It's not pointless if it's for the betterment of the wasteland. Sure, another person (or ghoul...etc) could've done it, but it wasn't their fight, it was yours and your parents fight, that's why it fell on your character.

Why?

The "why should I sacrifice my..." door open both ways so it's a useless argument, I can say the exact same and this never goes anywhere. And no, there's no... "cooties"; but there is a sense of accomplishment and closure.

It's also not just about "long term consequences", but profound consequences. Being dropped back means that the "present day" cannot be altered in any meaningful way. The ending goes just "Something happens a few years from here". It limits the narration.

lolwat?

It's my fight to go in and push a few buttons and die needlessly while the guy who is healed by radiation watches?

Moreover, it is pointless. It's adding a source of clean water that the Brotherhood of Steel control and will use for political gain, which is all that Colonel Autumn wanted, oh but he doesn't get to do it because he's the designated bad guy. Come on. That ending was tripe and you know it.

So you didn't have that sense with Fallout 2?

Cheers for that... there's spoiler tags for a reason...

A sense of accomplishment you don't lose if you just close the game, whereas I lose my sense of accomplishment if I'm not allowed to continue.

Again, the present day doesn't have to be altered that much, there's no limit to the narration at all.

That's one of the reasons why I said it was satisfactory but not great. The other companions that could be there and not do it, is a loop hole. If you had the skill in speech and depending on your charisma level, you should've been able to convince them to make the sacrifice for the greater good. That's what it should've been but instead we got the you sac your self or sarah sacs herself and then both of those options got retconned, Except sarah if you choose her which IMO is a dumb choice.

Broken Steel then just unchanged that ending to you stopping the Enclave from attacking again, a pretty lazy ending IMO.

I find it funny because I jokingly predicted the FO3 ending before the game came out. Someone asked how they thought the game would end, and I said it would be like "what button?" *BANG!*

It did feel a bit "off" when I first played it, imo. Not the story, but the pacing - it felt too rushed. I did actually really enjoy Broken Steel, and not only because it opened the game up again. It was the pacing and emotional beats that were different - like the Extended Edition of Lord of the Rings. Even though the game was longer, the pacing felt tighter and more balanced and it had more of a natural flow. It felt, to me, like a genuine ending - something emotionally satisfying - so I think they did a really good job with that DLC.

As to Fallout 4, I seriously doubt they'll ever make the "mistake" of having a definite-ending game again.

Yeah, Broken Steel isn't great.

But it's still better than the FO3 ending. I hate forced sacrifices, I hate contrivance and I hate idiot plots. That ending is all 3.

Moreover, it's just in bad taste for the plot to have an 18 year old sacrifice themselves so the BoS can cement their control over the capitol wasteland. That is the very last thing James would've wanted.

Yeah sorry about that...but it is only one of three endings and what ending do you get depends only of your choices.

How do i put spoiler tags? I could not find them and

did not worked.

PS now it does apparently

As much as fans were screaming about it not being open ended in Fallout 3, I think there a very real possibility that it will be.

Still it's a sad thing if it is done that way again. The ending slides which show you the consequences of your actions are important. Sure it doesn't have to be slides. The form that its done isn't that important for me. The showing is.

It's something that makes a Fallout game a Fallout game. If it's not done in Fallout 4 and it is possible... yes that's a mod project worth to make. Fallout 2 style if the main story allows it.

Is FO2 not a Fallout game then?

Hahaha holy [censored] you guys are just going back and forth " no this way will kill my immersion! And this way will ruin my immersion!" hahaha oh man this thread will go nowhere.

Didn't you read my previous posts? I was talking about the ending slides not the game ending and not playable again further. FO3 had a confused ending thats for sure (original and BS) but thats the past and I am sure Beth learned from it.

You just spoiled one of the ending outcomes to The Witcher 3. A game that released only a few weeks ago that people are still playing, such as myself. I didn't come to the Fallout 4 forum to have one of TW3's endings spoiled for me. Regardless, you should have used spoiler tags.

I'm derailing an already troublesome thread already some I'm just going to stop.

my overall ability to enjoy the game will be reduced by 15% if it is not. I like to role play and some times doing the main quest is not the last trip on my characters destination. A big part of why i could not enjoy FO:NV as much as I did FO3

Gaming slides is probably the worst way of showing the consequences of player's actions during the course of the game, i'd much prefer a short movie on game's engine without the narrator's commentary.

Would people really be fine with that? A joke continuation? The last thing I remember about those ending debates back when it was relevant to Fallout 3, was that there were a bunch of people whose "imemrsion" would break witha a popup window telling them the game is over and some content is no longer available, and that the changes to the world provided by the narration didn't occur.

If so, go for it.

Well, see, this still kinda goes around. I supposedly don't lose since I can quit, but you do if you can't continue despite that you are never rushed to finish (and despite that the "afterwards" doesn't need to change). Turn that sentence around... I'm losing my "immersion" when you get yours.

If the ending can be as comprehensive as it needs to be and be unaffected by the infinite loop afterwards, and the game prompts for continuation, I guess it's fine.

yeah, having the game give the sense of a heavy impact on all of your decisions and then at the end just give you some still images with a couple different flavor text based on those "really important decisions" is incredibly under whelming.

I fail to see how having an ending with slides that show you the effects of what you did and then a message pops up asking if you would like to continue to play effects those that want an ending. By selecting "No", you effectively end your game and those of us that select "Yes" get to continue in the world.

I hated that NV ended, but loved that I could finish the quest and continue in 3.

Okay, let's see.

In Morrowind, Dagoth Ur will surely unleash his new giant robot upon polite society if not stopped soon.

In Oblivion, the world is about to be overrun by a Daedric invasion.

In Skyrim, Alduin will end the world if he is not confronted and stopped.

In FO3, the Enclave must be attacked and the water purifier taken over right the hell now.

In all these cases, imminent danger is upon our characters. It would ruin my immersion to run around doing side quests while the world is about to explode.

I want to save the world, and then get on with my other stuff. You want it so that I'm not allowed to do that just because you can't open the menu and select quit after the ending? Come on now.

I was refereing to a mentioned Fallout tradition mostly (which doesn't exist at this point). What I think about these dialogboxes popping up I made clear with my reference of how NV handled the problem in the beginning. It really depends how the sidequests are designed and the ending narrataion sure. But it don't have to be so negative as you are stateing it.

The protagonists is the start and reason for the developments to come, which doesn't mean he is to experience them in his lifetime. So no it doesn't have to be a "joke" continuation as you state in good old...

The way FO3 ended shouldn't be held as an example of the way it should be with FO4 because they botched it, horribly. Now if they do it right from the start, I see no reason why it wouldn't be a good thing if it's open ended.The question is "will they do it right?".