Admission: the ending to BioShock soured me. And not just the actual ending itself, the entire last third of the game, where it ceases being a wondrous exploration of a crumbling dystopia and becomes a tedious, run-of-the-mill shooter. That last bit, maybe that was just me, but the actual ending sequences definitely left people feeling cold. Even Ken Levine:
...it was never my intention to do two endings for the game. It sort of came very late and it was something that was requested by somebody up the food chain from me.
Interesting. Please, continue.
One of the reasons I was opposed to multiple endings is I never want to do things that have multiple digital outcomes, versus analogue outcomes. I want to do it like the weapons system in the combat in BioShock. There are a million different things you can do in every combat; you can play it a million different ways. Looking into the future for the franchise, that's something I want to [figure out] , that by the time you get to the ending of that choice path, you have a sense of your impact on the world through lots of little permutations rather than like a giant ending piece, if you follow my meaning.
And I think we did a reasonably good job with [the endings] , but there are just two of them. And this is not a game about A and B. This is a game about one through 1 million, and all those permutations of choice. And as I think about the future of the franchise, that's where I want to take that.
Super-glad he's said that. Because for all their talk of leaving any moral choices open-ended, playing through the game only to see a "good" or "bad" ending was a let-down. Hopefully he can get his ideas for true multiple endings sorted by the time BioShock 2 rolls around. Q&A: Diving deeper into BioShock's story [GameSpot, via Rock, Paper, Shotgun]