Good Endings ruined by Sequels

I like sequels that dont really have anything to do with the first one I think its better for them to do it that way instead of ruining the ending of the first one, but if a good sequel can be made then its always an awesome thing to have

Warning: Serious Final Fantasy X (and X-2) Spoilers to Follow

@Veektarius: I personally preferred the idea of bringing back that Tidus as I didn't think it took away from the ending of FFX, in fact I think the contrast in knowing the real Tidus is already dead.* I think it really brought something to know that the Dream of Tidus got to live while the real one stayed dead. I would have had a minor problem if they did the opposite and made him properly dead forever since we see characters such as Auron who get to bypass death and live on (despite some problems) by yearning to stay in the world to complete a personal goal (and while I think Tidus was happy to fade at the end of FFX, I do think that would have quickly changed when he either: didn't get to go to their version of the afterlife since he was a dream, or once he got there realised that almost everyone there wouldn't know the him that he became and instead would link him to the life of for all intents and purposes is a different man. While Auron has people to be with, and Jecht would get to be with Braska, Auron and those he lost such as his wife from old Zanarkand - I don't think their would be enough for Tidus to resist struggling his way back to the living world through the lingering parts of the fayth that still had not properly gone to be with Yuna and the others).

Just my personal opinion though, I can totally see how someone might find it to be a disservice to the ending - I just personally think it bulstered up the entire story and in fact made the moment of him accepting his destiny to fade even stronger.

*Either from the start of the game as the entire Zanarkand section is a dream of the fayth or that you do play as real Tidus through the start for a little bit but at an unknown point in the intro the real Tidus dies and the new dream one is brought on.

@samcroft90 said:

I think it was MGS3 that led to all the MGS2 stuff becoming retconned in MGS4. There was a big struggle in that game trying to link the characters and events of MGS3 (and to a lesser extent Portable Ops) to the rest of the series and I think the game suffered because of it.

The game would have had less to address if it was the direct follow up to MGS2 and MGS3 hadn't happened.

Oof, I completely forgot about how hey tied up absolutely every character from MGS3 into MGS4 for absolutely no good reason.

I did enjoy MGS4 at first, it just tried a little too hard when it really didn't need to.

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90: But then we'd be out MGS3 which is, for my money the best one.

@BoG: I had forgotten about how overused the nanomachines were as a plot device but damn if you aren't right. At times it was kinda like they were going down a FAQ of plot holes/questions/mysteries and just answering "Nanomachines" to everyone. MSG4 is weird in a way because despite all of its flaws, I had a blast playing & watching it. That thing was a fucking ride. Though, it was also my first PS3 game so maybe that made me a bit biased.

@ShadowConqueror This was my answer. That was the film equivalent of someone just flipping you off in the first 15 minutes. I never saw Alien 3 until DVD and was unaware that happened. Nearly pulled the disc out right then.

I love MGS3 too, I just feel that the game would be served better if it felt a little less connected to the rest of the franchise and felt more stand-alone. It felt that way before MGS4 was released, but all the characters were then stitched in to the plot line and things from MGS2 were retconned.

It felt like to me like they knew where they were going with the follow up to MGS2 initially, but when they detoured so heavily with MGS3 it created a really tough situation to try and please everybody with MGS4.

@Abendlaender said:

Men in Black 2 pretty much ruined MIB 1 cause they felt the need to bring Tommy Lee back, which was jsut stupid and...oh video games?

While I would never say it ruined anything, I didn't like that they brought Glados back in Portal 2. It was such a cool fight to destroy her in 1 and then just to be like "Oh well, nope. You just need to flick some switches to bring her back, sorry" was kinda lame. Then again Portal 2 without Galdos might have been pretty lame as well and......I don't know what I want

I was totally fine with that because the ending song was all about how she was still alive, and I think the fact that she wasn't just the main antagonist again made it even better.

@samcroft90 said:

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90: But then we'd be out MGS3 which is, for my money the best one.

@BoG: I had forgotten about how overused the nanomachines were as a plot device but damn if you aren't right. At times it was kinda like they were going down a FAQ of plot holes/questions/mysteries and just answering "Nanomachines" to everyone. MSG4 is weird in a way because despite all of its flaws, I had a blast playing & watching it. That thing was a fucking ride. Though, it was also my first PS3 game so maybe that made me a bit biased.

@ShadowConqueror This was my answer. That was the film equivalent of someone just flipping you off in the first 15 minutes. I never saw Alien 3 until DVD and was unaware that happened. Nearly pulled the disc out right then.

I love MGS3 too, I just feel that the game would be served better if it felt a little less connected to the rest of the franchise and felt more stand-alone. It felt that way before MGS4 was released, but all the characters were then stitched in to the plot line and things from MGS2 were retconned.

It felt like to me like they knew where they were going with the follow up to MGS2 initially, but when they detoured so heavily with MGS3 it created a really tough situation to try and please everybody with MGS4.

Yeah, I suppose that's true. I didn't mind those people popping up in 3 and laying the groundwork for the conflicts of the earlier games, but around the time Big Momma* shows up, you could tell they were trying a little too much. Then having Zero be revealed as THE REAL BIG BAD in a japanese curveball during that epilogue was kinda raw. I still don't think I really liked it even if I don't hate it as so many people do.

*Still LOL at Big Momma. What a terrible "code name." Big Boss has the excuse of being a hold over from a different time, but they really should have come up with a better name than that.

@zombiebigfoot said:

@Alkaiser said:

@WickedFather said:

Matrix

I can't think of a better one than this.

Yup. This and ME3. The fight scenes (most of them) and music in Reloaded and Revolutions were fucking epic, but god damn did the plot get stupid after Reloaded.

Now that's four of us. The ending in the original Matrix was perfect: we found the One, he can permanently destroy Agents and he will use that ability to liberate humanity. Hooray! I just pretend the sequels don't exist and the story still feels complete. I haven't played ME3 and I don't plan to (Origin exclusivity and tacked on mp) but as far as I'm concerned, ME2 already did a pretty good job at ruining the franchise.

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90 said:

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90: But then we'd be out MGS3 which is, for my money the best one.

@BoG: I had forgotten about how overused the nanomachines were as a plot device but damn if you aren't right. At times it was kinda like they were going down a FAQ of plot holes/questions/mysteries and just answering "Nanomachines" to everyone. MSG4 is weird in a way because despite all of its flaws, I had a blast playing & watching it. That thing was a fucking ride. Though, it was also my first PS3 game so maybe that made me a bit biased.

@ShadowConqueror This was my answer. That was the film equivalent of someone just flipping you off in the first 15 minutes. I never saw Alien 3 until DVD and was unaware that happened. Nearly pulled the disc out right then.

I love MGS3 too, I just feel that the game would be served better if it felt a little less connected to the rest of the franchise and felt more stand-alone. It felt that way before MGS4 was released, but all the characters were then stitched in to the plot line and things from MGS2 were retconned.

It felt like to me like they knew where they were going with the follow up to MGS2 initially, but when they detoured so heavily with MGS3 it created a really tough situation to try and please everybody with MGS4.

Yeah, I suppose that's true. I didn't mind those people popping up in 3 and laying the groundwork for the conflicts of the earlier games, but around the time Big Momma* shows up, you could tell they were trying a little too much. Then having Zero be revealed as THE REAL BIG BAD in a japanese curveball during that epilogue was kinda raw. I still don't think I really liked it even if I don't hate it as so many people do.

*Still LOL at Big Momma. What a terrible "code name." Big Boss has the excuse of being a hold over from a different time, but they really should have come up with a better name than that.

MGS wouldn't be MGS if it wasn't for ridiculously dumb stuff like that though.

There are small aspects of all the MGS games I dislike but I wouldn't change any of them. If they were all perfect it would be pretty boring to discuss them and they wouldn't have that bizarre "Kojima Productions" charm.

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90 said:

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90: But then we'd be out MGS3 which is, for my money the best one.

@BoG: I had forgotten about how overused the nanomachines were as a plot device but damn if you aren't right. At times it was kinda like they were going down a FAQ of plot holes/questions/mysteries and just answering "Nanomachines" to everyone. MSG4 is weird in a way because despite all of its flaws, I had a blast playing & watching it. That thing was a fucking ride. Though, it was also my first PS3 game so maybe that made me a bit biased.

@ShadowConqueror This was my answer. That was the film equivalent of someone just flipping you off in the first 15 minutes. I never saw Alien 3 until DVD and was unaware that happened. Nearly pulled the disc out right then.

I love MGS3 too, I just feel that the game would be served better if it felt a little less connected to the rest of the franchise and felt more stand-alone. It felt that way before MGS4 was released, but all the characters were then stitched in to the plot line and things from MGS2 were retconned.

It felt like to me like they knew where they were going with the follow up to MGS2 initially, but when they detoured so heavily with MGS3 it created a really tough situation to try and please everybody with MGS4.

Yeah, I suppose that's true. I didn't mind those people popping up in 3 and laying the groundwork for the conflicts of the earlier games, but around the time Big Momma* shows up, you could tell they were trying a little too much. Then having Zero be revealed as THE REAL BIG BAD in a japanese curveball during that epilogue was kinda raw. I still don't think I really liked it even if I don't hate it as so many people do.

*Still LOL at Big Momma. What a terrible "code name." Big Boss has the excuse of being a hold over from a different time, but they really should have come up with a better name than that.

The sad part is that they could have ignored many of the characters from 3. It wasn't essential fr Big Momma to show up at all, or to even mention Zero. They could have left these characters out, and no one would have noticed. Big Momma acting as a surrogate mother made some sense, so I can see that I guess, but she didn't really need to be alive and kicking during 4. There was way too much fanservice in 4, bringing back old characters, and it really weakened the game and story. Of all things, though, bringing back Big Boss was the biggest sin. Story-wise, MGS4 would have been much better had they created new characters appropriate for the new game, rather than feeling obligated to bring everybody back.

@BoG said:

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90 said:

@CrossTheAtlantic said:

@samcroft90: But then we'd be out MGS3 which is, for my money the best one.

@BoG: I had forgotten about how overused the nanomachines were as a plot device but damn if you aren't right. At times it was kinda like they were going down a FAQ of plot holes/questions/mysteries and just answering "Nanomachines" to everyone. MSG4 is weird in a way because despite all of its flaws, I had a blast playing & watching it. That thing was a fucking ride. Though, it was also my first PS3 game so maybe that made me a bit biased.

@ShadowConqueror This was my answer. That was the film equivalent of someone just flipping you off in the first 15 minutes. I never saw Alien 3 until DVD and was unaware that happened. Nearly pulled the disc out right then.

I love MGS3 too, I just feel that the game would be served better if it felt a little less connected to the rest of the franchise and felt more stand-alone. It felt that way before MGS4 was released, but all the characters were then stitched in to the plot line and things from MGS2 were retconned.

It felt like to me like they knew where they were going with the follow up to MGS2 initially, but when they detoured so heavily with MGS3 it created a really tough situation to try and please everybody with MGS4.

Yeah, I suppose that's true. I didn't mind those people popping up in 3 and laying the groundwork for the conflicts of the earlier games, but around the time Big Momma* shows up, you could tell they were trying a little too much. Then having Zero be revealed as THE REAL BIG BAD in a japanese curveball during that epilogue was kinda raw. I still don't think I really liked it even if I don't hate it as so many people do.

*Still LOL at Big Momma. What a terrible "code name." Big Boss has the excuse of being a hold over from a different time, but they really should have come up with a better name than that.

The sad part is that they could have ignored many of the characters from 3. It wasn't essential fr Big Momma to show up at all, or to even mention Zero. They could have left these characters out, and no one would have noticed. Big Momma acting as a surrogate mother made some sense, so I can see that I guess, but she didn't really need to be alive and kicking during 4. There was way too much fanservice in 4, bringing back old characters, and it really weakened the game and story. Of all things, though, bringing back Big Boss was the biggest sin. Story-wise, MGS4 would have been much better had they created new characters appropriate for the new game, rather than feeling obligated to bring everybody back.

My reaction in Act 3 after talking to Big Momma: 'The codec team from MGS3? really? those guys? ummmm okay"

@samcroft90: Exactly. And, to be honest, it wasn't a big deal because you never felt as connected to any of them as other characters. They served their purpose, but it wasn't really necessary to make Sigint all important. I would say the same about MGS1 characters. It wasn't really necessary to bring back Naomi. She played an interesting role in the first game, but it felt awkward to bring her back when she wasn't even mentioned in MGS2.

@TooWalrus said:

@Abendlaender said:

Men in Black 2 pretty much ruined MIB 1 cause they felt the need to bring Tommy Lee back, which was jsut stupid and...oh video games?

While I would never say it ruined anything, I didn't like that they brought Glados back in Portal 2. It was such a cool fight to destroy her in 1 and then just to be like "Oh well, nope. You just need to flick some switches to bring her back, sorry" was kinda lame. Then again Portal 2 without Galdos might have been pretty lame as well and......I don't know what I want

I was totally fine with that because the ending song was all about how she was still alive, and I think the fact that she wasn't just the main antagonist again made it even better.

Yah, Glados is kinda the Main Character of Portal, Or at least one of them.

@BoG said:

@samcroft90: Exactly. And, to be honest, it wasn't a big deal because you never felt as connected to any of them as other characters. They served their purpose, but it wasn't really necessary to make Sigint all important. I would say the same about MGS1 characters. It wasn't really necessary to bring back Naomi. She played an interesting role in the first game, but it felt awkward to bring her back when she wasn't even mentioned in MGS2.

Meanwhile one of the characters who was heavily linked (quite tragically) to the whole theme of the game, Solidus Snake, was integrated in a really strange and indirect way. He was effectually used to link more MGS3 stuff. MGS4 really is a bizarre game. Fantastic though.

Has anyone mentioned Prince of Persia: Sands of Time yet? if not then that. Especially the third game.

Don't get me wrong though, they were all pretty good games, they just messed up the story past the first one.

@ShadowConqueror said:

Alien 3 ruined the ending of Aliens for me. In the first ten minutes the entire latter half of Aliens is negated because the struggle to make it out alive with Newt and the corporal ends with them dying in stasis. Great.

@Quarters said:

Though I ended up liking the game alright, Max Payne 3 was the first one that came to mind.

How does it ruin the ending of 2? Max has lost everything and has nothing left. It's a perfect starting point for 3 and makes narrative sense.

@samcroft90 said:

@BoG said:

@samcroft90: Exactly. And, to be honest, it wasn't a big deal because you never felt as connected to any of them as other characters. They served their purpose, but it wasn't really necessary to make Sigint all important. I would say the same about MGS1 characters. It wasn't really necessary to bring back Naomi. She played an interesting role in the first game, but it felt awkward to bring her back when she wasn't even mentioned in MGS2.

Meanwhile one of the characters who was heavily linked (quite tragically) to the whole theme of the game, Solidus Snake, was integrated in a really strange and indirect way. He was effectually used to link more MGS3 stuff. MGS4 really is a bizarre game. Fantastic though.

Great game, terrible story.

@Vitor: Well, yeah, that's how they portray it now, but when it first came out, just judging it based off the ending, it looked like he had found some sort of solace. The last line of the game showcased this quite lovely.

"I had a dream my wife died, but it was alright."

It ended hopeful that he was on the road to recovery. Then, MP3 rolled in and went, "naaaaw, son".

@Socialone said:

@zombiebigfoot said:

@Alkaiser said:

@WickedFather said:

Matrix

I can't think of a better one than this.

Yup. This and ME3. The fight scenes (most of them) and music in Reloaded and Revolutions were fucking epic, but god damn did the plot get stupid after Reloaded.

Now that's four of us. The ending in the original Matrix was perfect: we found the One, he can permanently destroy Agents and he will use that ability to liberate humanity. Hooray! I just pretend the sequels don't exist and the story still feels complete. I haven't played ME3 and I don't plan to (Origin exclusivity and tacked on mp) but as far as I'm concerned, ME2 already did a pretty good job at ruining the franchise.

I didn't completely hate ME2 myself. It was halfway decent. I'm not playing ME3 because of a total lack of interest. And I've got better games to play.

I was able to sit through Reloaded with considerably less cringing than I did with Revolutions. But yeah, the first movie was just fine.. but then they went and fucked it all up.

@BisonHero: TFU was pretty close to being ass on its own. TFU II was just a considerably more shitty 2-4 hour expansion.

Star Wars the Force Unleashed 2, The first one wasn't great, but story wise it was pretty cool and it really tied into the 4th Star wars quite nicely. But they then went and fucked it all up with this clone stuff and overall the game was pretty poor.

@BisonHero said:

The Force Unleashed 2 fucked everything up pretty good.

SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content.

In TFU, Starkiller dies at the end, but his impact is made pretty clear: his sacrifice allowed the fledgling Rebellion to survive, and to honour him, they made his family crest into the symbol for the rebellion. Then in TFU2, he's not dead because they cloned him (OR DID THEY?), and also there's an evil superclone, and it ends on a huge cliffhanger where Darth Vader is in Rebel custody, ready to stand trial for war crimes. Way to fuck up a decent self-contained story, guys.

Oh, yeah I forgot about this one. Man, it really seemed like someone in that studio was planted to ruin that ending. The results of your actions come completely out of nowhere.

If you consider The Answer a sequel to Persona 3, it is one of them.

I know this isn't a video game nor a true sequel, but the remake of Dawn of the Dead after the credits (Or rather, during I suppose). They take a grim movie with a hopeful ending and make it super grim and depressing. I wished I had just walked out before watching the credits.

@LTSmash said:

@ShadowConqueror said:

Alien 3 ruined the ending of Aliens for me. In the first ten minutes the entire latter half of Aliens is negated because the struggle to make it out alive with Newt and the corporal ends with them dying in stasis. Great.

This is the correct answer.

Yes.

@emem said:

@NTM said:

@LTSmash said:

@ShadowConqueror said:

Alien 3 ruined the ending of Aliens for me. In the first ten minutes the entire latter half of Aliens is negated because the struggle to make it out alive with Newt and the corporal ends with them dying in stasis. Great.

This is the correct answer.

Yes.

Aliens is one of my most favourite action movies of all time and even though I was extremely disappointed watching Alien 3 for the first time, when you watch it without thinking about the sequel you (all of us) wished for, it's actually not a bad movie. Some of the scenes and especially the ending are absolutely amazing, imho. (Alien 4 on the other hand... that's not a good movie. I still can't believe the guy who directed it also directed Amélie.)

Well, that's somewhat true, except for the fact that it's not "good" it's OK. It being an Aliens sequel, or even part of the franchise as a whole, makes it mediocre at best. Alien: Resurrection is just quite poor no matter what. It's sad too 'cause the people who made both the third and fourth films are actually quite good directors and have made a few great films. Anyways, Alien 3 isn't like Prometheus, you can't really shrug off the other films of sorts.

Scarface had a great ending that wasn't really ruined by the videogame sequel, but I still think it seemed like a huge cash grab.

@Everyones_A_Critic said:

Scarface had a great ending that wasn't really ruined by the videogame sequel, but I still think it seemed like a huge cash grab.

The game was fun though... I mean really REALLY fun!

@BrockNRolla said:

I know this isn't a video game nor a true sequel, but the remake of Dawn of the Dead after the credits (Or rather, during I suppose). They take a grim movie with a hopeful ending and make it super grim and depressing. I wished I had just walked out before watching the credits.

Agreed. Although that is more in line with the first movie actually. In the first movie the guy was supposed to shoot himself and the girl was to put her head through the helicopter blades. After test audience review and audiences didn't like it. They changed the originals ending to the one where they go off in the helicopter. No one has found the original ending on film though. That would be worth quite a few bucks actually! Just like The Land Before Times cut 15 minutes that are now lost!

Speaking of Land Before Time. It is the ultimate offender here! 13 sequel movies and a short running cartoon series... yeah... think that's enough?

I first read "good endings ruined by squirrels". I was disappointed.