Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

What choice did you choose at the end? SPOILERS!

67 replies to this topic

Poll: What choice did you choose? (161 member(s) have cast votes)

What choice did you choose?

  1. Kill Trevor (13 votes [8.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.07%

  2. Kill Michael (3 votes [1.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.86%

  3. Deathwish (145 votes [90.06%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 90.06%

Vote Guests cannot vote
ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#61

Posted 24 November 2017 - 06:42 PM Edited by ChiroVette, 24 November 2017 - 06:45 PM.

I think we are talking about the same thing, in essence.

 

-First off, the endings A and B are poorly written and even more poorly implemented. They play like afterthoughts and cut & pastes more than actual endings.

 

-Both are anticlimactic. While my main save was the C Ending, as I believe it is both canon (as you suggested) and would have been prerequisites for DLC that never happened. I had no idea back then that this would be the case. But even so, I left a save slot in that crossroad mission so I could re-load it and go back to play the two alternate endings. While I had zero interest in killing Trevor or Michael in my game, even back then, I had still assumed that their executions would be better thought out and better developed, not to mention better written. I actually really looked forward to playing them, even if they would not result in my final save point. But in the end, the missions are basically some dumb "chase the guy down, drive a long way to some destination, and kill him." Very disappointing from both an alternate ending standpoint AND a gameplay standpoint.

 

-The problem with a game that offers only ONE good choice is that, in my opinion, it devalues the whole point of offering the player a choice in the first place. I mean, shouldn't the devs and writers have offered players an actual choice between three viable endings, rather than one really good one and two completely dead end (your words) crappy ones? Again, if I were a writer or dev, I would want to make the player really think hard about their choice, by incentivizing the two "not as happy and Sunshine & Puppies endings." Maybe I am overthinking this, but I would have wanted the players to really have to sit and think a minute about whether they truly wanted to let all protagonists live OR wanted to kill one of them. As much as I hate IV, this is one area where I think the story choice is, in effect, better than the fork in the road for V. Because, if I remember correctly, choosing either ending gives the player both advantages and disadvantages. Meaning, you really have to think (assuming you care more about the story than I did, of course) about what ending you wanted for your final save. You were both rewarded AND punished for either choice.

 

-I am separating story from gameplay in one sense, but even in terms of writing, both the A and B endings are awful. Forget about the effect on the game, for a minute. They are delivered in a very generic way where the writing is pretty much identical, except for in one instance you let the guy drop and in the other, you set him on fire. But everything else about the writing in these ending choices is nothing more than written cut & pastes, and gameplay cut & pastes as well.

  • Lamborghini1335 and Galehaut like this

Galehaut
  • Galehaut

    Past crimes: Witchcraft, Stealing fire from the gods

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2016
  • Canada

#62

Posted 24 November 2017 - 09:47 PM Edited by Galehaut, 24 November 2017 - 10:04 PM.

-Both are anticlimactic. While my main save was the C Ending, as I believe it is both canon (as you suggested) and would have been prerequisites for DLC that never happened. I had no idea back then that this would be the case. But even so, I left a save slot in that crossroad mission so I could re-load it and go back to play the two alternate endings. While I had zero interest in killing Trevor or Michael in my game, even back then, I had still assumed that their executions would be better thought out and better developed, not to mention better written. I actually really looked forward to playing them, even if they would not result in my final save point. But in the end, the missions are basically some dumb "chase the guy down, drive a long way to some destination, and kill him." Very disappointing from both an alternate ending standpoint AND a gameplay standpoint.

 

That's where our opinions mainly differ ; while i completely agree that those endings are worthless on the game play side , i still believe that those 2 bad endings and the way they were written are very important and very complete IF you take in consideration the game as a whole. 

 

You already know some of the recurring theme in that game , the mid-life crisis theme being pre-dominant. Personal growth is also another very important theme close to the game as a whole. Another recurrent theme is Hollywood itself and everything it encompass. This game HAD to finish like a good Hollywood block buster. 

 

I really feel like you just had surrealist expectation for the end game or that you have a personal bias toward what the story should have been for you. I see those bad endings just like i would see mutliple ending games back in the days.

 

I honestly never saw anyone criticize games like Resident Evil 2 for having multiple bad endings and a good one. What about Silent hill ? Same for Chrono Trigger. Why would anyone choose anything else than an ending with Crono alive ? It's the whole point of multiple endings in a game ; to give more choice to the players ultimately. In Parasite eve 2 , i actually preferred the bad endings.

 

You can't deny the fact that many people preferred ending A or B , despite the consequences for choosing them.

 

 

-I am separating story from gameplay in one sense, but even in terms of writing, both the A and B endings are awful. Forget about the effect on the game, for a minute. They are delivered in a very generic way where the writing is pretty much identical, except for in one instance you let the guy drop and in the other, you set him on fire. But everything else about the writing in these ending choices is nothing more than written cut & pastes, and gameplay cut & pastes as well.

 

Gameplay wise , i agree completely. But story wise ,  like i said earlier , this is by design ! On the mural , you can clearly see that both ending A and B are symmetric and at the same height. This is how they chose to hint that one way or another , killing the protagonist wasn't the way to go.

 

This represent exactly what you described here. 2 copy-paste dead ends.

 

Even if they gave literally all the clues they could for the players to visually recognize the end of the story line in an image painted on a wall , it still took years for someone to uncover the real clues hidden in the story line writing to understand it all. I'd say that the writers are probably very proud of themselves on that one.

 

Remember , a R* official stated again last month that SP was very very complete. :*) If you understand the game as a whole , with the deciphered mural and all the endings, it opens the door to many more discussions. I think that's exactly what R* was going for with those endings and the mural. 


ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#63

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:13 PM

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, because I don't think that the A and B endings are in any way important from a story point of view. Particularly with how poorly they told the two alternate endings. I think they are more than just gameplay-crap. I think they both smack of lazy writing, which is not something I am accustomed to from Dan Houser's team. You seem to feel that they are meant to spark discussion in terms of controversy, but I don't see them as controversial so much as completely uninteresting and lackluster from a writing point of view. The endings are like non-entities in terms of story quality, and I don't think that doing that intentionally makes them any less banal.

 

But again, we can agree to disagree. You see the A and B endings as good storytelling (though we agree they suck for gameplay) and I see them both as lazy writing and lacking in any inherent interest to make them even seem "edgy."


Galehaut
  • Galehaut

    Past crimes: Witchcraft, Stealing fire from the gods

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2016
  • Canada

#64

Posted 24 November 2017 - 11:44 PM Edited by Galehaut, 24 November 2017 - 11:50 PM.

 You seem to feel that they are meant to spark discussion in terms of controversy,

 

Not at all. The spark of discussion arise from the fact that at the beginning of the game , the protagonists can see their future painted on a wall. That includes their own death for M and T.

 

What are the implications of having a canon hint showing the story line illustrated at the top of the highest mountain in the game ? That's where the discussions should rises and can also take many directions. Who painted it ? How come they know the future in advance ? 

 

If you know the game completely , you can also find other hints that pinpoint toward a certain narrative.

 

Ever watched Westworld ? :*) That's just to give you an hint without spoiling you anything.


Electrochoc
  • Electrochoc

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2017
  • Azerbaijan

#65

Posted 16 December 2017 - 12:29 AM Edited by Electrochoc, 16 December 2017 - 12:29 AM.

I chose to save all. I dont like Michael or Trevor but I've given so much effort to them, why would I kill one of them? The things that the game offered as a final choice were very ridiculous.


Sleepwalking
  • Sleepwalking

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2017
  • None

#66

Posted 29 December 2017 - 11:26 PM Edited by Sleepwalking, 29 December 2017 - 11:34 PM.

Spoiler

 

 

I love ending B.

 

Let's think of older GTA antagonists like Catalina / Big Smoke / Dimitri. The only difference between them and Michael is that you are able to play as Michael. He is just another GTA antagonist. He sold his mates to feds in order to save himself & family. After all these years he was not even sorry, I didn't buy his bullsh*t excuses where he defended his betrayal. At the end, he is betrayed by Franklin due to same reason.

I loved how story forms a circle.

Gameplay side:

Most players I see didn't bother with %100 completion and directly go into GTA online after completing story because after completing main story, the game doesn't offer any attractive criminal sub activities. So number of single player characters & their stats & properties are no longer important for them.

If you decide to reach %100 completion, again you really don't need have three playable character.

You will play mostly with Franklin.

* Only his sub missions contribute %100 completion.
* Chop is very useful when it comes to find collectibles.

After i reached %100, now I rarely launch single player; I launch single player if GTA online has some connection issues or if i come across with real assholes who make me very angry. When I launch it, I just shoot some cops, get bored easily and then turn off. While my main save file has ending B, i have a secondary "incase a dlc comes regarding Michael" ending C save file. Few minutes ago, I launch it to just see Michael, after story you really don't have any reason to play with him. He doesn't even have a sub activity to do.

Even reading posts & fan theories in this forum give me more fun than just roaming in empty single player map after finishing story.


Journey_95
  • Journey_95

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2012
  • None

#67

Posted A week ago

Ending C is the only one that makes sense, even though its underwhelming as hell too. There is no tension and the trio kills the villians too easily.

Still the first two endings are just forced and half assed, Rockstar should have put more effort in them or just not included them at all.

  • Lock N' Stock likes this

NumberNineLarge
  • NumberNineLarge

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2018
  • United-States

#68

Posted A week ago Edited by NumberNineLarge, A week ago.

I chose ending C as it's a happy ending. I watched the other two on YouTube, and both are sad.

That being said, it makes no sense for Franklin to kill either of them. It makes sense for Michael to kill Trevor and Trevor to kill Michael, but neither is an option.

Trevor and Franklin never had any serious tension. Trevor was always loyal and truthful with Franklin.

Michael and Franklin became so tightly knit even after Michael pointed a gun at Franklin's head for breaking into his house.

Deathwish is the way to go, as it was meant to be. Devin screwed Franklin over. Michael and Trevor never did.

Also, to the person who said Trevor needs to put down for the good of society, it's a video game, not real life. How I'd feel about somebody in real life is not how I'd feel about them in a game. It's GTA. Do you expect a boy scout?
  • Journey_95 likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users