The Closure of a Game is Most Certainly not the End

by Donnie Santos 

Recently there has been somewhat of a debate as to whether or not the nature of a games conclusion is sufficient reason to sit in judgement of the entire game. When first contemplating this, it would seem natural to say no. "The game is much bigger than just the ending, thats just a small part of it. Its not fair to say a great game with a bad ending is totally flawed." However, upon closer examination, I think that maybe this ideology isn't quite correct.

For example, earlier this year I played Breath of Fire 3, which I had been anticipating ever since I completed BOF2 for super nintendo long ago. Originated by Square, and finished by Capcom, the series is a true masterpiece and held my admiration for as long as I had the pleasant experience of playing it. But it is far far away from flawlessness. One of the major flaws in my humble opinion is the end of Breath of Fire 3. Moreover, this is the ending of the entire SERIES, not just the end of one game. And although I previously stated that I believed that you shouldn't judge a whole game by its ending, I suddenly find myself having negative feelings about an entire series simply because of the end of its finale. The major reason for this, was that the end of BOF3 portrayed the goddess Tyr (Myria) as a not-quite-so-evil goddess, that was really concerned with the well being of humanity. Sounds simple and harmless right? Sure, sometimes misunderstood and good intentioned villains are a good thing, but throughout this entire game, I had been anticipating a climatic battle with the established evil-to-the-core goddess from Breath of Fire 1. I was scared just thinking about having to fight such an abomination of evil. I was anxious to kill her for all she did in past games to our heroes. But what I found was that I was actually sorry I killed her, because she wasn't really that bad. Now the point of all this, is that not only is it a fact that the ending of a game can suddenly change your attitude of the entire game, but it can do a lot more than that, as is exemplified by this case.

Mike Lenzo in a previous article states, "A roleplaying game is much more than a mere 'game.' It is an experience, one that captivates someone just as much as a good novel or an epic movie does. What is it that usually distinguishes good stories in each media from bad? Good endings. If the ending of a movie or novel is bad or anticlimactic, a bad taste will be left in the mouth of the viewer or reader. What one remembers most from such experiences are the endings. 'Yeah, it was good until the end, and that sucked.' How many times has one heard that from friends about a movie or novel?". Mr. Lenzo is correct in saying this I believe. Now, do I dislike the entire Breath of Fire series just because the ending didn't coincide with the preconceptions that the series set up? No, but this did make a huge impact in my visualization of the entire series. How should I think of Tyr? Do I have to split her up into two separate alter-ego's and call them Tyr-bof1 and Tyr-bof3? Its quite a flaw in the overall layout and final "taste in the mouth" from the entire trilogy. I loved the series, and I love it still.. But the ending leaves a lot to be desired, and provides support for the notion that the newer games these days seem to be more prone to error in translation, balance, unity and closure.

There is one thing on this issue left to discuss. A lot of times at first glance, we don't notice such things. For example, the editorial by Mr. Lenzo that stated that he did not notice the flaws in FF7's ending until he had a lot of time to think about it. And another example is the case of somebody playing Wild ARMs and believing it was as good as a Square game, but then much later upon looking back on it, he changes his mind. What is more important, what we feel while we play, or our feelings upon looking back and contemplating the aspects. This may be a question that cant be answered. Looking back objectively, it is MUCH easier to find errors in games that we didn't even care about while playing. Does this mean we should ignore the flaws just because they only enter consciousness upon close examination? I'm not sure.. But one thing I am sure of, is that the closure of a game is most certainly not the end. It continues in our mind, and in our hopes for future games. And therefore, the conclusion of a game or series, while not comprising the game as a whole, is certainly the most important factor in shaping our permanent visualization of the game, and should never be unprioritized or weakly done.