Games that don't live up to their own foreshadowing

[m76]

There are several games that deliberately foreshadow events in their story. Sometimes they do right by it but other times the actual event does not live up to what was advertised.

For example I recently played Dishonored II, and the game kept nagging me to stop killing enemies as this will turn the main character very cynical, and result in a very dark ending for the game.  But when I got to the end, the so called dark ending, wasn't really that dark, so I was kind of disappointed.

Have you had any similar experiences in games, where a  promise of a big ending, or mission was not as expected?

[Reality vs Adventure]

8 minutes ago, m76 said:

There are several games that deliberately foreshadow events in their story. Sometimes they do right by it but other times the actual event does not live up to what was advertised.

For example I recently played Dishonored II, and the game kept nagging me to stop killing enemies as this will turn the main character very cynical, and result in a very dark ending for the game.  But when I got to the end, the so called dark ending, wasn't really that dark, so I was kind of disappointed.

Have you had any similar experiences in games, where a  promise of a big ending, or mission was not as expected?

I think that game was trying to challenge you to get through missions without killing to see how stealthy you can be. That happens often in Assassin's Creed missions where I'm supposed to assassinate someone without being noticed, or without all out battle. But there is no real consequences or extra rewards. I still go for the challenge though because it's fun and immersive. 

[m76]

1 hour ago, Reality vs Adventure said:

I think that game was trying to challenge you to get through missions without killing to see how stealthy you can be. That happens often in Assassin's Creed missions where I'm supposed to assassinate someone without being noticed, or without all out battle. But there is no real consequences or extra rewards. I still go for the challenge though because it's fun and immersive. 

No, it's a core mechanic of Dishonored, that there are two different flavoured endings depending on how aggressive you played.  There is even a separate achievement for the endings.

[Heatman]

On 3/29/2021 at 7:13 PM, Reality vs Adventure said:

I think that game was trying to challenge you to get through missions without killing to see how stealthy you can be. That happens often in Assassin's Creed missions where I'm supposed to assassinate someone without being noticed, or without all out battle. But there is no real consequences or extra rewards. I still go for the challenge though because it's fun and immersive. 

The question is how are supposed to complete the mission when you are supposed to kill and you're still made not to kill in order not to affect the character's personality? I think they had things mixed up in there by the developers. 

[Reality vs Adventure]

19 minutes ago, Heatman said:

The question is how are supposed to complete the mission when you are supposed to kill and you're still made not to kill in order not to affect the character's personality? I think they had things mixed up in there by the developers. 

All throughout the series, it was ok to kill soldiers and templars without disturbing the synchronization or memories. But if you kill any innocent civilian you will get desynchronized. Usually one or two accidental deaths was allowed of a civilian, but it wouldn't allow more than that. It even says as a warning that whoever you are playing as the protagonist that they killed soldiers in their past life, no civilians or you will get desynchronized. But that's up until Odyssey, where you can kill civilians maybe because the protagonist in that game was a mercenary, which I guess didn't have the same standard or code to live by. Odyssey was supposedly one of the very first of the assassin generation chronologically and even though she hunted cultists, I haven't finished the story to know if she came to follow the creed. She is still discovering her bloodline. Often times Kassandra in Odyssey talked with Socrates for some ethical discussions. That's a great question! 

[Heatman]

58 minutes ago, Reality vs Adventure said:

All throughout the series, it was ok to kill soldiers and templars without disturbing the synchronization or memories. But if you kill any innocent civilian you will get desynchronized. Usually one or two accidental deaths was allowed of a civilian, but it wouldn't allow more than that. It even says as a warning that whoever you are playing as the protagonist that they killed soldiers in their past life, no civilians or you will get desynchronized. But that's up until Odyssey, where you can kill civilians maybe because the protagonist in that game was a mercenary, which I guess didn't have the same standard or code to live by. Odyssey was supposedly one of the very first of the assassin generation chronologically and even though she hunted cultists, I haven't finished the story to know if she came to follow the creed. She is still discovering her bloodline. Often times Kassandra in Odyssey talked with Socrates for some ethical discussions. That's a great question! 

Probably you're correct with the assumption about the reason why it's possible to kill civilians in Odyssey was as a result of the protagonist being a mercenary ; there is a big link up to that.