Well it seems Jim isn’t alone on that, Luke Plankett from Kotaku wrote this:
One ending? Boring. Two? Thanks, but it’s just not gonna cut it. Not with Fallout 3 boasting of not just two endings, but two, two, two and then some. Bethesda’s Pete Hines has told CVG that depending on what you do during the game and how you do it, you can expect between 9-12 different endings to the game. That’s a lot. Hopefully this move has been made with more than just replayability in mind. Because playing an RPG 9-12 times? Not. Fun.
What’s not fun in replayability? I made twenty chars in Fallout 2 and at least twelve in Fallout 1 and I honestly think that’s one of the great things on the Fallout series.
Multiple endings to video games do NOT mean instant replay value. Having to play through the entire storyline again just to see a different cutscene shouldn’t be a standard. But, this is TWELVE times! By the time I unlock the ‘correct’ ending, I’ll have moved on to Fallout 5. It didn’t work with STALKER, and it was pretty meaningless in Bioshock. Stop using this stupid gimmick, and use the time to develop the gameplay on a deeper level.
Well as s001 commented on this blog earlier on:
I cannot understand why people complain about “too many endings”, as if you are going to be forced to watch all 12.
It’s not that Bethesda expects ever player to play the game 12 times, it’s the hope that one of those 12 endings will *really* represent how you played the game. If you’ve reached the end of the game, and one of those endings nicely sums up the choices and consequences you’ve made during your game, then what do you care about 11 other endings that you don’t have to watch and obviously didn’t apply to how you played?
You’d think people would be happy with multiple endings, but it sounds like people just want their one canned ending, their reward for reaching the end, not for how they got there.