Topic: The last Quarter of (almost) every game is lame.

Im currently attempting the same mission on mgs phantom pain for the twentieth time. Its not really challenging, but the layout of the level and the monotony of twenty tanks trying to blow me up is really annoying. I probably wouldn't mind if this was the first time I've seen this, but its not. Games start well, throw a couple of good gameplay mechanics in then pace them well into the final quarter - then comes the kitchen sink. Everything you saw in the first three quarters; Have it all in one level. All those bosses you fought? How about you get them all in a row? The enemies you fought earlier, take twice as much damage now. The time we gave you to survey the battlefield earlier? Nope not anymore as the enemy has homing bullets and you can't hide.

Its the same game design philosophy of 35 years ago!

@themcnoisy:
thankfully this problem only exists in games that are structured around missions. Narrative based games or world exploration games (like MGS3, Silent Hill 1-4, Life is Strange, Demon's Souls/ Dark Souls) rarely have this problem.
But yeah, I've noticed this also. I don't have very many games that are mission based, but Halo is one of them and I'm sick and tired of suddenly getting thrown in a room with 20 grunts, 5 elites, and 2 hunters, after I just got done with a room with 10 grunts and 3 elites.

I dislike this as well, less because of difficulty and more because it feels unoriginal.

I actually put down MGS Peace Walker because I hated the extra ops that were coming along after you beat Chapter 4. It was mostly vehicle battles that you've seen before, but more durable and the troopers just keep coming. I just got fed up with them and quit playing it.

@DerMeister: This is what I'm facing on this level. You cant hide or run away - something quiet and snake have done throughout, its a shoot a thon.

@themcnoisy: That's why games like Transformers are great and have their place Mr McNoisy

@TripleGK: ME3 - man those banshees! Exactly what Im talking about. Just imagine you were on your 21st retry - would it be so tense then?

@kyleforrester87: I found the bridge section (chapter 4 I think) of TD was just millions of the same old bad guys. That was a pretty terrible section of the game.

I think now apart from a few games we are used to games that let you complete them so easily. So its a shock when there are parts that really up the difficulty levels. In my early days of gaming I was failing to complete a lot of games. These days there only a couple which I have given up due to frustration. Even the ones that pose extreme difficulty can be resolved by a quick look on youtube.

I know the section of ME3 which you are talking about that has resulted in a few punched cushions and chosen words. The banshee are a great tough enemy I like them in ME3 multi-player.

@themcnoisy: But the whole section from getting on the bridge, beating the boss at the end and getting back only takes about 40 minutes or less if you know what you're doing so it's not really long enough to outstay its welcome. The first part (side scrolling) felt like the Commodore 64 game Silkworm:

Also I found that section pretty ace, fighting a triple changer on the beach at sunset was a real highlight!

But yes you're right, games can drag toward the end. A good way to deal with that, in my opinion, is to dedicate a big chunk of time to smash through it in one sitting. Alien Isolation is often criticised for dragging on too long, but I played the final 5-6 hours in one hit and I really appreciated how they ratcheted everything up to 12, it was just like it feels toward the end of the movies. Had I played that section in instalments I'd have probably not enjoyed it as much.

To be honest, there aren't many games that I play where the last third is 'lame'. A lot of the games I play - at least nowadays - are story based and I look at these as a whole. If the story has a weak ending then I think the story was weak. This doesn't mean though that the 'game-play' can't be fun or consistent. Some of these, the last third can be 'disappointing' from a story perspective but not from a game-play perspective - that is often established much earlier.

Those games that introduce you to a 'tough' enemy and then chucks 2+ at you towards the end doesn't bother me . It kind of makes sense that as you get closer to the 'end goal', the enemy is likely to have its stronger defence. I think as a game mechanic it works too. I would be disappointed if that 'tough' enemy had less health, just because there is more than 1 now. I think they would be accompanied by a 'squad' so if you have 2 enemies you would have 2 'squads' meaning you are likely to face more of the lower level enemy types too. The closer you get to the goal, the more the enemy will be desperate and determined to stop you. I admit though it can be somewhat frustrating. For me though its not as 'frustrating' as those games that have an AI partner or squad and are either bullet sponges compared to you or incredibly lightweight and get downed instantly - not helped by the incredibly dumb AI and actions.

I think it would be more disappointing if the game got significantly easier as you progressed.

@BAMozzy: For me though its not as 'frustrating' as those games that have an AI partner or squad and are either bullet sponges compared to you or incredibly lightweight and get downed instantly - not helped by the incredibly dumb AI and actions.

Yup on mission 45 quiet unlike the rest of the game becomes a suicidal idiot.

The thing is I thought I had passed the mission, it was really tough going. But nooo, yet more tanks and helicopters are now on my case.