What makes a great endgame?

It just occurred to me that many computer games I've really liked tend to fall on their faces towards the endgame. You know, that bit when all the open exploration and character development is finished and it's time to face your destiny/archenemy/consequences of your choices/whatever, your options narrow down, the plot elements get resolved, and so on.

IMO a strong endgame should be (a) narratively satisfying, (b) challenging, and (c) imaginative, while (d) avoiding really tired clichés or cop-outs like "kill the same boss N times to win," its variant "kill the boss's N different incarnations," "to kill the boss, destroy these pillars/tanks/minions/batteries first," or "fight your way through endless waves of enemies you've already faced, only in smaller numbers."

Here are a few games that I liked a quite a lot overall but where the endgames felt really lame:

* KOTOR 2: The Sith Lords. The endgame only managed one of the four, and that only barely -- it *was* sorta narratively satisfying, as the background traumas of the player character and the mystery of Kreia got resolved. But it failed pretty miserably on all other counts.

* NWN 2 OC. The early game, until Neverwinter, was kinda OK, the mid-game was great, it took a steep dive at the point where your keep got besieged, and the actual real endgame was absolutely terrible in every possible way. (Obsidian again. If it weren't for the pretty good endgame and ending in MotB, I'd start to suspect that they just lose interest in writing the damn things when it comes time to finish up.)

* Vampire: The Masquerade -- Bloodlines. Despite its flaws, it was among the most brilliant cRPG's of recent years... until the stupid grind of the endgame. This one was neither narratively satisfying, nor imaginative, nor did it avoid the classic clichés.

* Bioshock. This game generally fell apart after the Great Plot Twist; up to then it was pretty solid going, but everything beyond that felt tacked-on, and the endgame challenges were neither imaginative, nor challenging, nor narratively satisfying.

* S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Everything up to Pripyat was brilliant. From there on out it was just running an increasingly tight gantlet, and killing hordes and hordes of enemies. The endings were narratively pretty unsatisfying too -- the "fake endings" were just about horrible, while the "real" one involved a jarring change of pace and running yet another fairly unimaginative gantlet.

Here are a few that IMO succeeded in some areas, but failed badly in others:

* BG2: Throne of Bhaal. The actual dénouement was pretty good and it succeeds well in the "narratively satisfying" department, but the gameplay was atrociously bad, and it managed to incorporate just about every possible cliché into it.

* Planescape: Torment. The dénouement was possibly the most brilliant in any cRPG ever, but again the gameplay needed to get there was a tiring, tedious, trial-and-error grind. Which pretty much describes the entire game for me. Brilliant writing, brilliant imagination, god-awful gameplay.

* KOTOR 1. It made a decent attempt at working in your DS/LS character into the endgame, the gameplay itself wasn't horrible, and the dénouement was satisfying enough... but the final boss battle, and the last steps leading up to it after your final encounter with Bastila, were just insanely clichéd, tedious, and generally irritating. Nowhere near as bad as KOTOR 2's endgame, though.

* Deus Ex. Again, great resolution, meaningful choice, narratively very satisfying... but that final battle was a pretty unimaginative grind.

And here are a few that IMO succeeded pretty well, or indeed very well, in three or more areas:

* Jade Empire. This is one game that got *better* towards the end. It had felt like pretty standard, good, clean, BioWare fun until the big twist near the end; the events after that did a brilliant job of resolving the loose plot ends, pushed the character to the limit while introducing new challenges, and was imaginative, interesting, and generally successful.

* Fallout. Here the beauty is that there is no endgame -- it's just that some stuff you can do will tie things up. The illusion of freedom is kept until the very last shot, or dialog choice as it were. The problems with the endgame are the same that the entire game has -- the generally not very successful combat gameplay, due mainly to the limitations of the combat AI.

* BG2: Shadows of Amn. This was well-paced, and the pace increased towards the end; the final challenges and confrontations were well thought-out, narratively satisfying, and creative. The only area where they perhaps lacked a bit was the challenge department -- at least I had a lot less trouble with the final battle than with several I had fought until then.

* The Witcher. I don't think I can recall any game where I've been left as wowed by the endgame as this one. It really felt like I'd accomplished something, that my choices on the way made a difference, and it was exciting, creative, and challenging right up to the very end. It was a brilliant ending to a great story arc.

* NWN 2: Mask of the Betrayer. Again, challenging without being a (horrible) grind (although it got dangerously close at times), a change of scenery that made things interesting and different, and resolutions to the plotlines that you had opened up, based on the choices you had made and the corners you had explored. Not the best ever, but pretty damn good.

Do we have a spoiler tag here on the forum ?

Prime Junta said:

IMO a strong endgame should be (a) narratively satisfying, (b) challenging, and (c) imaginative, while (d) avoiding really tired clichés or cop-outs like "kill the same boss N times to win," its variant "kill the boss's N different incarnations," "to kill the boss, destroy these pillars/tanks/minions/batteries first," or "fight your way through endless waves of enemies you've already faced, only in smaller numbers."

Click to expand...

Perfect requirements, should be required daily reading for any game developer!

Here are a few games that I liked a quite a lot overall but where the endgames felt really lame:

* NWN 2 OC. The early game, until Neverwinter, was kinda OK, the mid-game was great, it took a steep dive at the point where your keep got besieged, and the actual real endgame was absolutely terrible in every possible way. (Obsidian again. If it weren't for the pretty good endgame and ending in MotB, I'd start to suspect that they just lose interest in writing the damn things when it comes time to finish up.)

Click to expand...

Completely agree (except the MoTB part since I haven't played it!)

Here are a few that IMO succeeded in some areas, but failed badly in others:

* BG2: Throne of Bhaal. The actual dénouement was pretty good and it succeeds well in the "narratively satisfying" department, but the gameplay was atrociously bad, and it managed to incorporate just about every possible cliché into it.

Click to expand...

I'd give BG2 ToB a bit more credit, but I get what you are saying on the gameplay. I enjoyed it though.

I would toss in Icewind Dale and the original BG here. In both games, you have some good story going up, some good battles, and a decently tough, but beatable, boss. Then boom. It's over. You just beat the big bad guy and all you get is a short animation of their death and the credits role. Now granted BG had a sequel, but while they may have had it in mind, they didn't KNOW how successful BG would be so they didn't know for sure they'd do a sequel. They could have had some narrative that left it open, but had you contemplating who you really are given what you'd learned, had some companions stay with you to help, some to leave, etc.

Ultima IX had a similar issue. The end part of the game was reasonably interesting, (depsite the horridness of the rest of the game), but boom, for the END of the ENTIRE series, it was really lame. Big let down. U7 part 2 was similar as you get tossed to Pagan.

And here are a few that IMO succeeded pretty well, or indeed very well, in three or more areas:

* BG2: Shadows of Amn. This was well-paced, and the pace increased towards the end; the final challenges and confrontations were well thought-out, narratively satisfying, and creative. The only area where they perhaps lacked a bit was the challenge department -- at least I had a lot less trouble with the final battle than with several I had fought until then.

Click to expand...

I didn't feel the end was very narratively satisfying. Granted, they were making ToB with the BIG ending, but if I hadn't had ToB on order already, I probably would have felt more let down.

I would put Ultima V and Ultima IV in this category. In both cases, I really felt like I had accomplished something, and was satisfied with the ending sequences, which while limited by the technology, were ultimately very deep. Lazarus, however, was a bit of a let down. I know they tried to be as accurate as possible to the original, but I found Dungeon Doom to be way too easy to get through, so I felt a bit disappointed when I got there. I also thought that given the extra depth they gave the over all story, they could have given extra depth to the ending.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

Do we have a spoiler tag here on the forum ?

Click to expand...

I thought because if I begin reading this thread (I decided to stay out) I might be heavily "spoilered", so to say.

Yeah. Most rpg endgames suck.

For me the deciding factors whether I consider the endgame good or not is how well it ties precedent plot and how memorable possible resolutions are.

Gameplay-wise Torment's endgame was not in the least tedious for me because the "tedious" part was very short and cutscenes were great. After that it was just fantastic. Torment's gameplay aspects might not be the essence of perfection (but they're in no way awful) but narrative aspects are so head and shoulders above anything else that gameplay problems are utterly forgettable for me.
However, generally the last fourth of the game was the weakest part, endgame put aside. Probably because there were more accents on combat than on narration which was putting those gameplay issues more into the spotlight.

Other than Torment's endgame I rather like that of Wizardry 8, be it for tough battles or radical change of setting in the final part.

Although I think that Shadows of Amn's endgame is good, I also think that the final scene is god awfully badly written and poses very unsatisfying resolution.

One of my least favourite endgames, given the preceeding game's quality, is that of Gothic 2 (NOTR or not). Chapter 6 is just underwhelming and ending boss is one of the most anticlimatic bosses ever. It's a pity that they haven't put the crew into more use.

I don't think that challenge is a necessary requirement for a great endgame.
If narrative and imaginative elements are strong enough and leave me breathless, I don't need any superduper boss-fight at all. But, of course, if there is an ending boss fight, carefully designed challenge is welcomed.

One of my favourite (mini) boss fights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

i concur with that list
wholeheartedly
(save the baldur's gate games, and torment which i've not yet played)

though about bloodlines, you do have to give it credit for the sheer amount of different endings, and the way they worked 'the cabbie' into the ending.

I have to agree with the idea that a lot of otherwise good games seem to fall on their face when it comes time for them to be over, which may be why I finish so few games. (Couldn't be laziness or being easily distracted by new toys or anything...)

For me, when the game's narrative starts to get diffused in tangental side issues
(slow or cloudy plot progression, proliferations of fluff quests, too many choices,etc) I usually find myself wandering off to something else. For this reason, I have a history of almost never finishing Bioware games.

The two I did finish were BG2: Shadows of Amn and the NWN expansion Shadows of Undrentide. (Also IWD, but that was a dungeon crawl and more up my alley) I think this says something good about these games--I identified enough with my character and her goals that I wanted to see the end of her story(and affect the end of her story), and was encouraged by the game to do so.

AFA Planescape:Torment, I found the ending to be actually the best part of the game, but I'm very tolerant of combat, and like DeepO, the writing and the story blew me away.

The Witcher endgame was more of a mixed bag, partly I think because I didn't want the game to be over, partly because it was a bit of a force-march up the mountain where I felt I was losing control over my character at times. However, the actual bones of the ending, the ambiguity, the shades of grey, the price of one's actions--yes, that was outstanding.

Actually, one of my favorite endgames of all time was the original Gothic. I'm afraid I can't go into detail because the detail is lost in the mists of my malfunctioning memory cells, but I do remember feeling *compelled* to finish it and find out wth was going on with the Sleeper and the whole world and my place in it. There's probably only two or three games I've ever been that motivated to finish.

I'd give ToB more credit as well... I mean you are the spawn of Bhaal and you knew from BG1 you have a powerful sibling who'd eventually want to kill you along with other Bhaalspawns. The story makes sense (although it is rather linear and battle heavy). And I loved each NPCs ending as well. Most of them were bitter sweet.

magerette said:

I have to agree with the idea that a lot of otherwise good games seem to fall on their face when it comes time for them to be over, which may be why I finish so few games.

Click to expand...

I have difficulties with endgames that are very much predictable. I mean, if I know who the big evil is, I usually know that, even if it takes several attempts, I will beat him/her at one point. Funny enough, this knowledge is usually enough for me, and the actual execution is only a formality that doesn't entice me very much. That's why I didn't finish NWN2, as I already mentioned in the other thread. There was really nothing interesting to discover anymore, there were only the fights to the end left. And often enough, those endgames feel more like work than pleasure.

I finished both BG games with extensions or IWD1 though. Those were interesting enough, although I nearly gave up with ToB. The only thing that kept me playing till the bitter end in that case was that I was hoping for something special to happen in the end. I'm still not convinced that it was worth it.

The best ending I remember was Neuromancer.

This sounds like a good subject for a poll. PJ?

Of thegames mentioned by PJ, I also thought Jade Empire had a neat end game; it was also the only bioware game I enjoyed up to now.

While I usually don't care about end battles (or combat in general - don't need it, but don't hate it, either), the last few moments of the game after the end battle are what is most important to me: if they wrap up issues nicely, that's great. On the other hand, I also like shocking, seemingly shocking or emotionally satisfying end sequences... generally speaking, endings that impress me (and really lacking endings don't count... I'm not talking about *this* version of shocking).
Two of my favorite game endings were the one from Cyberstorm (no RPG but a classic nevertheless where the story unfolded in short descriptions, side remarks and graffitis - if one had followed all those little things, the reward in the end was truly horrific) and the one from Lands of Lore 3. Yeah, really. It had a seemingly shocking ending before credits rolled and a rather satisfying sequence afterwards (if you had the nerve to sit through the credits, you could actually play on for a few minutes and resolve a 'problem' that had probably itched since LoL 1).

Gothic 2 is another game with a fairly bad ending - everything from start to finish is brilliant, except the last 45 minutes, which end up being a mindless grind, with a pointless boss at the end of it. The only good thing about that ending was the Xardas twist.

I'd also like to add the M&M games to that list. Such brilliant gameplay, story and world, and then it all falls apart near the end.

I really can't think of a single RPG where I look forward to the ending. By the time I reach the end of the game, I just rush through the final encounters to get it over with, and start over/play something else. I don't like leaving it unresolved though, so I always complete games I've gotten over halfway in.

The two biggest let-downs for me, were EoB and BaK. All you got after working your 'butt' off, was a page of printed text explaining what happened!!

I'm a bit surprised that Divine Divinity hasn't been mentioned in this thread already, to me that is the perfect example of a great game with a horrible endgame. From the moment you are cut off from the main game-world to the actual ending it's just a long, horrible grind, without any kind of motivation besides finishing the game. I don't' really remember exactly what the ending was, I'm pretty sure it was something akin to "beat the bad guy(s)", all I remember is how atrociously boring it was, I mean, people moan about the dungeon at the beginning of this game, but at least there you have the whole game ahead of you, and not just the end credits...

In general I think that RPG-developers should be more creative, and not just throw in a cheap boss-fight at the ending, you'd need a very well written enemy for this to be satisfactory. Does Bioware honestly believe that I played Baldurs Gate just to get the guy who killed your supposed foster-father, a man you, as a player, only knew from the short and boring tutorial? That is pretty naive. All fighting endgames might work in FPS or Mario games, it would just be a natural extension of the game, whereas in RPG's you spend a lot of the time exploring, completing quests, interacting with NPC's and so on, being tossed a big fight, with maybe some "clarifying" dialogue and a nice FMV afterwards doesnt really cut it.

I think a bad endgame is one that is too long (Divine Divinity), throws too much new and unnecessary crap at you (like the endless enemy respawning in KoTOR and Bloodlines), is noticeably WORSE than the actual game (KoTOR 2). If the endgame, and your motivation for completing it, can't compete with quitting and uninstalling the game to replay it later it is bad. I dislike it when a good game feels too much like it is about to end; the amount quests narrow down, the game world is dying, and you know there is nothing to do but to end it (Gothic 2), but that is more of a personal preference. Besides avoiding all the traps of a bad endgame, a great endgame is one where you care enough about the story/gameworld to finish it (Arcanum) or holds the answer to some kind of mystery or clarifies the game (PST). It should also provide a satisfying conclusion to the game (like they did in The Witcher, I really like it when games sum things up a bit, talking to Ravel in her maze was one of my favourite parts of PST) , or at least to part of the game if it is a cliffhanger, you really shouldn't feel like the devs just pulled the plug on the game, like in KoTOr2.

Off course, devs can probably get away with all of the bad stuff I've mentioned, and skip all the good, and make a great game, if they are talented enough...

I believe even the devs of DD admit their endgame was a mistake and they simply ran out of time and resources to complete it properly. Most people stop playing at the point you leave the main game world.

Anybody played a game called Revenant. This game and bad unclear endings are bound together for all eternity.