Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA VI

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    3. Gangs

    1. Announcements

    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

GTAForums does NOT endorse or allow any kind of GTA Online modding, mod menus, tools or account selling/hacking. Do NOT post them here or advertise them, as per the forum rules.

Ending A was Canon [SPOILERS]


The Odyssey

Recommended Posts

Ryo256
34 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

There's literally no point in including a choice between different endings in a game unless they're all canon endings. They put the choice there and whatever ending you chose is just as canon as any other and always will be. Endings A, B and C are all canon. If they do something else later with GTA Online or whatever that rules out one of the endings it's that later thing that's illogical and not canon.

Another thing to add is that I'm pretty sure the singleplayer DLC was going to consider whatever ending you picked. Unfortunately the content of it ended in Online as well? So it makes sense why Online has reference to story mode, because they shoved the singleplayer content there. So reference like Trevor is alive or not, I think is just Ending C's DLC part leaking whereas Ending A and B parts weren't added at all.

Also it is worth noting that you can 100% with any ending and that Online mode has some content (like flying vehicles) that just doesn't fit in with HD universe so yes, all of the endings can be canon and Online can be disregarded. All of them can be criticized. Personally I think Ending C is more of an afterthought than others because they wanted to go with IV's route with Ending A and B but realize that GTA V's theme may not agree and that players didn't respond that well to facing consequences in a GTA game so an ending where status quo isn't touched was made IMO. While Ending A and C do not seem like it but in Ending B, the way Franklin and Michael are portrayed seems to show that their relationship was meant to more.......interesting than what we got. So there is some indication of planning in terms of the endings, just the part of how we got from the start to those endings is where we have an issue. So since none of the endings can be justified well enough, players would just pick the one with the most gameplay benefits which would be C and then seems to rationalize it.

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
cp1dell
On 10/6/2020 at 7:27 AM, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

There's literally no point in including a choice between different endings in a game unless they're all canon endings. They put the choice there and whatever ending you chose is just as canon as any other and always will be. Endings A, B and C are all canon. If they do something else later with GTA Online or whatever that rules out one of the endings it's that later thing that's illogical and not canon.

IV did multiple endings perfectly fine and was able to leave it ambiguous in V. Hell, I still don’t understand how they messed up V when they did it right with IV.

 

There should have been only one ending (C) or two (Kill Michael or Trevor) if they really wanted to do the multiple endings thing. No cop out third choice (as much as I prefer ending C). The issue with A and B is that they are completely anti climatic, and come from nowhere, and leave plenty of loose ends open. The versions we have now are bad, but if they did it like IV where you still get a few slightly different missions, just different outcomes, or like RDR2, that would have been much better.

 

Kill Trevor or Michael. Deal with the fallout from either. Still have missions dealing with whoever you didn’t help, and Stretch, etc. and still get the classic big finale mission—instead of going out on a whimper of a mission where you chase someone and watch a cutscene.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
37 minutes ago, cp1dell said:

IV did multiple endings perfectly fine and was able to leave it ambiguous in V. Hell, I still don’t understand how they messed up V when they did it right with IV.

 

There should have been only one ending (C) or two (Kill Michael or Trevor) if they really wanted to do the multiple endings thing. No cop out third choice (as much as I prefer ending C). The issue with A and B is that they are completely anti climatic, and come from nowhere, and leave plenty of loose ends open. The versions we have now are bad, but if they did it like IV where you still get a few slightly different missions, just different outcomes, or like RDR2, that would have been much better.

 

Kill Trevor or Michael. Deal with the fallout from either. Still have missions dealing with whoever you didn’t help, and Stretch, etc. and still get the classic big finale mission—instead of going out on a whimper of a mission where you chase someone and watch a cutscene.

Agreed. I actually like endings A and B (besides the loose ends being left part), C indeed feels like a cop out by comparison. Personally I think they should've gone all in and had an ending C that resulted in Franklin's death. And I like your idea of having the missions to deal with the enemies/loose ends etc separately. Would've been a much more difficult decision and more impactful ending that way. 

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256

There are some creative ways on how endings could have been done but I think the main issue is that, if you look at the writing of V in general, the endings do kinda......fit in with the standard. Things we suggested in this thread would require Rockstar to revamp the whole story. 

Still I think writing in current endings do feel more impactful than rest of the story, almost like the area between the early parts and endings was filler. And this doesn't quite look good for V overall. So what I'm getting at, endings are the least of V's problems, we needed a more developed story to justify the conclusions.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ThatBenGuy

If anyone’s interested, I created a thread in which you can create your own GTA V mission. You can make an already existing mission different in it or just make your own mission (hence the name of the thread, lol). Either one is AOK. Heck, I altered ending A but if you want to alter it in a different way in the following thread, be my guest. If you wanna rewrite ending B in a different way, knock yourself out (it’s just a figure of speech, people, don’t really do it, unless you wanna wake up and find yourself in an ambulance or hospital room). Whatever you wanna do, I’ll be more than happy to read it! :D
 

 

Edited by Outlaw Biker Viking
Link to post
Share on other sites
cp1dell
1 hour ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Agreed. I actually like endings A and B (besides the loose ends being left part), C indeed feels like a cop out by comparison. Personally I think they should've gone all in and had an ending C that resulted in Franklin's death. And I like your idea of having the missions to deal with the enemies/loose ends etc separately. Would've been a much more difficult decision and more impactful ending that way. 

The thing is, just like how Franklin says to Haines—he has no beef with Trevor. And just like when Devin asks him to kill Michael, he kicks him out because that’s his mentor. Franklin is never given a reason to actually consider either option, and Option C strengthens that.

 

And I disagree with Franklin needing to die in C—before IV, Ending C type endings was the norm.

 

The layout in IV and RDR2 is good, and I don’t know what they were thinking with V.

 

Deal or Revenge - Slightly different missions

Fallout from choice

Finale with slight changes depending on choice

Ending

 

Final mission first half

Choice

Slightly different last mission half

 

And then there’s GTA V:

Choice A and B

Two final missions, slightly different

Choice C

Classic multi step finale string crammed into one mission, completely different from A and B

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
44 minutes ago, cp1dell said:

 

 

And I disagree with Franklin needing to die in C—before IV, Ending C type endings was the norm.

 

Sure but I think if they wanted to do something different by having a protagonist die then it should've included all three protagonists and not've been avoidable. A choice between losing Michael, losing Trevor or losing Franklin would've been compelling, a real dilemma. But a choice between losing Michael, losing Trevor or keeping everyone (plus getting to kill all enemies and no additional negatives) is just nonsense, it's not even a question. They missed their chance for a truly ballsy stand out ending, blew it by including a cop out option.

 

But the suggestion of making the choice for one to die and then a nice big ending mission to tie everything up afterwards does sound good to me. That would've worked with one, two, or three protagonists as the potential one to die, since you'd still have to lose one either way.

 

Like imagine if (RDR spoilers)

Spoiler

RDR had two endings. One where John dies brutally, his wife follows a few years later and his son becomes exactly what John hoped he wouldn't, in a gut wrenchingly tragic ending. And one where you save him and everyone lives happily ever after.

That would be dumb as hell. But it's essentially what they did with GTA V. 

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ThatBenGuy

@billiejoearmstrong8 and @cp1dell, I agree with both of your synopses entirely. They could’ve at least had Franklin contemplate about killing either Michael or Trevor instead. I mean, that’s exactly what they did in GTA IV with Niko Bellic in his options. Why, oh why, couldn’t they do the exact same with GTA V? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I think happy endings are a bit off putting in a game franchise like GTA or RDR. I mean, you’re playing as criminals in those games. They’re not supposed to have happy endings. They’re the bad guys. Don’t get me wrong, the Max Payne franchise, L.A. Noire, and the Call of Duty franchise are great games too. I still think their seriousness should be kept. However, as I’ve stated before, I think happy endings could still work in those games’ cases because you’re playing as virtuous law enforcement officials and military personnel in those games. In other words, they’re the good guys. They’re supposed to have happy endings. So yeah, in those type of games, happy endings could work. However, in franchises such as GTA and RDR, they’re what you call anti-heroes (fancy word for villainous protagonist) so it should only be expected for them to not completely get away with their actions and for them instead to suffer from them in one way or another. You get my point?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ryo256
33 minutes ago, Outlaw Biker Viking said:

They could’ve at least had Franklin contemplate about killing either Michael or Trevor instead.

What's ironic is that Franklin does contemplate this in Ending C when discussing with Lester and ......Lester sorta advise him to kill both of them or something lol. What a mess.

 

33 minutes ago, Outlaw Biker Viking said:

However, in franchises such as GTA and RDR, they’re what you call anti-heroes (fancy word for villainous protagonist) so it should only be expected for them to not completely get away with their actions and for them instead to suffer from them in one way or another. You get my point?

GTA series was more about living out your fantasy of being able to steal a car and do whatever you wanted. They just added a criminal context because a car jacker would fit well in that. The thing is in such power fantasy games, consequences weren't part of the formula as was the case with VC, SA and TBoGT, all ending on a positive note. GTA IV is when I think game got a bit more serious about being a criminal (Claude didn't really give a sh*t about that stuff in III) and later Rockstar gave us RDR in the same spirit of where facing consequences was the point of the game.

The thing about criminals getting away happily or not is, I don't really prefer one over the other, as long as the theme is well-communicated. Problem in the case of V is that, it doesn't commit to a direction. If consequences matter, Trevor shouldn't live happily in any ending  (and of course Ending C shouldn't exist). If consequences be damned then Ending A and B shouldn't exist, also Michael shouldn't be getting stuck with Madrazo and FIB either. V seems like a mash-up of two different directions, constantly conflicting with each other. 

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8

I don't mind if they go for more of a happy ending, it can work. As can a sad/negative ending. But a "choice" between a protagonist dying and all your enemies left undealt with vs a fairytale happy ending where all the protagonists live and you take out all your enemies not so much lol. Maybe I could accept it if it was a secret and the good ending really rewarded good choices and the bad ending punished bad ones, without telling you what the consequences would be in advance. In IV (where the two endings are more balanced anyway) the consequences of your decisions aren't revealed until after you've made the choice. But in V it literally tells you "Kill Michael" "Kill Trevor" or don't lol. Tough choice there :lol:

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.