Fuck you 1942!

This one is only going to make sense to video game crack heads like myself. On the old school Nintendo’s there was a game (based on the arcade game) called 1942. In it, you fly through gazillions of planes blasting everything dodging bullets like crazy, fighting flying fortresses, and picking up power-ups. Now this game gets really hard as you move on, but I was undeterred.

I spent days and days getting good, and then one Saturday morning decided to sit down and beat it no matter what it took. 12 hours later: hands throbbing, eyes tearing, neck aching, on some serious carpel tunnel shit. I finally beat it. My reward? No cute scene with a princess, no ticker parades, not even a friggin nice plane flying into the sunset type of moment.

The ending? A totaly black screen save for one word which was supposed to be “Congratulations” but was spelled “Congratuations”. My god, I’ve been pissed ever since. This is the worst placed Engrish I have ever seen. Anyone else have this experience?

If your gonna make a goddam video game, give me a decent ending for christ sake.

I also still haven’t gotten over the fact that when I saved the princess in Super Mario Brothers she looked like an elk. A hideous elk at that. "You welcome for the saving and all but I ahhh . . .gotta go. . .do my . . . well see It’s just. . . ahhh . . . I was supposed to be . . .and I’m just really late. . . gotta run. . . Have fun ruling the land.

DaLovin’Dj

I suck at solving games, but the one time I did (using a Game Genie) was with the game Toe-Jam and Earl (the greatest game ever).

The ending was so awesome I could not believe my eyes. I was expecting some lame “Good job” screen, but it was an extravaganza. And I cheated!

Anyhoo, I feel your pain, brother, but it seems that you’ve been holding onto this resentment for quite a few years now. Any other 1980’s era stuff that you want to get off your chest?

Hate Duran-Duran?
Did someone Blind you with Science?
Steal your Izod sweater?

Zette
(hoping Mario was from the 80s. I think it was, anyway)

You’re spending time writing a rant about a video game ending??? What a waste! You could be discussing so many other important topics! You could…

Oh wait. I’m spending valuable time responding to your waste of…nevermind.

And yes, I have been disappointed re: video game endings. “Soul Reaver”, anyone?

Quake 2? The ending, especially compared to the glorious cinematics in the beginning, sucks.

I still have a game that I’ve never finished it was on an old computer that is now broken just knowing that I’ll never figure out how to finish the level makes me very sad:(

The worst ending to a computer game I ever saw was also the end to the worst computer game I ever played. That would be Sierra’s “Civil War Generals: The Battles of Robert E. Lee”.

Dear Lord, that game sucked. I have never played a worse computer war game. Everything was wrong with it. To enumerate:

  • They weren’t even really the battles of Robert E. Lee. You started at First Manassas, well before Lee took command, as a ‘training’ mission. Upon finishing that, you jumped to Second Manassas- completely skipping all of the Seven Days’ Battles where Lee attained his stature as a brilliant general.

  • Sierra hired some famous artist of Civil War scenes to paint the portraits of the generals. Apparently, either the artist was rushed, or Sierra ran out of cash, because only about twelve portraits were available- Lee, Longstreet, Jackson, Sherman, Burnside, Meade, and Grant, then five portraits used over and over and over and over again to represent everyone else. The fact that Sherman had a personal portrait just showed me how fucked the games’ priorities were- Sherman shows up for First Manassas. And that’s it. But as a famous name, he gets a portrait, while Slocum- who fights in nearly every battle- is General Generica.

  • In an attempt to make things like the wildly successfull Panzer General, you were offered Prestige Points for beating the enemy. You could use these points to buy new rifles for your troops, just as in PG you could buy better and newer weapon. This was incredibly stupid. The change in gun technology from 1861 to 1865 in no way resembled the change in armored warfare technology from 1939 to 1945, and it was obviously a “well, this is why Panzer General was a success, therefore, if we include it in our game, our game will be a success.”

  • Damage sustained in one fight was generally carried over to the next battle. Somewhat understandable, as it was the two same armies hitting each other again and again; unfortunately, it was overdone, especially given the timing of the scenarios. Two of the ‘toughest’- Antietam and Chancelorsville- come immediately after the turkeyshoots of Second Manassas and Fredericksburg. At Fredericksburg, I managed to kill every single Union unit on the map; this meant that at Chancelorsville and later at Gettysburg, I faced a Union army that couldn’t even muster half the troops I had.

  • The rules were too goddamned simple. Now, I don’t mind simple rules, and I’m not given to playing games of ASL-level rules myself. But when your rules are so damned simple that what happens in nothing even close to historical, then your rules are bad. There were numerous examples of this, but the one that really stands out in my mind is the fact that there were no rules against moving while adjacent to the enemy. This, on top of being generally given X hexes of trench to sit in covered by Y amount of units to sit there, with Y being half of X, meant that the big battles over forts generally meant the Union rushing my lines, slipping in between the “holes” between my units, and then attacking me (with a bonus!) from behind. Gah.

  • Winning didn’t matter. I won Antietam. No notice that the Union is offering terms. No notice that I was raiding Baltimore- nope, retreat back to Virginia, apparently, because suddenly I’m fighting Fredericksburg. I kept Jackson in the backfield during Chancelorsville to keep him safe; nope, he’s dead anyways because he dies at the end of Chancelorsville even if he’s at Confederate HQ. Not that any notice was actually given, he just wasn’t there for unit placement at the next battle. I won at Gettysburg- hell, I kicked ass at Gettysburg, taking the entirety of the hill for myself and picking off the Union reinforcements as they came in along the main road. I’ve beat the Union in the North, have destroyed the Army of the Potomac, and threaten to attack Baltimore or D.C. proper… and now I’m fighting in the Wilderness against Grant because it doesn’t fucking matter, win or lose, you go through the same scenarios in the same order.

So I finally get to the end of this crappy little piece of shit- mostly because I want to end it, get it over with, and never have any desire to wonder what would have happened had I won, and therefore have no reason to ever touch it again. If you beat Grant in the Wilderness, you finally get to attack Washington, though why Grant losing in northern Virginia is necessary after kicking McClellan around western Maryland and Meade through Pennsylvania makes no real sense. So then I get to fight in D.C., which apparently has taken the time to set up a network of pillboxes on the border, and has hired crack German snipers given how well they fight. But fuck it, it’s the last battle, and I just want it over, no matter the cost. Throw lots of troops at them, lots of troops die, but eventually the forts crack and I take D.C. proper. The last day of battle ends, and I have an obvious overwhelming victory according to the score.

The screen then fades out, and an American flag appears. The American flag catches fire, and quickly burns up. And then I’m back at the main game screen.
Fuck you, Sierra. Fuck your crappy little game and your crappy little programmers. What the fucking fuck were you thinking? You claimed this was a game designed for beginners- not only was it designed for beginners, it was designed for people who had never actually seen a wargame before, and never would again because of how crappy your game was. You talked about the ‘historical quality’ of the game without even talking about the history. Oh, sure, you threw in a few Ken Burns-ish dramatic readings of letters between the battles, but maybe the person playing would like to know why they were fighting at Chancellorsville rather than the fact that Johnny wanted to go home and propose to Bessy Sue.

And then, to top it all off, at the end of a game where you can only portray the Confederates, the ‘victory’ is a fifteen second clip of the American flag burning up. What, was this some sort of condemnation? “Congratulations, you’ve succeeded as the Confederacy, which means you have destroyed the United States and everything that it stands for!” Thank fucking GOD you guys didn’t design Panzer General; nothing would have made me feel happier upon finishing that game than watching film clips of Jews being led off to the gas chambers, because anyone who would deign to play the Confederate or Nazi side in a war game must obviously be an evil fuck who agrees with their philosophy.

And, while this may seem like a “the food was horrible, and the portions too small”, a one hour of play to one second of ending is not enough, you bastards. If I’m going to devote a fucking week of free time to getting through your morass of a game, I deserve more than fifteen seconds of something.

Assholes.

Hmmm…1942 was a pretty fun game though. It’s certainly not alone in having a disappointing ending.

What did you expect on an eight-bit system?

Studi

John:

I hope you got Sid Meiers “Gettysburg.” That was one of the best games I ever played.

Geez, doesn’t anybody play poker anymore?

And the first guy that says, “you poke her, I’m tired”, goes on my list.

I never saw a truly bad game ending, but I often feared
that after beating a game, it would just say,

“Hey Yanqui! Get a life!” or some Engrish corruption of
same.

Well done John Corrado…
but Mary Todd Lincoln is in another castle…
Ha…Ha…Ha…
Just kidding…
Congratuations!

Sigh. Unfortunately, I didn’t- Gettysburg was perfectly timed to completely miss me. When it first came out, it was too powerful for my 386 to handle; by the time I had saved up to buy a Pentium, it was off the shelves and gone.

Every once in a while, I’ll dust off “Decisive Battles of the Civil War”, which I still think is one of the best CW strategy games- the graphics and interface suck, but it plays reasonably well. Besides, it has a full editor for adjusting and creating scenarios, the original manual had a good description of what the real battles were, and it’s one of the few games with a reasonable command structure- you can’t tell every troop what to do. You can tell those within a certain range, and you can given general guidelines to subordinate commanders and hope they perform well.

[tanget rant]
Those really are my two biggest complaints about Civil War games. The first is that too often you don’t merely play the commander, but the commander, all of the corps commanders, all of the division commanders, etc. Quite frankly, many of the battles were severely influenced by independent action taken by subordinates that any supreme commander with a complete view of the battlefield would never have done- Sickles moving his corps about one hundred feet forward of the Gettysburg line, for instance. Sickles saw the better terrain and didn’t realize he was sticking his unit out of the line like a sore thumb, giving the Rebs an opening for breaking the entire line. That’ll never happen in a game where the commander has complete control unless the commander isn’t paying attention.

My second problem, and a harder one to deal with, is the “when you take over” problem. Too many computer game versions of the war start off with the troops all in specific places and pre-set to enact the actual battle; at that point, you’re just watching the dice to see which way luck points, and whomever reacts to the good opening the fastest wins. The battle of Gettysburg generally plays out better, given that it starts small and massive reinforcements come in, requiring the finding of good defensive lines (for the Union) and finding a way to get around them (for the Rebs) making a more fluid game; but too, too often a game plays out like Antietam, where the lines are set, the schedules are posted, and there’s not a lot you can change. What really ticked me off to this was playing the Decisive Battles version of Murfreesboro; in that, there’s a small hill just ahead of the Union line. Invariably, the Rebs grab the hill and use the terrain to their advantage. I would always play the game and wonder to myself, "why the hell couldn’t the troops have marched far enough last night to grab the hill? It’s damned important, and had I been Rosecrans last night in addition to this morning, it would have been a top priority. Luckily, the game has an editor, so I could build a scenario where I had taken the hill.

[/tangent rant]
Anyways, back on topic- to echo Briminator, also under the “really bad endings” were the Manhunter and Star Saga series, both of which were trilogies that were cancelled after the second game.

I have a copy floating around somewhere.

I feel the pain of 1942. Actually, I feel even more pain of 1945, I think it was - or maybe 1943. Anyway, it was a “sequel” to the 1942 engine; it allowed you to select from about six planes (American, British, German, Russian, Japanese, and French, I think) rather than defaulting to a P-38. I played that while doing laundry my sophomore year in college - they had a standup arcade version of it, and I had a lot of quarters, and time to kill …

I gradually became surprisingly good at it. Dodging bullets was done unconsciously, and I’d play for half an hour and lose interest, until one day when I decided that I was going to beat that damn game.

Apparently, after blowing up ships, submarines, zeppelins, giant super-bombers, aircraft carriers, et al, your WW2-era fighter plane goes off into space to fight aliens and space stations. The designers probably thought “Well, if they’ll believe this, they’ll believe that aliens can fill the screen with destruction to automatically kill anyone, regardless of how well they’ve played up to this point.” I refused to admit defeat; I’d die, pop in another quarter, continue, fire off my three bombs, shoot my guns for another few seconds, die, repeat.

$13 dollars later, I reached the end of the game, older, sadder, wiser.

And then repeated with each of the other five aircraft.

People wondered why I never had any money in college…

Studi:

There were plenty of games that had a great ending on the nintendo. Mike Tyson’s Punch out for example. That’s right, I’m in the papers bitch. I knocked that mofo out, and I still got both my ears. Loved it.

1942: Fun until the end. then I had to project back and hate the whole thing. Dammit.

DaLovin’Dj

Actually, John Corrado, Firaxis is still selling Sid Meier’s Civil War Collection (Gettysburg & Antietam) on their site here. It links to Chips & Bits, a decent online store for games. Twenty bucks plus shipping, if you’re interested.

Here is a copy of Gettysburg on e-bay at buy-it-now $3.99, or bid on it at 1¢

Someone mentioned Quake 2, I’ll have to step up and say:

Anyone finish Quake 3 Arena? If at least they would have show us the Vadrigar (the arena masters that brought you there), and made it interesting or anything else but not the ending they had. The movie at the beginning was better, short though it was.
or Half-Life? The actual ending was soooooo bad that it made my skin crawl. Almost ruined it for me. I had to actually remember that I had enjoyed playing the whole game and that it was the process, not the product; the journey not the destination… and all of that. Way to go, Valve Software!

It’s just like movies with stupid endings. A bad ending to a game makes me feel cheated. Sort of like: I went through all of that for THAT??? WTF are these people thinking?

I really hope someone gets fired over that [/simpsons]

[SPOILERS]
Quake 3 Arena:
Xaero turns into a statue while his “soul” escapes and then Slash stumbles by on her “rocket skates”. Whooptidoo(sp?)!

Half-Life:
After you kill this huge mutant alien baby (Nihilanth), you teleport back on the train from the beginning of the game and the “Government Agent”, in one of the worst voice-overs in the history of speech, informs you that you have played a part in an invasion of an alien world and now will become an agent for them or he offers you “…a battle you have no chance of winning…”. Either you become an agent for them and that’s that, or you choose not to and get dumped back Xen with a bunch of aliens around you and no weapons. You die. Yippee!

You think that ending was bad (the OP), I played 1942 as a coin-op in a Korean bar. I got really good at that game. One day, after playing for about 1 1/2 hours the game ran out of programming.

Yep, I’m flying along through clouds of bullets and planes, shooting my ass off. Then the enemy planes start getting fewer and fewer. Next thing I know I’m flying through an empty sky. What really sucked is I had the highest score ever but couldn’t even save it. There was no way to die and end the game. Had to unplug the damn thing to get it to start over.

You guys should read the classic cyberpunk short story “PAC Man” by Rudy Rucker, it’s in his “Transrealist Anthology.” The tale is set in the days of the video arcades, someone completely finishes all the boards of Pacman and a recording of Ronald Reagan comes on saying “thank you citizen, your distinctive video game moves have been recorded for use in programming our new ABM system. A federal agent will contact you tomorrow at this arcade with a reward of $10,000.”
And that’s just the start of the tale. I always wanted to make story this into a short film. You gotta read it.

Hell no! Half-Life had one of the greatest endings I’ve ever seen. It was well done, creepy, and explained things in an excellent manner. It just gave you this big sense of “Oh my fucking god, I just did all that?!?”

However, Opposing Force really bummed me out. It’s similar to the ending of Half-Life except (WARNING! SPOILER!) instead of being offered a job as an agent, the MIB just dumps you in the middle of the void where you’re to stay for the rest of eternity.

Other crappy game endings…

Kid Chameleon: This is a game that requires about eight hours to beat… AND THERE ARE NO SAVE POINTS. That’s right, you have to play eight hours straight, and if you die, you start over from the very beginning. The only way I managed to pass it was by getting it on an Emulator and using the built-in autosave feature. And the ending was just so… pathetic… for all the effort you put into getting there.

Deus Ex: This was a very impressive game. Very impactful. However, its endings (there are three possible endings) are short and trite. They try to be ominous, but don’t quite make it. They top 'em off with three different Famous Quotes that match up with the ending you choose (“Better to serve in hell than to rule in heaven” and such).

Fallout 2: Sure, there’s a nice cinematic of a nuclear explosion going off, but then the game’s Narrator spends several minutes telling you what you failed to do in the game (well, he says what impact your choices had, but you get the idea). The only saving grace of this poor ending is that you get to continue playing afterwards… with a nifty new item… :smiley:

From the old Nintendo: Castlevania 2: I was so annoyed at this crappy ending (SPOILER: You die) that I vowed never to play the game again. I then broke my vow about five seconds later when I started playing again… oh well.

And good-but-bad endings… Gabriel Knight: Sins Of The Fathers: This is actually a very, VERY good ending to a very, VERY good game… however, the ending is SOOOOOO heartbreaking and sad and melancholy and all sorts of other adjectives.

Other good endings include Final Fantasy 3 (6 in Japan). Hell, just about any Squaresoft game.