Whats up with RPG endings?

[Faldric]

After just finishing Tyranny, which has to be the shortest isometric RPG I ever played, I just have to ask a question that pops up in my head with almost every new RPG I play: What the hell is wrong with video game endings in the last years? Either the games are just cut off at some random part in the story like in Tyranny (and the artbook lists the acts that didn't make it into the game....). Or, you have a rushed ending full of plotholes that leaves half of the story unfinished. For example, I felt that way about TW3s Deus Ex machina ending against the white frost. But, everyone is doing this, e.g. I can't remember the last Bioware game that didn't need an expansion to include a semi-sophisticated ending.

I don't need endings to cater to my taste. But at least be consistent and actually "end" something.

Sorry for the rant.

[Powell]

I can't remember the last Bioware game that didn't need an expansion to include a semi-sophisticated ending.

It gives them a reason to sell DLC.

[zealo]

As for how Tyranny did it, the game is built around the assumption you'll be playing it multiple times with how much reactivity there is in the world setup and critical path variance in the game. But it's indeed a DLC/Expansion hook with how it comes to a conclusion.

[Tech614]

Because western rpg developers have always been good at world building and bad at story telling? The stories are usually an afterthought in these games after giving the player a cool world to play in with 100s of useless "choices" just for the sake of choice.

Play JRPGs if you actually want a proper story told, not handicapped by trying to give a player false freedom.

[Valeron]

As for how Tyranny did it, the game is built around the assumption you'll be playing it multiple times with how much reactivity there is in the world setup and critical path variance in the game. But it's indeed a DLC/Expansion hook with how it comes to a conclusion.

This pretty much. Tyranny's length is deceiving due to how much it changes when you align with certain factions

[tikcol]

Because western rpg developers have always been good at world building and bad at story telling? The stories are usually an afterthought in these games after giving the player a cool world to play in with 100s of useless "choices" just for the sake of choice.

Play JRPGs if you actually want a proper story told, not handicapped by trying to give a player false freedom.

Care to share good JRPGs?

[Faldric]

Because western rpg developers have always been good at world building and bad at story telling? The stories are usually an afterthought in these games after giving the player a cool world to play in with 100s of useless "choices" just for the sake of choice.

Play JRPGs if you actually want a proper story told, not handicapped by trying to give a player false freedom.

Easier said than done. There aren't that many and most I have already played. Stuff like Breath of fire, shadow hearts, suikoden,.....don't get made anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

This pretty much. Tyranny's length is deceiving due to how much it changes when you align with certain factions

I am pretty sure the "ending" will play out almost identical.

[Deleted]

After just finishing Tyranny, which has to be the shortest isometric RPG I ever played, I just have to ask a question that pops up in my head with almost every new RPG I play: What the hell is wrong with video game endings in the last years? Either the games are just cut off at some random part in the story like in Tyranny (and the artbook lists the acts that didn't make it into the game....). Or, you have a rushed ending full of plotholes that leaves half of the story unfinished. For example, I felt that way about TW3s Deus Ex machina ending against the white frost. But, everyone is doing this, e.g. I can't remember the last Bioware game that didn't need an expansion to include a semi-sophisticated ending.

I don't need endings to cater to my taste. But at least be consistent and actually "end" something.

Sorry for the rant.

Tyranny was never meant to be long. It was meant to be replayable and have totally different story throughout. There are some things you absolutely never get to see in tyranny depending on some of your conquest and/or in-game decisions.

[Toppy]

As for how Tyranny did it, the game is built around the assumption you'll be playing it multiple times with how much reactivity there is in the world setup and critical path variance in the game. But it's indeed a DLC/Expansion hook with how it comes to a conclusion.

Ironically not much really changes in Tyranny based on factions you choose. Just a bit of fluff here and there.

[Valeron]

I am pretty sure the "ending" will play out almost identical.

Endings are problematic in almost every game that I have played. I have yet to find a real satisfying ending no matter what the genre is. I know your topic was about the endings, my comment was just about the length of the game. It's a bit different than most CRPGs in how it approaches the game.

[Tech614]

Care to share good JRPGs?

SMT 3, 4, 4A
Persona 2, 3, 4, 5
Tales of Vesperia(not to be confused with Zesteria which is garbage)
Final Fantasy 4, 6 and 9
Xenoblade Chronicles
Entire Etrian Odyssey series
YS 7
Tokyo Xanadu(which should be coming out in the west on pc/vita early next year)

[tikcol]

SMT 3, 4, 4A
Persona 2, 3, 4, 5
Tales of Vesperia(not to be confused with Zesteria which is garbage)
Final Fantasy 4, 6 and 9
Xenoblade Chronicles
Entire Etrian Odyssey series
YS 7
Tokyo Xanadu(which should be coming out in the west on pc/vita early next year)

Thank you !

[Cosmic Janitor]

If you want to bitch about Tyranny I have a few words of choice for that disapointment as well. I was wondering why no one made a thread about that yet. .

As for how Tyranny did it, the game is built around the assumption you'll be playing it multiple times with how much reactivity there is in the world setup and critical path variance in the game. But it's indeed a DLC/Expansion hook with how it comes to a conclusion.

Imho tyranny took what should be side quests and multiple open options and tied them to certain paths, witholding them from you to force you to play it again. Once to take certain routes within the story you are forced down a path (which you can change at key points, even though doing so makes no sense from a RP perspective) and are only allowed freedom to decide whn to do the next bit instead of giving you different paths. That you don't get to see the burning library if you choose the crossing for example is one of the biggest bullshit decisions there are. It's also not like playing it multiple times really changes much tbh. Act 3 will always pan out the same for the most part and since the characters are so flat I really didn't get much out of trying different things with them.

[Stevegasm]

Because western rpg developers have always been good at world building and bad at story telling? The stories are usually an afterthought in these games after giving the player a cool world to play in with 100s of useless "choices" just for the sake of choice.

Play JRPGs if you actually want a proper story told, not handicapped by trying to give a player false freedom.

I find the main difference between JRPGs and western RPGs is that JRPGs tend to give way too much story and filler and less on gameplay, while western RPGs focus more on the gameplay over story. I'll take the western way any day, because I'm not huge on video game stories anymore and the amount of non-gameplay stretches in JRPGs drive me nuts. There's nothing wrong with either though, because people play games for different reasons.

The main exception for me and JRPGs is when they are on portables. The lack of power seems to cause JRPG developers to put more focus on gameplay and systems over complex story development and exposition, hence why the DS and 3DS probably had some of the most critically acclaimed JRPGs since the 7th gen started. JRPGs never seemed to gain anything gameplay-wise in the shift to 3-D in the way western RPGs have. I'm pretty apprehensive about how the Switch will change things. I really hope the developers of games like Bravely, SMT, Etrain, and so on continue to keep the status quo, rather than trying hard to make technically advanced games.

[Valenhil]

Persona 5

Fuck, don't remind me

The wait is driving me insane

[OperationFerret]

You will find that in most video games the plot tends to write itself into a corner in such a way that by the time the ending comes in, there simply can't be a satisfying denouement. This is not inherent to the medium, as you will find the same issue in the Harry Potter books where every ending is a Deux Ex Machina, but it is worth noting because video games are about feeling awesome and oftentimes "awesome" simply doesn't make sense when you add it all up.

Another thing to consider is that RPGs are very costly to develop from scratch (so the developers will want to leave things open for a sequel or expanded universe), and that the way game development works the ending can only realistically be thought out towards the end of the cycle - when there isn't really any time or energy left to spend on closing every loop.

[Tech614]

Fuck, don't remind me

The wait is driving me insane

You can probably learn Japanese before it comes out in the west at the rate it's going...

- - - Updated - - -

I find the main difference between JRPGs and western RPGs is that JRPGs tend to give way too much story and filler and less on gameplay, while western RPGs focus more on the gameplay over story. I'll take the western way any day, because I'm not huge on video game stories anymore and the amount of non-gameplay stretches in JRPGs drive me nuts. There's nothing wrong with either though, because people play games for different reasons.

The main exception for me and JRPGs is when they are on portables. The lack of power seems to cause JRPG developers to put more focus on gameplay and systems over complex story development and exposition, hence why the DS and 3DS probably had some of the most critically acclaimed JRPGs since the 7th gen started. JRPGs never seemed to gain anything gameplay-wise in the shift to 3-D in the way western RPGs have. I'm pretty apprehensive about how the Switch will change things. I really hope the developers of games like Bravely, SMT, Etrain, and so on continue to keep the status quo, rather than trying hard to make technically advanced games.

It's because most JRPG developers are not AAA and drifted more to handhelds in the 7th gen then 3D not doing much for them.

Valkyria Chronicles(can't even believe I missed this in my suggestion post actually)
Tales of Vesperia
Ni No Kuni
Blue Dragon
Lost Odyssey
Persona 5(PS3 version still counts suckas =P)

Where all amazing 7th gen console JRPGs. I would choose to play any of them again, over playing any bioware or bethesda rpgs from the gen(and I like both fwiw). Speaking of bad gameplay, bioware and bethesda have some of the worst gameplay in any games period, their games are carried by amazing world building.

[Vizardlorde]

After just finishing Tyranny, which has to be the shortest isometric RPG I ever played, I just have to ask a question that pops up in my head with almost every new RPG I play: What the hell is wrong with video game endings in the last years? Either the games are just cut off at some random part in the story like in Tyranny (and the artbook lists the acts that didn't make it into the game....). Or, you have a rushed ending full of plotholes that leaves half of the story unfinished. For example, I felt that way about TW3s Deus Ex machina ending against the white frost. But, everyone is doing this, e.g. I can't remember the last Bioware game that didn't need an expansion to include a semi-sophisticated ending.

I don't need endings to cater to my taste. But at least be consistent and actually "end" something.

Sorry for the rant.

DAO didn't need an expansion but the some expansions expanded on the universe and answered some unanswered questions. Killing the archdemon pretty much ended the game. I cant say the same for the sequels.

[Toppy]

I find the main difference between JRPGs and western RPGs is that JRPGs tend to give way too much story and filler and less on gameplay, while western RPGs focus more on the gameplay over story. I'll take the western way any day, because I'm not huge on video game stories anymore and the amount of non-gameplay stretches in JRPGs drive me nuts. There's nothing wrong with either though, because people play games for different reasons.

The main exception for me and JRPGs is when they are on portables. The lack of power seems to cause JRPG developers to put more focus on gameplay and systems over complex story development and exposition, hence why the DS and 3DS probably had some of the most critically acclaimed JRPGs since the 7th gen started. JRPGs never seemed to gain anything gameplay-wise in the shift to 3-D in the way western RPGs have. I'm pretty apprehensive about how the Switch will change things. I really hope the developers of games like Bravely, SMT, Etrain, and so on continue to keep the status quo, rather than trying hard to make technically advanced games.

This was true about a console generation or two ago. It hasnt been so for years. wRPG are focusing more on story over gameplay.

Tyranny is doing this for example. The gameplay is rather basic and easily exploited to the point of rapid god mode.

[Onvious]

damn, witcher 3...