How Not to End Your Videogame


I played it followed an unfortunate tendency that’s been bothering me a lot lately and The Evil Inside 2. The majority of the game was enjoyable, however, this game’s past couple hours were a part of of the mechanisms with challenge. This is something we have been accustomed to in the times of the first Mega Man games, but doesn’t fly so well. Recent games like Prey (2017) and Volume Effect Andromeda were equally as guilty. In a article The Last of Us and Tomb Raider (2013) universe of gaming, an ending to a action game that is anything less than mind boggling just does not cut it anymore.


Many will recall Aliens: Colonial Marines as the match that on years of hype and fan expectations. Objectively, the initial 3/4 of the game is a mediocre shooter that is the worst one of Alien games. It’s after playing with it the excruciating final 2 hours that leave such an awful taste in your mouth. That game is one of the cases of programmers throwing waves of enemies at you, mixed with inexpensive and mini-bosses deaths, just to add length. It is not fun and it’s obviously. It’s only a clear cop-out when programmers can’t come up to ratchet up the battle, and so they simply reuse of the work until it enough they’ve already done.

The Evil Within Prey and 2 are offenders in my view, because they start out good. Prey made me feel as though I was playing with a Bioshock game, right up until the ending at which it suddenly felt like one of the lousy Call of Duty games (or Colonial Marines, ouch). The Evil Within 2 starts out with open environments that encourage creative play, not unlike The Last of Us. When you are feeling like this is the Silent Hill/Resident Evil game you’ve been missing for years, a cheap and Mega Man like boss battle is the initial sign that the fun is about to finish. After that point, the conclusion of the game is the programmers forcing you to do the things you’ve been doing in arbitrary and narrow conditions, removing all.


Seriously guys, do not do this.

It would be better to place a fantastic tower full of boss battles in the game. Hell, even turning the areas of the match you could not finish into cinematics that are low-budget ala Xenogears is better than this. There’s nothing that ruins a game that would be good (or even average) faster than taking everything that made it fun and destroying it. There’s no faster means to do that than by making the player reuse their upgrades and powers in a series of repetitive rooms.

It is particularly bad if this is this game’s last few hours. You see, there. Folks sit down to put the finish in their inspection right after finishing the game. So the bottom line opinions from both critics and players, concerning it, is going to be heavily influenced by how they felt after finishing it. The word of mouth isn’t going to be great if the end of the game makes people hate what they liked about it. It doesn’t even matter if the first 35 hours of your match were excellent (here’s looking in the Mass Impact 3), in case your ending sucks you will get blasted critically.

My expectation is that the reaction to such endings will give ammunition to developers when negotiating money and time from publishers. It is not tough to imagine that a lot of those “cookie-cutter” endings will be the consequence of men in suits saying “only ship it”. As we’ve seen with these games however, it can make a large difference in the way the sport is perceived. The press for Prey was all excellent. I myself was ready to call it the successor to Bioshock. Then we poorly paced plot twist and got to the super ending that was lame and the metacritic dove below 90. To make it considered a terrible game by any means, but instantly eliminating it from any comparison. That. Bioshock was a game that is good, but it was the ending that made it so mythical.

Comments are closed.