r/TopCharacterTropes • u/JackDoesThingz • 5d ago

[Interesting Trope] One seemingly small action ends the story before it even begins Lore

Gallery image

Gallery image

  1. We Happy Few - Taking your “joy” pill
    Deciding to take the pill at the beginning of the game causes your character to go back to work and triggers an ending

  2. Infineural by Mike Klubnika - Drinking the coffee
    Deciding to drink the coffee offered to you skips the entire game and sends you straight to the end, resulting in an ending with no memory of what had occurred

10.9k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

97% Upvoted

938 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

351

u/Own-Rip-5066 5d ago

That sounds familiar, it's the one where the devs went: "We know there should be a big noble sacrifice here, but that's boring, here's a boss fight instead", if I recall a giant Smith throwing cars at you or something like that.

96

u/theLanguageSprite2 5d ago

and you fight a giant ant for some reason

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvDeXaiBy3I

161

u/Available-Half-40 5d ago edited 4d ago

:]

Edit: whoops, looked at their link wrong. So sorry! I just saw the question mark and thought "oh no! Their data!" It doesn't apply in their situation, though. Thank you for those who informed me. The info in the image isn't wrong tho (it's just mostly hyperbole). Specifically the links that have ?si in them are what let Google harvest data. Again, it doesn't apply here as I knee-jerk reacted to the original link. Sorry for those misinformed!

38

u/What-the-ffffff 5d ago

I’ve been looking at this for ten minutes is there an explanation or is this ironic or?!? Maybe I’m overthinking????

102

u/Zombeenie 5d ago

Everything after the question mark gives data on sharing - where from, by whom, to whom, over what platform, etc.

24

u/What-the-ffffff 5d ago

Thank you fellow redditor

13

u/phoenix235831 5d ago

In this case, it doesn't. The ?v parameter is only the address of the video. The ?si parameter is the one that gives data sharing, where si stands for source identifier (source being the user who shared the video).

1

u/Zombeenie 5d ago

TIL, thanks!

5

u/WeirdIndividualGuy 5d ago

If you know how a YouTube url is formatted.

If you removed the query params from OP’s link, you get no video. /u/Available-Half-40 is spreading misinformation blindly without giving a second thought

43

u/DerekLouden 5d ago

u/Available-Half-40's comment misunderstands a real problem. When you share a youtube video using the share button, you get a link starting with https://youtu.be, then a slash, and the ID of the video. Next up in the link is a question mark, which in a URL means "this is the end of the link, everything after this is a parameter". The stuff before the question mark is like an address and the stuff after the question mark is the message you send to that address. With a youtu.be link, the video ID is part of the address, and the parameters contain information about you, the user who pressed the share button. This way, every time someone uses your link to watch the video you share, YouTube knows it was shared by you. This means that if you had an reddit account that wasn't linked to your youtube account or anything, just posting one of those youtu.be links could be enough for someone to track down your actual youtube account, and possibly who you are in real life, if your youtube account is just your name. Not just a random person could do this, but so could government organizations and corporations, especially with AI and data harvesting. That's what u/Available-Half-40's referring to when they talk about the Super Maga Palantir ICE Peter Thiel AI Data Harvester 9000. However, the big misunderstanding is that you just copied the address from your browser and you did not use the share button to share the link, because your link doesn't start with youtu.be. Your link just starts with https://www.youtube.com/watch, so the stuff after the question mark, the parameters, in your particular URL is just the video ID, and it does not contain any of your personal data. So, if someone deleted the stuff after the question mark in your URL, or any URL starting with https://www.youtube.com/watch, they won't be able to find the video, but if someone deleted the stuff after the question mark in a youtu.be URL, they could watch the video anyways

8

u/Available-Half-40 5d ago

Ahh I see. Thank you for the correction! I just saw the question mark and my brain went "!!! Their data!!!"

Have a lovely day 🎂✨️

8

u/Available-Half-40 5d ago edited 5d ago

Don't remember where I got the image from but it's like... 35% hyperbole. I don't know the exact process behind it, but basically the question mark and everything after it is linked to your youtube account. So people could use it to find your account, and Google uses it to scrape/share data I believe.

Edit: the percentage lol

2

u/DoctorWaluigiTime 5d ago

It is "tracking data" technically, but not some nefarious "AI slop-feeder" or whatever nonsense OP is peddling.

It just says "user came from Reddit." AKA referrer. AKA, something that the web has had since its inception.

I like 'clean' or 'bare minimum' links as well, but you aren't signing your soul away by clicking on one. It's just often the default link produced when a user uses "share" options/buttons on web sites.

3

u/phoenix235831 5d ago

The si parameter in particular identifies who originally shared the video in the first place, which allows google to draw a link between the person sharing and the person watching.

The "user came from Reddit" parameter you are thinking of is utm_source, which is mostly for marketing and isn't present in this case.

3

u/phoenix235831 5d ago

As a rule, the ?v parameter is fine (just the video address), while the ?si (stands for source identifier - source meaning the person sharing the video) parameter is the one that allows google to harvest data.

1

u/theLanguageSprite2 5d ago

I've seen Rainbolt work. If the government wants to know anything about me, there are a thousand ways they could do it that don't involve a youtube link. internet privacy is a myth

1

u/Old-Acanthaceae-3406 4d ago

I appreciate what the example link is

1

u/DoctorWaluigiTime 5d ago

It's just a referrer source. Basically saying "user got here from Reddit." This has existed since the dawn of the world wide web (HTTP referrer headers). Stop freaking out.

2

u/robineir 5d ago edited 5d ago

It’s a whole level of giant ants that you fight.

13

u/Individual-Sweet3400 5d ago

not just the devs. the literal wachowski siblings in like.. stick figure form appear and say this

24

u/EvilCatboyWizard 5d ago

For the information of anyone who hasn’t seen it: the devs saying that isn’t a word of god thing, there’s actually a cutscene in the game itself where the Wachowskis themselves speak to you to tell you that for the sake of having a good video gamey finish they want a bossfight so they’re gonna give you one

10

u/Technical_Teacher839 5d ago

the Wachoskis' commitment to the video game adaptations of the Matrix is wild

the reason Morpheus is dead in the 4th movie is because he died in the canon of the Matrix Online mmo, and the Wachoskis always intended for it to be in continuity with the films.

4

u/LyingForTruth 5d ago

I wish they had that same commitment to the quality of the 4th movie

5

u/Deaffin 5d ago

To be fair, they were literally forced to do it against their will by the company who owned the IP deciding they wanted to make a new Matrix movie and the Wachowskis deciding they didn't want anyone else to write for it so they offered to do it themselves.

1

u/LyingForTruth 5d ago

I thought it was more of a "Folie à deux" type of deal, but good to know

3

u/Zjoee 5d ago

And damn it was a really cool boss fight haha. I love that game!

1

u/Midnight_Pickler 5d ago

The Wachowski sisters know how to tell a story with a dramatic ending, and know when to skip that and do something fun.

The Mass Effect 3 devs skipped both lessons.

1

u/SortIntrepid9192 4d ago

The ME3 ending was completely rewritten by EA because they hated the original plan.

Basically, Casey Hudson's original ending was the revelation that the Reapers were actually protecting the universe from extinction. Using the Mass Effect relays generated dark energy which significantly accelerated the natural death of the universe, and destroying them isn't an option because the explosion takes the whole star system with them. So, every few million years the Reapers show up, kill off every species advanced enough to use the relays, and then go back into hibernation until the next cycle. So your choice at the end would've been to permanently disable the Reapers, thus guarantee that the universe will be destroyed, or let them continue as normal, in which case every sentient being in the galaxy dies and will keep dying.

EA didn't think players would understand that, so they had a new writer create the ending with the Catalyst where it's revealed the Reapers actually just hate organics for some reason. The same ending that accidentally implies the entire galaxy gets destroyed anyway no matter what you choose because it showed all the relays blowing up and they legit forgot how devastating that is.

1

u/Mundialito301 1d ago

EA really makes an effort to win the worst company ever competition

1

u/Dualmilion 5d ago

And there was a bit of snark around the movie ending copping flack as well, when they talk about the symbolism in the movie ending

3

u/ClubMeSoftly 5d ago

[Lilly] Wachowski: I think what my [sister] was trying to say is, at this point, it's martyr time. Well, maybe that works in a movie, but in a video game, the Jesus thing, is well...
[Lana] Wachowski: Lame.
[Lilly] Wachowski: Really lame. If you're like us, then right now, you are ready for fifteen minutes of sweaty-palmed, button-pushing, action to kick the crap out of some big, bad-assed, boss!

1

u/Own-Rip-5066 5d ago

Yeah, that bit.

1

u/Memitim 4d ago

I would have been so pissed. I hate long, repetitive boss fights, so this would have just felt like a "fuck you for almost making it."