Would you prefer self contained games that always have a happy ending, but then for the sequel a cult forms to resurrect the previous badguy, you find out there was an even bigger badguy the previous one was working for, or an evil apprentice decides to take over the plan for world domination / destruction? Whether it is time or circumstance, if you save the world, something has to undo all your previous work if a sequel is to allow you to save it again.
There are plenty of ways to make a trilogy entertaining that doesn't involve saving the world 'every' single time. Although, additionally you can do that too I see no problem with that.
No offense, but this is incredibly narrow-minded, yes I expect a happy ending that's what we fight for in those games if you want to 'include' an ending like this then it should be a dual path good or bad. I think the day of 'bad endings only' has been over for a while, now, games are adapted to include moral decisions with consequences allowing for multiple paths but generally two, good and bad. This game is literally missing an entire side of development in favor of a negative ending.
I'd like to add that it isn't a 'bad' ending it is a 'negative' ending. The ending was well done even if I didn't like it.
