Immersive and utterly gripping stories, is a compulsive incentive to beguile gamers to persevere right through to a titles rewarding conclusion, it drives gamers to endure, even during the most strenuous of circumstances. If the narrative is captivating enough, the challenges you experience feel justified, particularly if the games conclusion meets your aspirations. So why is it that so many game’s feel the constant need to bombard us with “enticing” promises of multiple endings? That we should strive to complete the story in a multitude of differential ways, despite whether or not, we feel it’s the appropriate decision?
In Heavy Rain, almost every decision you make as you progress, has a detrimental effect on how the narrative unfolds, for instance, if your too lethargic to react to certain button actions, during your tense encounter with the origami killer, it will result in you relinquishing the battle and conceding defeat to the rain inspired, psychopath. But why would you intentionally allow this scenario to take place? Surely failing to win is counter intuitive to the very fibre of gaming, succeeding? Or is this the point? Similarly, the hugely successful Mass Effect series major focal point, is an open-ended conclusion, where if not properly prepared for the notorious “Suicide Mission” at Mass Effect 2’s finale, could lead to certain counterparts becoming unintentional martyrs, or worse, leaving your entire team, as well as your self, perishing. But why would you allow this catastrophic situation to occur in the first place? It’s like participating in a football match, and deliberately passing the ball to the opposition, before your rival tucks it comfortably into the back of the net. It all seems self-destructive, and a notion I havent yet embraced.
Do you enjoy completing games multiple times, just so you can experience every conceivable ending?