Ditto ivana. I even find that status like "exhausted" strange. Dead in battles is different with dead in 'actual' events, and everyone knows it. If a character dies outside from a battle(a.k.a canon), well, cuz it's how the story goes. But if a battler dies in normal battle, it's because he's lost all of his life points. No life points = dead.

Point taken, but there should probably be a justifiable reason on why this particular "death" is different and the character can't be revived with normal means. In Jack's case in AP, he gets eaten, and can't be revived because there's no body left. With the Villains' case, it's mostly because they're forever alone and don't have friends/minions around to revive them when our heroes kill them. Also because they never seem to leave their lairs, they probably don't store up Cassia Leaves/potions we have in our inventories.

Well, what's so weird about "incapacitated"? It means you can't do anything at all. Whether you're incapacitated because you're unconscious or dead is not part of the question. I just dislike the idea of using "dead" as status because of possible plot discrepancies (e.g: CASSIA LEAVES Y U NO REVIVE STELLA???).

I'm more okay with people barging in houses than the dead status. The in-game battles ARE still technically part of the story, so there's no reason why Cassia leaves work on the dead people in regular combat and doesn't work when people die by plot.

I agree with d_a incapacitated makes a lot more sense than dead when it comes to avoiding plot discrepancies.

If someone's just incapacitated, then it'll make sense why you can't revive a dead character with what you use to revive the incapacitated party member.

Eh, I don't get why 'dead' status is so jarring. It's just one of those rpg things, like why I can travel from one end of of AV to the other tend and back 20 times but is still only 1 day game time.

Or why our characters don't ever need to eat/sleep/use the toilet/etc.

I'm fine with dead/knocked out/incapacitated/fainted. I really don't pay attention to the wording since in battle, it means I'm down a fighter and need to do some reviving asap.

@KTC: Some people have logic issues with "dead" as a status. If you can revive the dead-from-battle with xxx item, then someone dies-by-plot, some have issues with why they can't revive the dead person with xxx.

Eh, I have a logic issue more with why I need to open a chest with XX key instead of smashing the lid open but you can't satisfy everyone lol.

Meh, you can argue that the chest might be made of special materials that you can't just smash with your weapon, and needs a special key to open. Some illogical stuffs in game can be explained or justified, and some can't.

I don't mind death statuses in games- it only becomes a problem when a character is killed of for real, and it is not explained why the previous resurrection methods don't work on this case. Even if the writer is too lazy to think of reasons, it could at least be lampshaded ("Why can't I revive X using the Cassia Leaves? It always work before!" or something like that).

Naw, the chests are plain ole non-enchanted wood and you got xx sword of invincibility. Smashiness should be enabled (and is thanks to certain mods heh.)

I mean seriously, I have a ~10 foot golem on my side and a puny chest is just begging to be smashed. But of course, I can't.

How do you know that the chests aren't magicked?

Dragon Age: Because they're made by non-magic humans and Dwarves can't use magic. Being even slightly magical means you're gonna get dumped into a tower for the rest of your life, assuming you're not a Dalish.

So no, majority of chests in that game aren't enchanted or special in any way. Hence the fanmade mods to break all of them with smashy fists! XD

@d_a
It's weird because it is. Maybe for hardcore gamers like us anyways. Like shadowshed said, the gamers get the difference of dying in battle and dying in story so using 'dead' isn't weird for us.


Also you need to take note that changing it to 'incapacitated' really doesn't help things much. Like in Exit Fate where Clint uses a gun as a weapon, it wouldn't make sense for someone who is wearing a robe and got shot and that person's 'just' incapacitated. So changing the name doesn't really help much to the plot.

And it's kinda unfair to just nitpick the 'dead' status. If you care for that, then shouldn't you also question the teleportation, having 342543 agility while in a very heavy armor, treasure chests etc etc in rpgs?

@KTC
LOL @ the treasure chest thing. XD That's one of the 'argh!!' moment I have when dealing with those 'red' chests. =P

Argh!! I need to play Dragon Age, Dragon Quest and other classic games that has the word 'dragon' in it so I won't feel left out in the convos. .___.

@ivana: I haven't played Dragon Quest, but DA is fun XD

Oh, and I got one: In one of my games, my gal has about 10,000,000 gold on her back and 1000 pounds of equipment on (entirely by legal means btw). Yet she's able to fight and run as if she's broke and naked.

Where does she keep it all and what type of strength drugs/potions is she on cuz I want some XD

well, i don't know about games, but i remember reading a REALLY good book. it had all these insane plot twists and it was really good, up until the very last chapter. a final showdown was going on between the heroes and the villain, and one of the main heroes died. that was that. i was left about one paragraph of mourn time before the book went straight to the epilogue.

needless to say, i was very upset. i don't like being put out on a string. i always like having my endings be fairly decent in wrapping everything up. yea, they could be tragic and sad, but at least give me "mourning time," don't just say "yup, they died, the end."

in the book i'm writing, i'm trying to make sure that the ending coincides with how i like my endings: wrapping up almost all the loose ends, and those that are left to the wind better the heck have a reason to be that way.

To answer the thread's main question: I like almost all kinds of endings. I read "Oryx and Crake" and to be honest, I read it in disgust, because it was that sort of suckish book that pulled you inside it and you could not stop reading it, no matter how bad it was. But the ending, which was open in this case, made me rate it 5/5. So endings are pretty much important for me and can affect my view on that thing drastically.

As for plots, I prefer to have all the loose ends tied up, but the main plot left like that. Because if all other small things aren't wrapped up, I end up thinking that the writer forgot about them and just concentrated on the main plot.

On the other side, opposing to what pj said, I love the main character to die at the end. :] I just do. It gives me that sad and empty feeling on the inside and it's really weird but I like it. All my favourite books have main characters dying at the end. Well, most of them.

@Ruffie: I haven't seen a book where the main character is dead except for Harry Potter, but that doesn't count coz he got magically revived.

I only like if the main character dies if it makes sense in context.

That means no lazy "deus ex machina" type of maneuvers where it's "suddenly kill main character for the lulz".

That's just evil and frustrating.

I like endings where it's kind of sad if one or two characters die, it makes it all heart wrenching and stuff. But not too "this person dies and then this person kills them self because they're sad and then everyone dies for some reason or another and then the world explodes". But not too "everyone lived happily ever after and all evil was wiped from the world forever" and that sort of stuff.

I guess it's important to get that balance right.

@KTC: I know, I meant if they die as a result of the plot? I don't know, but it needs to relate to the context.
There's a series of books I'm currently reading. :/ At the end of the second book, three or four of the most important main characters died without no reason. They simply got shot by a bunch of arrows and died. And bam the end, will be continued o.O The series is really good, imo, but that sucked and it annoyed the hell out of me. Mainly because those happened to be my favourite characters.

@d_a: "Martin Eden" by Jack London, "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo., I'm pretty sure the main characters died in "Feathered Snake" by Colin Falconer, also "Venom" by Colin Falconer, "The forest house" by Marion Zimmer and more than I can't think of right now.

Quote:

That's called a Diabolus Ex Machina, the evil twin brother of the Deus Ex Machina. Just as annoying, just one that tries to force a downer ending into the plot. XD