CHAPTER

Eight

Multiple-Ending Stories

image

FIGURE 8.1

Multiple-ending storytelling.

Multiple-ending stories represent the next step in interactivity after interactive traditional stories and are the first type of storytelling on the spectrum that allows the player to have a significant impact on the main plot. Therefore, they’re the first type of story that can be called truly player-driven – although just barely. They’re also quite popular with both game developers and players (as shown in Chapter 14).

For the most part, multiple-ending stories follow the same structure as interactive traditional stories. The only difference – and the style’s defining feature – is that players are allowed to choose between two or more possible endings. Outside this single choice, the player can’t seriously alter the main plot in any other way. Despite this limitation, there are many different methods for determining what types of endings a game should have and where to place them in the story (there’s no reason why some endings can’t take place sooner or later than others). Similarly, though players are often given a rather clear choice that determines which ending they see, there’s no need to make the decision obvious or even to put it under the player’s direct control. We’ll discuss all these issues and more throughout this chapter.

Case Study: Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain

Developer: Silicon Knights
Publisher: Crystal Dynamics
Writers: Jim Curry, Denis Dyack, Ken McCulloch, Sheatiel Sarao
System: Sony PlayStation, PC
Release Date: November 15, 1996 (US), September 10, 2009 (PlayStation Network rerelease)
Genre: Action-Adventure

Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain and the rest of the Legacy of Kain series can best be thought of as cult classics. Known for their dark and brooding tone, excellent voice acting, and twisting story, the games were often called RPGs, even though the gameplay itself places them more squarely in the action or action-adventure genre. Although the dark, violent, and occasionally problematic gameplay kept the series from achieving widespread success, the Legacy of Kain games – particularly Blood Omen and Soul Reaver – still maintain a devoted fan following.

The story begins in the world of Nosgoth with the murder of Kain, a young nobleman. But Kain doesn’t stay dead for long. He’s brought back to life as a vampire by the necromancer Mortanius and immediately seeks revenge on those that ended his human life. Upon their defeat, however, Mortanius informs him that they were merely pawns and the real villains are the guardians of the Pillars of Nosgoth. Instead of protecting the pillars and the world they support, the guardians have become corrupted and must be destroyed if the world is to be saved. Unlike most game heroes of the time, Kain has little interest in what happens to the world and goes after the guardians in order to complete his revenge.

During the course of his search, Kain travels back in time to stop a tyrannical king before the king gains his full powers. But Kain later discovers that he was in fact being manipulated by one of the guardians and that his actions in the past triggered a bloody crusade that has left him as the only surviving vampire. He’s later betrayed by Mortanius, who is revealed to be the true mastermind behind Kain’s murder and the corruption of the guardians, all as part of a master plan to destroy the pillars. Upon learning this, Kain kills Mortanius and becomes the new guardian of the Pillar of Balance.

It’s at this point that the game presents the player with an all-important choice. With the other guardians dead, Kain can choose to give up his own life in order to reset the pillars and restore the land, though doing so would also mean the end of the vampire race. Or he can refuse, keeping his own life and ruling over the world as the pillars collapse and the world falls into decay. Although the choice changes nothing but the ending movies, it allows the player to think about what he or she would choose to do if facing a similar dilemma, or perhaps how Kain himself would respond based on his character and personality. As neither choice leads to an “ideal” ending, it makes for an interesting decision between the noble and selfish. The later games in the series assume that Kain chose the latter option and doomed the world to save himself, though it’s eventually revealed that his intentions weren’t entirely self-serving and that there were deeper reasons behind his decision. But the choice itself made quite an impact on players at the time, leaving them to wonder just which option they would have chosen.

Creating Multiple-Ending Stories

For the most part, the creation process for multiple-ending stories is similar to that of interactive traditional stories, as they use a mostly non-player-driven structure that allows the writer a great degree of control over the story and its progression. There are, however, several additional things that need to be considered, each of which I’ll explain in detail.

What Types of Endings Should a Game Have?

The first and most important question is what the endings are going to be and what purpose they serve. As in Blood Omen, multiple endings can be used to show the different outcomes of an important decision that the hero has to make (usually a choice between good and evil). However, they can also be used to represent good, bad, and/or neutral outcomes of an event, as in Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow (discussed in the next case study), or just show different ways that the story could turn out if things had gone slightly differently, as in Chrono Trigger (discussed later in this chapter).

To start off, you need to ask yourself why you want to have multiple endings in the first place. If your only answer is “to have more endings,” you may want to reconsider. As with any other story element, adding more endings simply for the sake of saying your story has a lot of endings is likely to result in a lot of writing that feels forced and unnecessary. But if you can think of two or more very interesting ways for the story to end or you want to challenge the players to think carefully about a certain decision or entice them to work harder to achieve the story’s best possible outcome, then multiple endings may be the way to go. The important thing is to make sure that the endings fit naturally into your story and don’t show up randomly or revolve around bizarre or unnecessary plot twists.

If He Dies, What Does That Mean?

One of the challenges in multiple endings is that of theme. In an ideal world, the way the story ends is exactly related to your theme – and not only “related”: it is your theme. If the theme of Macbeth is that “greed for power corrupts even the best leaders and leads to destruction,” it’s difficult to write to that theme if in one possible ending Macbeth ends up as king of Scotland. It’s best if you have multiple endings that the possible variations all lead to the same A-story climax, but get there through different pathways, and thus the theme then would shift to being carried by the B-story instead of the A-story.

Let’s keep using Macbeth as an example. The story has to end with Macbeth and Lady Macbeth both dying. But if you’ve given the players a series of choices along the way, allowing them to avoid killing Macbeth’s friends while Lady Macbeth still connives for power, the players can be pulled in a few directions related to his relationship to Lady Macbeth while the kingdom crumbles around him. Perhaps then the theme can be expressed through the way the kingdom collapses, how bloody it is, rather than simply that it does.

The desire to work in multiple endings can certainly make players happy and bolster their feeling of agency; the risk is that those kinds of stories will never feel very deep, emotionally, and may always tend to drift into melodrama. Writers need to guard against this kind of slippage at all costs if the medium is ever to be considered a serious storytelling venue.

—Chris

Case Study: Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow

Developer: Konami
Publisher: Konami
Writer: Koji Igarashi
System: Nintendo DS
Release Date: October 4, 2005 (US)
Genre: Action-Adventure

image

FIGURE 8.2

Soma finds himself facing a wide variety of monsters over the course of his adventure.

Konami’s long-running Castlevania series has gone through a lot of permutations over the years, from its beginnings as a humble platforming series, along with occasional forays into the 3D action and fighting genres, to the Metroid-inspired exploration-heavy action-adventure games that have come to define it. At the heart of each Castlevania game lies the simple story of a lone man (or in rare cases, a lone woman) venturing out to defeat Dracula (or occasionally another related villain) and restore peace to the land. According to series lore, both Dracula and his labyrinthine castle return to the world every hundred years as part of a never-ending cycle, and it’s the job of the heroic Belmont clan (and/or a few other special individuals) to fight their way to the count and send him back into his grave for the next century.

Dawn of Sorrow, a direct follow-up to Aria of Sorrow on the Game Boy Advance, is one of the rare games in the series to change the traditional story. In 1999, Julius Belmont and his companions at long last managed to seal Dracula away for good, then in 2035, the dark lord’s soul and power (castle) were separated from each other by a young man named Soma Cruz (who has the power to steal the souls and powers from monsters). One year later, Soma and his friend Mina are attacked by dark creatures that have been raised by a mysterious cult. Convinced that the world needs an ultimate evil if god is to be considered the ultimate good, Celia (the leader of the cult) has gathered people containing fragments of Dracula’s power (of which Soma is one) to create an existence to replace the defeated count. Soma ventures into Celia’s base, hoping to bring an end to her plans and protect his friends.

The Castlevania games have never been particularly known for their stories, as even in the most plot-heavy titles, the story takes a back seat to exploration, fighting, and some RPG-style character development. However, the plots of the entire series do tie together into a consistent, if rather convoluted, timeline and have featured some pretty interesting characters, such as Dracula’s son (and general fan favorite hero) Alucard. The series has also used multiple-ending storytelling in many of its games, starting all the way back on the NES with Castlevania II: Simon’s Quest. Instead of focusing on moral choices or “what if” scenarios, the endings in Castlevania games use the good and bad – or at times good, bad, and neutral – structure. Often, as is the case in Dawn of Sorrow, the endings are spaced throughout the game and the player needs to meet certain requirements in order to avoid the bad and neutral endings and reach the later parts of the game and receive the good ending.

image

FIGURE 8.3

Stealing the souls of defeated monsters gives Soma many different powers.

Dawn of Sorrow features three endings. One is clearly the good or best ending, and the others bad and neutral endings. The first ending can take place after Soma’s second battle with the cult member Dario, who – like Soma himself – has some of Dracula’s power inside him. If the player fights and defeats Dario normally, Soma will be victorious but will reach a dead end in his search and have little choice but to exit the castle and return home, leaving many issues unresolved. To avoid this ending, the player has to have acquired the power of the Paranoia Soul, which he can use to find and destroy the source of Dario’s powers. This prompts Celia to open a previously blocked area and challenge Soma to meet her in the castle’s central chamber. It’s there that the second ending can take place. Soma arrives just in time to see Celia murder Mina, and his shock and anger causes him to lose control over his dark powers and transform into the new Dracula. That isn’t the good ending, either! To avoid this one, the player needs to enter the room while wearing a talisman given to him by Mina. The talisman suppresses the dark energy long enough for Soma’s friends to arrive and tell him that the real Mina is safe and the one murdered by Celia is a fake. The following events result in the last section of the castle opening up, which leads to the true final boss and the best possible conclusion to the game.

Although Dawn of Sorrow’s bad endings don’t do much to expand upon the story, they do show what would happen if Soma failed at certain points along the way and also set the stage for an unlockable bonus mode that follows the efforts of Soma’s friends to defeat him after he becomes Dracula. Most importantly, as the bad endings are clearly not the proper conclusion to the story, they force the player to think about how they can be avoided and to thoroughly search the game for the items and/or skills necessary to do so. The other Castlevania games are much the same, with their bad endings encouraging players to further explore the world and figure out how to avoid them. Because of this, they do an excellent job of supporting the gameplay by further emphasizing the games’ focus on exploration and experimentation.

Choosing Where to End the Game

Once you’ve decided on what types of endings you want and how they’re going to fit into the story, the next step is deciding exactly where to place them in the game. Quite a lot of games such as Blood Omen and STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION (which is another title we’ll talk about later in this chapter) have all their endings at the end of the game, which seems like the natural place. And that’s fine if all the endings focus on different ways that the final battle or decision could have played out, or just serve as different possible epilogues for the characters. But, just as Dawn of Sorrow demonstrated, there’s no reason to limit endings to the end of the story. Different things the hero does or doesn’t do could easily cause his journey to come to an early end (for better or worse). There’s also no reason for the story to not have several important decision points instead of just one, with one decision leading to an early ending and the other allowing the game to continue.

When looking at the structure or outline of your story, consider the points at which the hero is going to face an important decision or a particularly difficult challenge. Then consider what would happen if the hero made a different choice or performed significantly worse (or better) than expected. What would happen next? Could it lead to an early ending? If so, would that ending add anything important, interesting, and/or enjoyable to the story? For example, an ending in which the hero decides to stay home and sleep in instead of going out on an adventure would probably be pretty boring and wouldn’t be worth the time to write and program. But an ending in which the hero miraculously manages to defeat the main villain when they first meet early in the game could show an interesting “what-if” scenario and also reward the players who are able to win a battle that’s skewed heavily against them.

When using this approach, be sure to keep in mind that every ending your game has requires extra writing and programming, and quite possibly art and sound as well. All of those processes take time and money, so think carefully about each ending and whether it will add enough to the game to be worth it.

Case Study: CHRONO TRIGGER

Developer: Square Co., Ltd.
Publisher: Square Electronic Arts, LLC
System: Super Nintendo
Writers: Yuji Horii, Masato Kato
Release Date: August 22, 1995 (US)
Genre: RPG
Other Versions: PlayStation (included in FINAL FANTASY CHRONICLES, 1997), Nintendo DS (2008)

image

FIGURE 8.4

The accidental creation of a time portal sends Crono and his friends on an epic journey to save the future. © Square Enix, Co., Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Frequently called one of the greatest games of all time, CHRONO TRIGGER was the result of a “dream team” collaboration between FINAL FANTASY creator Hironobu Sakaguchi, DRAGON QUEST designer and writer Yuji Horii, and Dragon Ball Z creator Akira Toriyama. Though never quite achieving the popularity of any of those series, CHRONO TRIGGER did become a hit and went on to spawn a sequel (1999’s excellent CHRONO CROSS on the PlayStation) and enhanced ports on both the PlayStation and DS. It’s remembered fondly for many reasons, including its bright cartoon graphics, catchy musical score, fun and memorable characters, time travel mechanics, and numerous endings. It also introduced the New Game+ feature, which lets players who have finished the game restart from the beginning while keeping their characters’ levels, spells, and items.

CHRONO TRIGGER begins with spiky-haired teenager Crono heading off to visit the kingdom of Guardia’s Millennial Fair, where he meets a cheerful girl named Marle (who is actually the princess in disguise). While having fun at the fair, the pair eventually agree to try out an amazing new teleportation device created by Crono’s friend Lucca, but the machine malfunctions, sending Marle through a strange portal. Crono dives in after her, with Lucca promising to follow as soon as she’s figured out what went wrong. Crono finds himself transported 400 years in the past, where Marle has been confused for her own distant ancestor (the then queen of Guardia), creating a time paradox. Fortunately, Crono, Lucca, and a warrior named Frog manage to find the real queen and restore the timeline. Unfortunately, things aren’t all well in the present and Crono is soon arrested on suspicion of kidnapping Princess Marle, despite her own protests to the contrary. She and Lucca help Crono escape, but the trio is forced to jump into another time portal in order to avoid the pursuing guards. They find themselves a thousand years in the future in a world that has been destroyed by Lavos, a powerful monster that had been slumbering beneath the planet’s surface for millions of years prior to its awakening. The friends decide that it’s their duty to prevent this sad fate and begin journeying through time to find a way to destroy Lavos.

Along the way, they visit six different time periods and recruit several additional allies, including Frog (a warrior from Guardia’s history), Robo (a robot from the distant future), Ayla (a cavewoman from the distant past), and the mysterious magician Magus (who is also searching time for Lavos). Exploring the world across multiple time periods offers many opportunities for players to see how their actions in the past change future times, something that is made use of throughout the story and in many optional quests as well. In addition, the heroes themselves all have a set of optional quests that tie into their backstory and personal goals, and there are lots of other quests and hidden areas to discover as well – all of which serve to further expand on the story and setting.

image

FIGURE 8.5

CHRONO TRIGGER features one of the most unique and eccentric casts to be found in any game. © Square Enix, Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shortly after escaping from the post-apocalyptic future, the heroes find a portal that will allow them to travel to the day of Lavos’s awakening at any time to challenge him. However, trying to fight the final boss early in the game is sure to end in failure, as the heroes don’t have the levels or equipment needed to survive. It’s not until the end, or near the end, of the main plot that they’ll be strong enough to have a chance against Lavos. But that’s where New Game+ comes in. After beating the game, players can restart from the beginning, keeping all their levels and abilities and nearly all of their items. New Game+ also allows the players to reach Lavos at an even earlier point in the game. Although breezing through enemies with powered-up characters is fun, the real purpose of New Game+ is to obtain the rest of the game’s 12 endings (13 in the DS version), some of which also contain several variations. Fighting and defeating Lavos at different points in the game results in different endings. Four of the endings are joke endings, with two consisting of various characters running around during the credits, one allowing players to talk to members of the development team, and one featuring a hilarious slide show narrated by Marle and Lucca. Of the remaining eight, one is the normal ending and the others constitute a series of what-if scenarios, showing how things would have changed had the heroes defeated Lavos and ended their quest early before meeting certain characters or altering various events. Some of these endings are fun, some are interesting; they all serve to further expand the world of CHRONO TRIGGER and provide the player with fascinating glimpses of what could have been.

CHRONO TRIGGER’s large number of endings and the unique way in which the players choose between them are among its defining features and served as many players’ introduction to multiple-ending storytelling. What’s most impressive is that they manage to both expand on the story and provide significant replay value without cheapening the main ending or hiding the best ending behind a series of complex or frustrating requirements, two problems that plague many multiple-ending games. CHRONO TRIGGER was far from the first game to use a multiple-ending story, but even after all these years, it’s still one of the best.

How Many Endings Does a Game Need?

Blood Omen has two endings; Dawn of Sorrows, three; and CHRONO TRIGGER, twelve or thirteen. So how many endings should your game have? First off, remember the amount of work that each ending takes to create and make sure you keep this in mind throughout the planning process. Next, remember that you want every ending to be interesting and/or enjoyable and add something to the story. Finally, consider where your endings are placed. With all these things taken into account, you should have a fairly good idea of how many endings you’ll need. If your goal is to show what becomes of your hero if he or she becomes good or evil having two endings is probably fine; if you want to explore the different outcomes of an important decision or have endings that are better or worse based on the player’s performance, two or three should be enough. As those are the most common multiple-ending scenarios used in games, it should come as no surprise that the average number of endings in multiple-ending stories is two or three. But if you’ve got a more creative use for your endings and the time and money to create them, there’s no reason you can’t have more. CHRONO TRIGGER may feature more endings than average, but there are some games with far more!

Why, Exactly, Are We Doing Multiple Endings?

In production meetings, the desirability of multiple endings is often championed by marketing. They state that putting the bullet point on the back of the box that the game has “three endings” implies that the game is greatly replayable and thus delivers more value for the dollar. This trade-off is always compared to the increased production cost to create the content for those multiple endings, which can be significant.

It is a sad fact, however, that most games that are purchased are, historically, not finished by the purchaser at all – and an even smaller percentage of players finish a game multiple times. There are players who do so, and those players certainly are the types of customers who are loyal fans, so there is certainly a return on investment from the point of view of the developer and the publisher. But it has never been convincingly demonstrated that the technique of multiple endings increases sales in any measurable fashion.

I mentioned previously the experience of talking with Dragon Age players. I asked them after they had discussed the multiple endings whether they would have purchased the game anyway if the game had not explicitly stated that it contained multiple endings. Their reply was inconclusive, and they meandered around the topic as they discussed it. Their main concern was how, if there were not multiple endings, the game might dilute their sense of agency without them. We spent some time analyzing the story and came to the conclusion that, indeed, inability to choose a path of action that affected the ending would have diluted the experience for them. And second, they were willing, as a group, to sacrifice a definitive theme if it meant retaining their sense of agency. This is a small sample, and by no means definitive, but it is a window into the evaluation of an interactive product. They agreed that expression of an author’s point of view is valuable, and in fact have enjoyed stories in other media that delivered a powerful point of view (the film American Beauty came up in the conversation as a good example of a story that, if it had allowed multiple endings, might have been diluted by that choice). Perhaps it may be true that the interactive medium may not be the place to deliver a powerful theme. I don’t think we’ve come to any solid conclusion either way.

—Chris

Case Study:   STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION

Developer: Square Enix Co., Ltd.
Publisher: Square Enix, Inc.
Writers: Masaki Norimoto, Masayasu Nishida
System: Sony PSP
Release Date: January 20, 2009 (US)
Genre: RPG
Original Version: STAR OCEAN: THE SECOND STORY (PlayStation, 1999)

The STAR OCEAN series has a mixed history. The first game did well in Japan but never made it to the United States until it was remade for the PSP as STAR OCEAN: FIRST DEPARTURE many years later. Its PlayStation sequel, however, did arrive in the United States and went on to become the most popular game in the series. Despite that, its direct sequel remains a Japanese exclusive and the third and fourth games in the series, though moderately successful, have met with somewhat mixed reviews. Through all that, the series’ intriguing mix of sci-fi and fantasy elements, along with its fast-paced and additive real-time battles and deep skill and item creation systems, have helped it maintain a loyal following.

image

FIGURE 8.6

SECOND EVOLUTION’s world features a unique mix of fantasy and science fiction. © Square Enix, Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION is a PSP remake of STAR OCEAN: THE SECOND STORY that features numerous additions, including a new character and a large amount of additional voice work. The story takes place in the far future, long after mankind set out to explore the vastness of space, seeking out new planets and races. Claude is a young member of the Earth Federation who, while exploring some ancient ruins, is accidentally transported to the undeveloped planet of Expel, a medieval world with little technology but powerful magic. There he saves Rena, a local orphan girl, and is mistaken for the legendary hero of light. Although he insists that he’s not the hero, Claude agrees to investigate a strange meteor that recently crashed into the planet both to help Expel’s citizens and to try and find a way to contact the Federation and return home. Naturally, the meteor is anything but ordinary and their quest to stop the sinister Ten Wise Men leads Claude, Rena, and their companions all across both Expel and the high-tech world of Energy Nede.

The story itself is interesting and features a large cast of memorable characters, including the teenage inventor Precis and the morose dragon-possessed swordsman Ashton, but it also includes several features that specifically set it apart. First, at the start of the game, players are given the choice between having Claude or Rena as their main character. Although the decision doesn’t really change the story, there are brief points in the game at which the two separate and some other events vary slightly depending on whether they’re being viewed from Claude’s or Rena’s perspective. Additionally, some endings are harder or easier to get, depending on the chosen character. The second unusual storytelling feature is private actions. When entering towns, the player has the option to initiate a private action instead of exploring the town normally. During private actions, the player’s party splits up, with the player retaining control over the main character (Claude or Rena) while the rest of the heroes explore and go about their business on their own. Tracking down and talking to the various heroes during private actions leads to a variety of different scenes and conversations that serve as the game’s primary means of character development. There are a very large number of private action scenes, which make for an enjoyable way to learn more about and grow closer to the characters outside the main story.

image

FIGURE 8.7

Talking to and forming relationships with other characters is a very important part of the game. © Square Enix, Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.

Finally, there is the primary reason we’re talking about STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION right now: the endings. STAR OCEAN: SECOND STORY originally featured a whopping eighty-six unique endings, with STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION raising the number to somewhere around one hundred. You’re probably wondering how any one story could possibly have that many different outcomes and, in fact, it doesn’t. Claude and Rena’s journey to stop the Ten Wise Men ends the same way every time you play. However, the majority of the ending scenes focus on what becomes of the different heroes afterward. Each hero has an ending in which he or she goes off on his or her own, at least one friends or couples ending for every other hero, and often one or two special endings as well. There’s also a special bonus ending that can be unlocked under certain conditions. Upon beating the game, the player is treated to several of the possible endings (between four and eight) depending on how friendly and/or romantically attracted the various heroes are to each other. These friendship and romance values are determined by what the player says during various private actions and which characters are together most often in battle, though they can also be manipulated through the use of certain rare items. The values themselves are hidden from the player, so unless he or she goes into the game knowing about them and makes a significant effort to track and modify them, the ending selection will come across as entirely natural, perhaps even leaving the player unsure of why specific matches were chosen.

The sheer number of endings is impressive, and it can be fun for players to see their favorite characters pair off at the end. However, because there are so many endings, they’re all extremely short (many containing only several lines of dialog) and some overlap quite a lot. Furthermore, the hidden friendship system makes it tricky to keep track of how much the various characters like each other, and because of the way the system is set up, certain endings are extremely difficult to get. This can lead to a lot of frustration for players trying to get specific endings, especially if they don’t use a guide and do a lot of preplanning. A final issue is that even with multiple save files and a lot of planning and value manipulation, players must complete the entire game numerous times in order to see all or even most of the possible endings – something that none but a very dedicated few are likely to do. In the end, as unique and enjoyable as STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION’s ending system can be, there are many who question whether it might have been better to just stick with the “canon” character pairings (based on information from the sequel) and provide longer and more satisfying endings for each of them. But, whether or not you appreciate STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION’s ending system, its fun characters, enjoyable plot, and unique private actions make its story a very memorable one.

Determining Which Ending the Player Sees

By now, you’ve seen examples of several methods that games use to determine which ending the player can see. For example, there’s the straight-up method used in Blood Omen that provides the player with a clear choice, often at or near the end of the game, and directly determines which ending the player receives, and CHRONO TRIGGER’s timing method, with the ending depending on the point in the story at which the player decides to defeat the final boss. These two methods are the most direct, as they not only make it clear to the player how the ending is chosen, but allow him or her to easily and directly control that choice. Other popular methods – such as the good and evil system (whereby the hero becomes good or evil based on the player’s actions) in games such as Bioshock (discussed in a case study later in this chapter), Dawn of Sorrow’s performance-based endings, and STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION’s hero relationship system – are less obvious to the player and/or harder for him or her to manipulate, often requiring the player to start the game from the beginning with very specific goals in mind to order to achieve certain endings. Even games that use a fairly clear choice to determine the ending don’t need to place that choice right near the end of the game or make it clear that the decision has serious ramifications.

When it comes to deciding which method you should use, the choice should be fairly obvious because certain types of systems lend themselves better to different types of endings. A story with good and evil endings, for example, would work best with a good and evil system or possibly a clear decision point while endings focused on different character relationships could use a system similar to that of STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION. In the end, it’s all about ensuring that the system supports the types of endings you’re going to have along with the rest of the story and gameplay.

Case Study: Growlanser II: The Sense of Justice

Developer: Career Soft
Publisher: Working Designs
Writers: Shinjiro Takada, You Haduki
System: Sony PlayStation 2
Release Date: December 7, 2004 (US) (as part of Growlanser Generations)
Genre: Strategy RPG

Despite having a strong following in Japan, only a few Growlanser games have been released in the United States. Growlanser II and III were the first to arrive here, coming several years after their Japanese release in Working Designs’ Growlanser Generations collection, and Atlus released V shortly after, but the rest have unfortunately remained Japanese exclusives. The series’ most popular elements include its non-grid-based battles, ring weapon customization system, and highly stylized artwork. Many games in the series also feature a character relationship system similar to but less complex than the one found in STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION.

Sense of Justice technically uses a branching path story rather than a multiple-ending one. However, aside from the decision that determines the game’s ending, the only other choice that significantly alters the main plot doesn’t becomes available unless the player receives a top ranking on every mission in the first portion of the game, a feat that’s virtually impossible on a first playthrough, making it unlikely for most players to ever find it.

The hero of the story is Wein Cruz, a knight of the kingdom of Burnstein who dreams of rising in the ranks until he has enough influence to try and prevent wars such as the one that raged during his younger years. At the same time, his friend Maximillian Schneider sets off to try and achieve the same goal through political means. Unfortunately, Wein’s first mission as a commander ends with him and his comrades framed for a crime they didn’t commit, forcing them to go on the run in an effort to prove their innocence. Several major twists occur as the tale progresses, including a strange encounter with a girl from Wein’s past, the secret plot of the mercenary Wolfgang, and Maximillian’s ultimate plan to create a peaceful world. The characters and dialog are enjoyable throughout, and things frequently aren’t what they seem, ensuring that players remain interested through the course of the adventure. And, in a refreshing change from many game stories, there’s no single villain manipulating everything from behind the scenes but rather several separate threats that must be dealt with over the course of the story.

Like in STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION, Sense of Justice’s endings are based on character relationships, the one exception being the special ending for those who discovered and followed the well-hidden decision point I mentioned earlier. However, instead of presenting endings for every possible character pair-up, Sense of Justice’s endings focus entirely on Wein and the party member he becomes closest to. This focus, combined with a New Game+ mechanism, makes getting all the different endings a far more realistic goal than in SECOND EVOLUTION. His relationships with his comrades strengthen or weaken based on the player’s responses in certain conversations as well as finding and participating in a variety of optional story scenes that can be triggered by visiting certain areas at specific times during the game. Unlike in SECOND EVOLUTION, the characters’ relationships are quite easy to keep track of, as the status menu displays every character’s current level of affection for Wein. To make it even easier for the player to achieve his or her chosen ending, there’s a point about 80 percent of the way through the story at which Wein has a day off and can choose to spend it with any one of his comrades. If the chosen character’s affection for Wein is high enough, he or she will agree and the day’s activities, along with the eventual ending, will be decided. Having the decision point earlier in the game makes for a somewhat more natural progression than a last-minute choice and also allows the story to show Wein and his chosen friend/girlfriend growing closer prior to the ending. However, it also means that even if the player develops strong relations with every character and creates a save point prior to his or her choice, he or she will still have to play through the final portion of the game each time he or she wants to obtain a different character’s ending. In a nod to romance over friendship, the player is required to get the endings for all three of the game’s female heroes before any of the male heroes’ endings become available, which can be disappointing for some players. One final surprise, and a strong incentive for obtaining every ending, turns up in Growlanser III, when after undertaking an optional quest, the player is given the ability to import his or her party from Growlanser II (who otherwise don’t appear in III’s story), though aside from Wein, only characters whose endings were seen are able to make the transfer. Aside from providing a cool cameo and a chance for Growlanser III players to obtain some powerful characters and items early in the game, it provides one of the best incentives I’ve ever seen for players to actively seek out every different character and ending. Though rather hard to find, it’s touches like this one – combined with excellent stories and fun gameplay – that make Growlanser Generations worth tracking down.

Multiple-Ending Stories and Sequels

In multiple-ending stories, it’s quite common for the various endings to contradict each other, sometimes considerably. Although this isn’t an issue in individual games, in an industry with such a heavy focus on series and sequels, it can cause quite a lot of problems. In Growlanser II and STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION, for example, different characters can become romantically involved or just end up being really close friends. But what if those characters appear again in the sequel? Who should they be paired with? An even tougher decision comes in games such as Blood Omen, in which the different endings are not only strongly opposed but lead to major repercussions throughout the entire game world. There are several different ways to deal with this issue, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages.

The first is to pick a single specific ending and declare it to be canon. From that point on, that ending is what truly happened and the one on which all future games are based, and the others are nothing more than things that could have been. In games featuring the classic good, bad, and neutral set of endings, the good ending is generally used. In games using other types of endings, it really comes down to the writer’s preference, though looking into which ending was most popular among fans is a good idea as well. This is a popular method used by series including Legacy of Kain and Star Ocean. It’s a quick and easy solution that allows you to continue on with the world and characters from the first game. However, fans of a particular ending (for example, those who feel that Kain really should have sacrificed himself at the end of Blood Omen) may be upset that the story didn’t go the way they wanted. Creatively, this can be problematic as it says to the players “we know we gave you two choices but only one really mattered.”

If you don’t want to tie yourself down to a particular ending, the other easy way out is to dodge the issue entirely. Just because a game is a sequel doesn’t mean that it must feature the same characters or even take place on the same world. Many series, such as FINAL FANTASY, feature new worlds and characters in each game, with only a few common threads linking them together, making this a very popular approach. If you want to keep your sequel in the same setting and the different endings of the first game didn’t feature massive world-changing ramifications, you can still dodge the issue by having the sequel take place in a different time period and/or feature different characters. In Growlanser III, for example, the cast of the previous game show up only if the player completes a certain optional quest, and even then they have little dialog and no important role in the story, so the question of who Wein ended up with never becomes an important issue.

A less popular and trickier but still workable approach is not to use any of the first game’s endings and instead combine elements from all of them to create a new ending, which then becomes the canon. Although this allows you to reuse your favorite elements from multiple endings, it requires more work, as you need to write an entirely new ending to go off of. It also tends to confuse fans, though they usually manage to piece together the events of the new nonexistent ending eventually.

The final option is the toughest, requiring a lot of extra work from the entire development team, but also provides the biggest payoff for the choices the player made in the previous game. If your sequel is going to be released on the same system as your previous game, or the new system is backward-compatible, you can allow players to import their old save file, with the game playing out differently based on which ending they received in the first game. Depending on the types of endings used in the first game, the extra work required can range anywhere from rewriting a few lines of dialog to creating several almost entirely different stories. However, in an effort to keep the additional workload at a reasonable level, the rare games that use this approach usually do their best to keep the endings close enough that significant story changes aren’t required. For fans of the series, carrying over their story decisions from the past game shows them just how much their choices mattered and can be a big selling point. On the downside, it can also discourage new players, who may feel like they can’t really play the new game unless they play the original first, and can potentially hurt replayability, as replaying two entire games takes a lot longer than replaying one.

Case Study: The Mass Effect Series

Developer: Bioware
Publisher: EA
Writers: Drew Karpyshyn, Mac Walters
System: Microsoft Xbox 360, PC
Release Date: November 20, 2007 (Mass Effect, US); January 26, 2010 (Mass Effect 2, US)
Genre: Action RPG

image

FIGURE 8.8

Mass Effect takes place in the far future, when humanity has spread into space. Mass Effect Images, © 2010, Electronic Arts Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

Bioware’s epic sci-fi series has quickly grown to become one of their most popular franchises. Like all Bioware games, Mass Effect features a long, complex story; well-developed characters; and a massive number of optional quests and tasks for the player to undertake. Although the heavily streamlined battle and character development systems in the second game irked some fans, both Mass Effect games launched to near-universal praise and expectations for the third and final volume of the trilogy are very high.

The Mass Effect series follows Commander Shepard, an experienced human solider in the late twenty-second century, when space travel and planetary colonization have become commonplace. Though humans are one of the less influential species in the universe, Shepard soon gains an opportunity to change that by becoming the first human Spectre (a type of special agent with freedom to go anywhere and do as he or she pleases, answering only to the highest levels of government). Shepard’s appearance and gender are chosen by the player, who is – in an interesting twist – also able to pick between several possible origin stories for the hero. Although these decisions don’t significantly affect the main story, they do alter the dialog in various conversations and make certain optional quests available or unavailable. Thanks to the planned backstories and well-written dialog, Shepard manages to avoid the generic hero stereotype that plagues most RPGs featuring player-created heroes. However, as a result, the player’s control over Shepard’s personality is limited to acting as a paragon (a law-abiding, by-the-book hero) or a renegade (a get-the-job-done-by-any-means-necessary antihero).

image

FIGURE 8.9

Mass Effect’s dialog wheel frequently allows the player to choose from several different responses. Mass Effect Images, © 2010, Electronic Arts Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

While hunting down a rogue Spectre in Mass Effect, Shepard learns of an ancient alien race called the Reapers, who secretly foster the technological advancement of other races only to suddenly wipe them out once they’ve progressed to a certain point. Unfortunately, there are few who believe him, forcing Shepard and his ragtag crew to search for a way to stop the Reapers on their own. The planet-hopping adventure features a diverse cast of races and characters, along with a detailed universe and mythology to explore. Shepard is able to make numerous choices when reacting to different characters and situations and can even pursue a romantic relationship with one of several members of his crew. However, these decisions have little to no effect on the main plot, and even the ending – which features several variations depending on the result of two choices Shepard makes – changes only slightly, leaving Mass Effect to straddle the line between a multiple-ending story and an interactive traditional story. This approach does have its advantages, allowing players to customize Shepard and his behavior to better suit their preferences and providing a strong illusion of control, while still allowing for a well-structured, writer-controlled story.

Mass Effect 2 picks up shortly after the first game, when Shepard’s ship is suddenly attacked by a powerful enemy. Though his crew manages to escape, Shepard himself is caught in the crash and thought to be dead. Two years later, he wakes up under the care of Ceberus, a human group with a questionable history, that brought him back from the brink of death. Their leader wants Shepard to investigate the disappearance of large numbers of human colonists, which he believes is the work of the Reapers.

image

FIGURE 8.10

Mass Effect 2 features many new characters, though many from the first game make appearances as well. Mass Effect 2 Images, © 2010, Electronic Arts Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

Featuring a mostly new cast of characters that are just as interesting and fun as the first and many more worlds to explore, Mass Effect 2 provides another engaging planet-hopping journey throughout the universe. The story has even more twists than the first and often takes on a much darker tone as well, with slavers and twisted human experimentation playing significant roles. Once again, players are able to play the paragon or renegade and woo one of several crew members along the way. As in the first game, the majority of choices the player makes have little to no effect in the long run, but some of the choices – particularly those near the end of the game – have significant ramifications later on, making the game (barely) a branching path story.

image

FIGURE 8.11

Battles are fast-paced and intense. Mass Effect 2 Images, © 2010, Electronic Arts Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

Players are also able to import their save data from the first Mass Effect, which carries over their customized Shepard along with a record of the important decisions he made and ending he received in the first game. As most of the major characters and areas from Mass Effect play a much smaller role in Mass Effect 2, this data doesn’t significantly alter the main story, though it does change some events and conversations. This continues to let the players feel that their choices matter and provides a strong illusion of control, while maintaining the structured story. A similar system is planned for Mass Effect 3 as well, allowing characters to complete the entire trilogy with their custom character. Although carrying over the results of decisions from past games made for a lot of extra work for Bioware’s writers, it allows the series to achieve a degree of consistency rarely seen in series using anything but interactive traditional stories, making Mass Effect an excellent example of the most player-centered way of solving the multiple-ending dilemma.

The Strengths of Multiple-Ending Stories

Multiple-ending stories can serve several purposes. First and foremost, they allow the players to gain some degree of control over the plot, which can – in theory, anyway – help ensure that the story plays out in the way they’ll most enjoy. (For an in-depth discussion on whether this is really the case and why, see Chapters 12 and 13, along with the research data in Chapter 14.) The more endings there are, the higher chance there is that there will be at least one the player likes, possibly avoiding unsatisfying ending situations like the one in Arc the Lad II. Multiple endings can also increase a game’s replay value by encouraging players to restart the game and try for a different ending. In some games, they also serve to support and enhance core game concepts such as STAR OCEAN: SECOND EVOLUTION’s relationship system and Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrows’s exploration-based gameplay. Multiple endings may also drive players to play a game in ways they normally wouldn’t, such as playing as an evil hero instead of a good one or striving to complete a particularly difficult task in order to achieve a certain ending.

Case Study: Disgaea: Afternoon of Darkness

Developer: Nippon Ichi Software
Publisher: NIS America
Writers: Yoshitsuna Kobayashi, Sohei Niikawa
System: Sony PSP
Release Date: October 30, 2008 (US)
Genre: Strategy RPG
Other Versions: Disgaea: Hour of Darkness (PS2, 2003); Disgaea DS (DS, 2008)

image

FIGURE 8.12

Disgaea’s unique story focuses on Prince Laharl’s bid to conquer the Netherworld. © 2006-2011 Nippon Ichi Software, Inc © 2011 NIS America, Inc. All rights reserved.

Japanese developer Nippon Ichi is known for creating some of the deepest and most hardcore strategy RPGs in existence, with nearly endless character and item development, battle systems built to be carefully dissected and exploited, and optional challenges that require players to push their party to extreme levels of power in order to succeed. However, fans of their games are quick to point out that much of the appeal comes not just from the gameplay, but from their unique characters and hilarious stories. Nippon Ichi’s flagship franchise, the Disgaea series, embodies both of these traits. Afternoon of Darkness is an enhanced port of Hour of Darkness (the first game in the series) that features many additions, including new bosses and a bonus what-if story starring fan-favorite character Etna.

The story takes place in the Netherworld, a hell-like dimension, where the demon Prince Laharl has just awakened from a two-year nap to discover that his father, the mighty overlord King Krecheskoy, choked to death on a pretzel, leaving the Netherworld in chaos as hordes of powerful demons battle to claim the throne. Unwilling to let someone else become overlord in his place, Laharl sets out with his questionably loyal retainer Etna and a squad of underpaid prinnies (which can best be described as evil penguins) to beat down the upstarts and cement his claim to the throne. Along the way, he battles and occasionally befriends a wacky cast of characters, including the pesky “Dark Adonis” Vyers (who, much to his chagrin, is renamed Mid-Boss by an unimpressed Laharl), bumbling angel trainee Flonne (who was sent from Celestia to assassinate the overlord), and the overly heroic Captain Gordon, Defender of Earth. In between the zany antics and humorous dialog, Disgaea’s story manages to work in a few surprise twists and a nice, if slightly corny, moral about the importance of love and friendship, even among demons, who many (themselves included) believe to be too evil to care about such things. The clash of ideals between demons such as Laharl and Etna, who hold things like ruthlessness and betrayal in high regard, and Flonne and Gordon, who value kindness and heroism, is handled in a mostly lighthearted way, but there are occasional serious moments as well. Over the course of the game, it’s fun to watch Laharl’s progress from a spoiled brat to a powerful overlord and finally to a person who truly understands love and compassion, though in a somewhat demonic way.

image

FIGURE 8.13

Disgaea is full of crazy characters and hilarious dialog. 2006–2011 Nippon Ichi Software, Inc. © 2011 NIS America, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disgaea contains numerous endings. Most of them are humorous in nature, but they all build on various characters and/or game elements to great effect. Though not all of the endings are easy to find, they all fit in very logical places throughout the game. Some focus on what-if scenarios. Losing a battle to Mid-Boss, for example, shows an ending where the oft-beaten underdog at last reigns supreme; another ending shows what would happen if Laharl pursued the traitorous General Carter to Earth instead of letting him escape. Others, however, show the results and consequences of Laharl’s actions. If he’s deemed to be suitably cruel (determined by how many of their own allies players have killed in battle), he’s given the option to kill certain enemies rather than spare them, leading to bad endings in which his own allies attack him in turn. The main ending also plays on the story’s themes of love and friendship, concluding on a rather sad note unless the player successfully reached the end without killing any allies, in which case – having fully learned the meaning of love and compassion – Laharl holds back at a crucial moment, sparing his enemy and allowing the best possible ending to take place.

image

FIGURE 8.14

The importance of love and kindness plays a key role throughout the story. 2006–2011 Nippon Ichi Software, Inc. © 2011 NIS America, Inc. All rights reserved.

The way Disgaea’s endings focus on interesting what-if scenarios and tie heavily into the story’s themes works wonderfully, fully showing the way that multiple endings can expand and enhance a story. However, Disgaea’s approach isn’t without problems. The game itself offers no hints as to how to achieve the different endings (though one NPC does break the fourth wall to suggest that there is more than one way for the story to end). Although this isn’t a big problem for most of the endings, which serve as fun extras and are easy enough to stumble across with a little exploration and experimentation, reaching the end of the game without killing any allies is a moderately difficult task. In strategy RPGs featuring abilities with large areas of effect, it’s quite common to find one or two allies standing in the blast radius of an attack that will also strike quite a lot of enemies. Strategically, it can be best for the allied character to take one for the team rather than hold off on the attack, especially when the injured ally can be healed after the battle. Even for players trying to avoid such a scenario, it’s easy enough to accidentally hit an ally with any number of attacks if the player isn’t paying close attention to exactly what’s in his or her target range. This could easily lead to many players never seeing or even realizing the existence of Disgaea’s best ending, which is a problem because it not only wraps up a couple of otherwise unexplained plot threads, but is also the canon ending that the stories in the rest of the series build on. This is Disgaea’s biggest weakness and also one of the key weaknesses of multiple-ending stories in general, but is still only a minor flaw in an otherwise excellent game.

The Weaknesses of Multiple-Ending Stories

First, a general warning. At the end of the day, after putting hours upon hours into a particular game, players want an ending that provides at least a moderately satisfying conclusion to the story. As previously discussed, the ending doesn’t need to tie up every single plot thread or be entirely happy, but it shouldn’t be completely depressing, vague, or abrupt, either. Though this is a big enough problem in interactive traditional stories, players expect multiple-ending games to have at least one good ending. If they put in the extra time to see every ending only to find out that all of them are bad, they’re going to be understandably upset.

When it comes to multiple-ending stories, one thing you need to ask yourself is which ending the player is most likely to see. Keep in mind that many people play through a game only once. If their first playthrough results in a bad ending, they may not be willing to replay the entire game (especially if it’s a long one) just to try for a better ending. They may not even realize that there is a better ending and may walk away from the game feeling decidedly unsatisfied. This is an especially big problem in games such as Disgaea and Bioshock in which a single mistake can render the best ending impossible to achieve without restarting the entire game. In general, the shorter a game is and/or the more fun the gameplay, the greater the chance is that players will be willing to replay it to get different endings, but there’s still no guarantee that they’ll do so, and it needs to be clear to them that there are other endings to find. Furthermore, although the most common ending doesn’t necessarily have to be the best one, it should at the very least provide a somewhat satisfying conclusion to the story so that players who see only that ending won’t be upset.

Games such as Blood Omen avoid that problem by allowing players to easily choose which ending they want to see at or near the end of the game, so that at most they need to replay only a very short portion of the game to see each ending. This approach, however, leads to another weakness of multiple-ending stories. If the player is allowed to simply reload his or her last save and watch all the different endings one after another, they tend to lose their impact. One ending may show the hero bidding a tearful farewell to his lover, who sacrificed herself to save him, but if players know that they can just reload and watch another ending in which she survives, the scene loses much of its shock value and emotional impact. The player can also get bored watching all the different endings back to back if they’re too similar. In some cases, the player may also realize that the hero’s actions in many of the endings contradict his or her beliefs and personality as shown in the other endings or even the rest of the game. On the other hand, if the player has to replay most or all of the game to get a different ending that at least reduces (though doesn’t entirely negate) the loss of emotional impact and also lessens the chance that the player will see enough of the endings to get bored or spot any serious consistency issues, though it also drastically reduces the number of players who will see more than one ending.

Finally, although this isn’t a hard and fast rule, the more endings a game has, the shorter and more repetitious most of those endings will generally be. Although there are some notable exceptions to this rule (Chrono Trigger, for example), the amount of extra time and effort required to create each additional ending means that it will probably always hold true for the majority of games that use multiple-ending stories.

Case Study: Bioshock

Developer: Irrational Games
Publisher: 2K Games
Writer: Ken Levine
System: Sony PlayStation 3, Microsoft Xbox 360, PC
Release Date: August 21, 2007 (US)
Genre: FPS
Release Date: August 21, 2007 (US)
Genre: FPS

The spiritual successor to the cult classic System Shock series, Bioshock did away with many of the typical FPS conventions, presenting a dark and disturbing tale devoid of wars or alien invasions with a heavy emphasis on atmosphere and a deep combat system that rewards experimentation and unusual strategies. Proving that doing things differently can pay off, it rapidly became a surprise hit, selling millions of copies and receiving near-universal acclaim from players and critics alike.

When a passenger plane goes down in the middle of the ocean one night in 1960, Jack, the lone survivor, swims from the burning wreckage and comes across a small island. The only structure is a tower containing an elevator, which takes him far below the sea to the underwater city of Rapture. Built in the 1940s by business tycoon Andrew Ryan, Rapture was founded on the principles of famed writer Ayn Rand, with the goal of allowing business, art, and science to flourish, free from the oppressive restrictions imposed by politics, religions, and morals. A marvel of design and engineering, Rapture thrived as its citizens made rapid advances in many fields. However, by the time Jack arrives, something has gone horribly wrong. Most of Rapture’s inhabitants are dead, and those who survived have become murderous mutants known as splicers, who roam the halls, seeking out the few remaining pockets of normal humans while the city slowly crumbles around them.

Jack is guided over the radio by a man named Atlas, who promises to help him find a way to safety if Jack in turn helps Atlas and his family escape from Rapture. Though weapons are surprisingly common, as Jack begins to explore the city and piece together its troubled history, he soon discovers that guns alone aren’t enough to survive and gains the ability to use plasmids as well. In one of Rapture’s more notable developments, plasmids and gene tonics use a substance known as ADAM (discovered by a Rapture scientist named Dr. Tenebaum) to rewrite human DNA, granting almost magical powers such as telekinesis, pyrokinesis, and teleportation. However, ADAM has its dark side as well, with overuse leading to horrendous mutations and a loss of sanity. But that was only one reason for Rapture’s downfall. Frank Fontaine, a mobster and the only supplier of ADAM, also contributed, setting up false charities as a front for twisted human experiments in order create the creepy ADAM-harvesting Little Sisters and their hulking guardians, the Big Daddies. Even Andrew Ryan himself, the founder of Rapture, contributed greatly to its destruction. Forsaking his own ideals, he became a tyrant, violently taking over Fontaine’s businesses and then tearing the city apart in a war against Atlas and his supporters.

The use of audio diaries to explain Rapture’s backstory is an interesting one and adds a very personal touch, allowing the player to see the city through the eyes of the people who lived during its darkest times. The only downside is that finding them all can be rather difficult, requiring a considerable amount of searching if players want to uncover the full story. Throughout his explorations, Jack also has several run-ins with some of Rapture’s surviving citizens, most of whom are only marginally saner than the deadly splicers tracking them, and is frequently lectured over the radio by Atlas, Dr. Tenebaum, and Andrew Ryan. Jack himself, however, is very much the silent protagonist, not speaking a word throughout the entire game, even during the shocking plot twist that takes place when he finally meets Ryan. And, as the entire game is played from a first-person perspective, he lacks body language as well. This is, in my opinion, the weakest point in Bioshock’s story, making Jack more of a generic “guy with a gun” than a true character that players can grow to like and sympathize with. That aside, Bioshock’s story explores the dark depths of human greed and depravity in one of the most unique and compelling settings in gaming, making for a disturbing yet intriguing experience.

As a multiple-ending story, Bioshock contains three endings, which can be classified as good, bad (or evil), and neutral. The ending received is based on Jack’s treatment of the Little Sisters, the young girls who roam about the city extracting ADAM from dead bodies. Each girl is guarded by a hulking Big Daddy. Although this powerful guardian will ignore you if you leave him alone, he becomes merciless when threatened, and bringing him down is no easy feat. Doing so, however, will leave the Little Sister unprotected. As Jack grabs the struggling child, the player is given the option to harvest her (killing the girl and receiving a large amount of ADAM) or saving her (removing her genetic modifications so that she can return to a normal life while gaining a small amount of ADAM). This makes for a very straightforward good and evil mechanic. Saving the girls is good, but leaves Jack with less ADAM to improve his plasmids and gene tonics; harvesting them is evil but makes Jack far stronger. Unfortunately, the theory isn’t supported by the gameplay, as saved Little Sisters periodically give Jack gifts containing large amounts of ADAM, making the difference between the good and evil paths rather minimal, though players are unlikely to notice this on their first playthrough.

The endings are somewhat problematic as well. The bad ending (achieved by completing the game while harvesting every single Little Sister) briefly shows Jack taking over Rapture and leading an army of splicers to conquer the surface world. Although very short, it does effectively show the type of monster that Jack could become after his journey through Rapture, though it doesn’t make for a very satisfying conclusion to the story. The good ending (gained by saving every Little Sister in the game) has Jack instead bringing the former Little Sisters to the surface and raising them until they have families of their own. Though still short, it allows the story to go out on a much more satisfying note. The neutral ending (gotten by harvesting some Little Sisters while saving others) is unfortunately the same as the bad ending, but with slightly different narration. Though players who go through the game harvesting every Little Sister might expect some sort of dire consequences eventually, for players who harvested only one or two Little Sisters while saving the others, Jack’s dark actions in the neutral ending are inconsistent and disappointing. And because getting a different ending requires replaying the entire game from the beginning, it discourages many players from trying over in hopes of obtaining a better outcome. But despite the occasional blemish, Bioshock’s unique setting and compelling story make it an experience that no one with an interest in game storytelling should miss.

Summary

Multiple-ending stories are very similar to interactive traditional stories, with the notable difference being that players are – either consciously or unconsciously – allowed to choose from two or more possible endings. There are many different types of endings that can be used, including endings based on the hero’s morality, based on character relationships, based on the player’s performance during the game, and based around various what-if scenarios. Though most multiple-ending stories limit themselves to two or three endings (generally a good, bad [or evil], and neutral ending), there’s no set limit to the number of endings a story can have. However, because each ending takes additional time and effort to create, it’s important to ensure that they add enough to the experience to be worth it.

Choosing between endings gives players a degree of control and choice not found in interactive traditional stories, though it can be debated whether doing so significantly improves or detracts from the overall experience. Care also needs to be taken so that players who play through the game only once still receive a satisfying conclusion. This can be done by placing the deciding point near the end of the game so that players can reload and try again if they don’t receive an ending they like, but it has the drawback of significantly reducing the emotional impact of each individual ending, a problem that plagues most multiple-ending stories to some degree.

Finally, sequels to multiple-ending games create additional challenges, as you need to decide which ending, if any, to make canon. There are other ways to approach the issue; some games, such as Mass Effect, allow players to carry over their progress and ending from the previous game into the sequel, though doing so requires a considerable amount of extra planning, writing, and design.

Things to Consider

1.  List five games you’ve played that use multiple-ending stories (and if you haven’t played that many, just list the ones you have).

2.  Pick two of the games from your list. How many endings do they have? How do they determine which ending the player receives?

3.  In both games, were you happy with the first ending you received? Why or why not?

4.  Did you want to replay one or both games in order to see the other endings? Why or why not?

5.  Do you think that the additional endings enhanced or detracted from the games’ stories? Write a short explanation of your reasoning.

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset