Honest Hearts Ending

Post » Wed Jul 06, 2011 12:24 pm

Alright I did do a search for this and it turned up nothing.

Alright anyone else think the ending of Honest Hearts was rather lacking?

You are given one of two options: Run like Coward and the valley gets ruined, Fight and have everyone become morally corrupt in the war department.

While the second and in my opinion better of the two endings does have a redeaming quality in you can stop him from killing the guy it just isn't enough. This is the kind of personal choice defying mechanics which really irritate me. I would rather of had one solid ending like FO3 then have multiple choice but each choice svcks equally endings.

The other ending you have to fight the same enemies and The Burned Man Doesn't loose his mind then, you even have the same option to talk your way out of it as the other ending but it comes at a high price.

Now for anyone who collected all of the survivalists notes you will know this behavior is not what he taught them. Which flies in the face of the ending itself. He taught them to stand up for themselves if threatened. A kind of gentle hand with a large stick kind of deal so them getting corrupt or running doesn't make sense and flies contradictory to the lore the game set up so beautifully.

Though it is easy to complain so I have thought up a way better ending that still takes into account the key message of the game.

Basically when it comes time to fight if you have high enough speech you convince Daniel and the Burned Man to go with you and you three will take on the White Legs by yourselves sparing the rest of the people the horrors of war. Daniel will agree as will Joshua. The middle details are unimportant but at the end Joshua wants to kill the leader of the White Legs but Daniel being who he is has his gun pointed at Jushua and you have the option of siding with one of them and killing the other or talking them down if you have high enough speech.

I figure this is a way better alternative an eliminates all the irritating parts ether of the original endings. Since neither tribe was corrupted they learn that they must defend themselves true to Randell (the survivalist) teachings, Josthua's soul is healed, and Daniel has a positive outlook on life. The other good stuff about the carivan doing well and them building a prosperous settlement also happen. In this way everyone wins and everyone is happy.

Just my thoughts what are yours?
User avatar
Vicki Gunn
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:59 am

Post » Wed Jul 06, 2011 7:23 pm



Though it is easy to complain so I have thought up a way better ending that still takes into account the key message of the game.

Basically when it comes time to fight if you have high enough speech you convince Daniel and the Burned Man to go with you and you three will take on the White Legs by yourselves sparing the rest of the people the horrors of war. Daniel will agree as will Joshua. The middle details are unimportant but at the end Joshua wants to kill the leader of the White Legs but Daniel being who he is has his gun pointed at Jushua and you have the option of siding with one of them and killing the other or talking them down if you have high enough speech.


Wow man, this is good. You should send this in to Obsidian. They might pay you for it.
User avatar
Nicole Mark
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:33 pm

Post » Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:23 pm

Wow man, this is good. You should send this in to Obsidian. They might pay you for it.

I HIGHLY doubt that they would pay him for it, as in, no chance at all, being that HH is out and has been out for more than a week. Although, I think this ending would be better than the crap they give us which always ends with us feeling bad.
User avatar
kasia
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:46 pm

Post » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:14 am

Spare the Sorrows "corruption"? What the hell is corrupting them in the eyes of anything? News flash: The only person worried about "corruption" is a bedammed missionary thats already started on the merry path of stomping out their own peaceful religious beliefs and replacing it with one based on misogynist hypocrisy, hatred, willful ignorance and forced conversion.

Fighting, even killing to defend your home and loved ones doesn't "corrupt" a dammed thing. It does however put the victor on notice that the world is a hard and uncaring place that will chew you up if you're unwilling to hit back and hold your own. Were it possible to flat out chase Danny off, I'd let him get out of the Narrows just far enough for me to drill him in the back of the skull. It's all his ilk deserve for attempting to crush a whole society in the name of his personal sky faerie.

But hey, it's christianity, so it's ok. It's never seen as "corrupt" or even wrong for the way he's destroying a whole tribal tradition, mocking their beliefs ("Father in the Caves? [dismissive tone] Oh, thats some spirit the Sorrows used to believe in) and deciding their future for them because he obviously "knows better" by virtue of being a white christian. Joshua isn't any better, but at least he doesn't talk down to the people of Zion, mock their ways and treat them like ignorant children.

I loved Honest Hearts, but Daniel outright disgusted me.
User avatar
jason worrell
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:26 am

Post » Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:54 pm

Spare the Sorrows "corruption"? What the hell is corrupting them in the eyes of anything? News flash: The only person worried about "corruption" is a bedammed missionary thats already started on the merry path of stomping out their own peaceful religious beliefs and replacing it with one based on misogynist hypocrisy, hatred, willful ignorance and forced conversion.

Fighting, even killing to defend your home and loved ones doesn't "corrupt" a dammed thing. It does however put the victor on notice that the world is a hard and uncaring place that will chew you up if you're unwilling to hit back and hold your own. Were it possible to flat out chase Danny off, I'd let him get out of the Narrows just far enough for me to drill him in the back of the skull. It's all his ilk deserve for attempting to crush a whole society in the name of his personal sky faerie.

But hey, it's christianity, so it's ok. It's never seen as "corrupt" or even wrong for the way he's destroying a whole tribal tradition, mocking their beliefs ("Father in the Caves? [dismissive tone] Oh, thats some spirit the Sorrows used to believe in) and deciding their future for them because he obviously "knows better" by virtue of being a white christian. Joshua isn't any better, but at least he doesn't talk down to the people of Zion, mock their ways and treat them like ignorant children.

I loved Honest Hearts, but Daniel outright disgusted me.

Now that I think about it, I totally agree. Daniel was very condescending...
User avatar
Michael Russ
 
Posts: 3380
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:33 am


Return to Fallout: New Vegas