If only you had taken the knife with you that the Antagonist just used to stab you, things might have gone a different route. But if your game makes it obvious that there are multiple endings and each ending gives information about a possible other ending, one of them being good, then everything is fine. This would make the player feel like all of their effort was indeed wasted. Having only bad endings would probably be a bad idea. Because you spend most of your time in the game itself: The journey is the destination. I've played quite a few horror games that were created with the RPG Maker (I am not affiliated with the company) for example where there are lots of bad endings - and I enjoyed all of them. If you are going for a darker themed game, and your description suggests that you are doing this, then having multiple bad endings is fine. It depends on your genre - in horror games this can be a very good decision Don't ask me why, it would be VERY complicated to explain why that's not an option for me. Side Note: because of the nature of the story, it can only have one good ending, not multiple. Example: if you make sure a certain character lives until a certain point, that character later manages to prevent the genocide that ended your run in one of the bad endings.
I still want to try and make each bad ending interesting, but I'm not sure if that alone would make those bad endings worth playing through. I don't want to make it feel like getting the sole good ending is the main goal and the only thing the player should focus on. Only one good ending, basically.Ĭould this be a bad idea for the story of a game? I feel like players might think they just wasted their time whenever they go into a route that leads to a game over.
There are many bad endings but only one true canon ending. The choices the players make can lead them to very different endings. Additionally, mind control was very much a prominent theme and gameplay mechanic, so this kind of theory actually makes a lot of sense.Background: I'm working on a game that has multiple paths for players to choose from.
HAPPY GAME MULTIPLE ENDINGS FREE
One of the prevailing theories is that the boy was being controlled by the Huddle, and the blob-like creature only wanted to break free so it could stop being experimented on.Ĭonsidering that the boy broke into a heavily fortified facility and not only knew exactly where to go in order to solve Inside's puzzles, free the Huddle, and also became a part of it, it makes sense that the Huddle somehow managed to use the boy (who is the youngest of all the characters in Inside and, therefore, perhaps the most susceptible to this type of mind control) to free itself. Just like the rest of Playdead's game, the Inside game ending is meant to be open to interpretation, not only of the Huddle (and the boy, for that matter) being dead or not - but also what the ending means in general. Perhaps adding to this confusion of Inside's ending is that once the Huddle truly breaks free and rolls down the mountainside, Inside simply ends.
0 kommentar(er)
