss fight, I didn't it was difficult or easy, just pointless. Then, as you said, the disappointment of the ending after engaging in some pointless boss battle.
Click to expand...

A bit of confusion on my part

I'm disappointed that there weren't any more story based DLC for DX:HR than Missing Link.
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
I'm disappointed that there weren't any more story based DLC for DX:HR than Missing Link.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they missed a HUGE opportunity there IMO.

Frankly, though, I just hope we see a second full title rather than any DLC for DX:HR at this point.
 
MavericK96 said:
Yeah, they missed a HUGE opportunity there IMO.

Frankly, though, I just hope we see a second full title rather than any DLC for DX:HR at this point.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Based on its reception, i imagine DX:HR was a success financially. Not sure why they didn't put out an expansion, though I can see how it'd be hard to do with the way they wrapped up the story and everything.
 
MavericK96 said:
Yeah, they missed a HUGE opportunity there IMO.

Frankly, though, I just hope we see a second full title rather than any DLC for DX:HR at this point.
Click to expand...

chockomonkey said:
Agreed. Based on its reception, i imagine DX:HR was a success financially. Not sure why they didn't put out an expansion, though I can see how it'd be hard to do with the way they wrapped up the story and everything.
Click to expand...

If they had released DLC with a prequel plot line, I would be happy. I can't enough of exploring game worlds like that. I really wanted to know how Adam came into existence since there's quite a lot of mystery around that event (as far as my knowledge is concerned).
 
CrimsonKnight13 said:
If they had released DLC with a prequel plot line, I would be happy. I can't enough of exploring game worlds like that. I really wanted to know how Adam came into existence since there's quite a lot of mystery around that event (as far as my knowledge is concerned).
Click to expand...
oh yea, that totally could have worked. Although, if he weren't augmented at that time, they'd have to come up with something completely different for the praxis point system, or perhaps make you play as someone else, where adam jensen is still involved..
LeninGHOLA said:
I'd take an HD remake of the first game in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

Well yea, duh!
 
How about they just abruptly roll credits mid mission? That'd hit over real well.
 
Breath_of_the_Dying said:
...Heavenly sword was also bad, I breezed through the entire game, then hit a brick wall on the boss and spent time learning how to execute techniques I never used in the rest of the game to beat the end boss.

If a game mechanics revolve around accuracy, the end boss should require you to be a bit more accurate.
If the game mechanics revolve around timing, the end boss should require better timing.
If the game mechanics revolve around QTEs, the end boss should have more QTES with less room for error.
And so on..
Click to expand...

Completely agree on this. Introducing new techniques right at the end is a total immersion killer.

The best finales are those which just give you more of what you've been doing before, but in a more grand fashion. I mentioned ME1 because it does exactly that: You're fighting the toughest opponent you've faced in the game yet, but you're still using all the techniques and moves you've spent the entire game using, and they work as you'd expect. It's like you are now fully trained and this is your final test. Well executed!
 
I prefer random endings/multiple twists.

Every COD game seems to be about how many of the main cast can you kill in the end sequence.
 
I'd rather have multiple ending possibilities rather than the cliched boss fight every time.
 
I love a good final end boss battle in games. I don't quite like it when it is not Michael Bay-ed. I play games for enjoyment and kicking the living shiznit out of bosses is one way I get that enjoyment. A cake walk ending would leave me unsatisfied (case in point Mass Effect 3, RAGE). I want conclusion and I want to kill the bad guy with some effort. Heck, I want a boss fight even in an Adventure game like The Longest Journey had one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top