Invisible, Inc.

Invisible, Inc.

View Stats:
Vorlath May 25, 2015 @ 4:07pm
What's with the crap ending?
It's pretty clear the devs didn't give a rat's ♥♥♥ about the ending, so no spoiler alerts here. The devs already made it clear they wanted to screw everyone over on that department. Kinda funny in a twisted kind of way. Still, most games I play have some kind of reward at end. This one was basically a slap in the face. What really got me was how un-original it was.

Any thoughts on why the ending was so bad? And please don't say it was good. We're way past that.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 110 comments
Kaijudo May 25, 2015 @ 4:45pm 
First off I love this game (It's my top spy game next to Covert Action). I can't speak for the dev's, but what I have noticed, all spy stories (games, tv, movies, board games) come up a little short. I think it's just hard to come up with an original spy story. They always seem the same. That's why me myself, I don't bother with story, I play endless mode. I'm more into having a a career as a spy as opposed to paying a specific story character with a back story and a linear mission objective.
Promethian May 25, 2015 @ 4:55pm 
Pretty sure they wanted it as a build up to DLC, expansion and/or sequel. With the ending they have a set up for why we are starting fresh and a story way to fit in new mechanics. This is all good because Klei has a lot of credibility built up with all their game releases so far so I am happy to support them if they release an expanded Invisible.
Vorlath May 25, 2015 @ 4:56pm 
@Kaijudo: Oh, I love the game. I think it's great. And I guess you make a valid point about spy stories coming up short. But that doesn't explain this ending. They didn't even try.

Last edited by Vorlath; May 25, 2015 @ 4:57pm
Valravn May 25, 2015 @ 4:59pm 
Cant really make a satisfying ending when there isn't much story to begin with so I didnt think it was a big deal. Everything exists at this time to serve the mechanics. Maybe we will see it fleshed out with an expansion at some point.
Connatic May 25, 2015 @ 5:01pm 
Originally posted by Vorlath:
It's pretty clear the devs didn't give a rat's ♥♥♥ about the ending, so no spoiler alerts here. The devs already made it clear they wanted to screw everyone over on that department. Kinda funny in a twisted kind of way. Still, most games I play have some kind of reward at end. This one was basically a slap in the face. What really got me was how un-original it was.

Any thoughts on why the ending was so bad? And please don't say it was good. We're way past that.


Because there really wasn't a massive story? The driving force of this game isn't the story. You don't buy this game because you want a good story?
Vorlath May 25, 2015 @ 5:07pm 
No one said anything about the story. The ending was basically a loss. A screen that just said "You Win!" would have been better. Instead, it was "YOU LOSE ♥♥♥♥♥♥"
Valravn May 25, 2015 @ 5:08pm 
Oh, so you are just really craving some affirmation.
Connatic May 25, 2015 @ 5:11pm 
Originally posted by Vorlath:
No one said anything about the story. The ending was basically a loss. A screen that just said "You Win!" would have been better. Instead, it was "YOU LOSE ♥♥♥♥♥♥"

Of course you get stuff. You unlock more agents.
retrox May 25, 2015 @ 7:09pm 
It seems that many people expected some kind of rousing narrative, probably because the actual gameplay is so engaging that it makes us wonder why the story shouldn't be just as awesome as the rest of it. Personally, I would pay a AAA price for a game using II's mechanics and universe in a 20-hour campaign fraught with intrigue and excitement.

I totally get the aggravation, but with the understanding that II with a longer (and probably linear) campaign/story would be a completely different experience. II's design, at its very core, keeps the focus squarely on the nuts and bolts of the fun and minimalizes the extraneous, campy pulp that passes for a storyline. The journey is the reward here, and the end is just a bridge to the next beginning.

Maybe I'm numb to it because I've been playing Nethack all my life, have ascended several times, and throughout hundreds of hours of play not once felt sad that the story was little more than "Go here, get this thing, get out alive, and you win!" Whether I win or lose, I'm always ready to play again.

Some games need a solid story to be good games, others don't.
Qfasa May 25, 2015 @ 8:09pm 
They knew you won't like and they wanted to slap you in the face with it. Kudos to them for the successful result.
Dorok May 25, 2015 @ 11:16pm 
It's right that the special design of the game is based more on replay than length of one run. This doesn't let much place for a story development. It's a short short story and when you play, the story doesn't really evolves, it's more you get more information along your run. And then the final is a bit abrupt and will surprise most players despite it's a known element and despite there's ton of clues of it during your play. And yeah it's not really a end it feels more like the end of a first part.

The game is great but for sure it can't be bought for the story. :-)
Last edited by Dorok; May 25, 2015 @ 11:18pm
Please don't tell me people played even an inch of this game for the story.
WMG May 26, 2015 @ 2:07am 
I say that Klei built this game with the resources they had, and they had to make a decision whether or not they wanted to also include a very solid story, but ultimately knew that they needed a solid base game first, and that adding a story, which I wish they did make more of, may detract from making a solid game. And I will agree, this game's story is not exactly the greatest thing ever. But then again, Don't Starve's story isn't really that much impressive either. But these games, these procedural games, it's really less you wanting to play for this story, but more for the replayability of it all.
Does anyone that makes these threads ever actually pay attention to the ending?

Incognita only attacks the corporate HQs. She doesn't kill everyone.

It's the perfect setup for a DLC expansion with a three faction scenario.

Invisible Inc., Corporate, and Incognita with a drone heavy presence.

And don't act like you didn't get a reward at the end. If it was your first run you get two new mainframe programs and a couple more starting agents for the higher difficulties.
Shirsh May 26, 2015 @ 2:29am 
Originally posted by Vorlath:
It's pretty clear the devs didn't give a rat's ♥♥♥ about the ending, so no spoiler alerts here. The devs already made it clear they wanted to screw everyone over on that department. Kinda funny in a twisted kind of way. Still, most games I play have some kind of reward at end. This one was basically a slap in the face. What really got me was how un-original it was.

Any thoughts on why the ending was so bad? And please don't say it was good. We're way past that.
If there was happy-end, it wouldn't be original too, or would it?

[offtop]I can't say is it good or bad: when I was 8, I had wish to beat Bomberman on Nes, and I did it (at 12 maybe), there no ending that can frustrate me after that, ever since
and Wild Gunman (level 1 after level 50, first endless loop in my life, damn). And ok, 95% of all games of my childhood, kindest of them mostly shows me one picture (oh, thank you Rockin'Cats, you shows me beautiful pic at he end!)[/offtop]
Last edited by Shirsh; May 26, 2015 @ 2:31am
< >
Showing 1-15 of 110 comments
Per page: 15 30 50