chose to do it with Rogue too, but she got killed by smasher. leaves to that still unsatisfying space ending. where you wake up next to your loved one, but then leave for space.
Good evening, everyone. Nexus here, for N54 News today. We have had lots of great discussions so far, many points shown from either side. Now it's time to summarize all that. As usual, don't forget to chime in if you think we forgot something, or we misinterpreted something. This segment is sponsored by Kiroshi Opticals. "Kiroshi Opticals, we got our eye on you!"
Here's a link to the previous posts.
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...lert-about-the-endings.11041109/post-12396899 https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...lert-about-the-endings.11041109/post-12402323
One point repeatedly brought up is that CDPR is currently focusing on bugfixing and performance improvement for last-gen consoles, so we should not expect any news on DLC yet. Also, around the Net people have been noticing chooms praising the story and focusing more on the bugs and performance, which could shadow the insatisfaction people are currently having with the story so far. Despite that, we will keep covering the issue and keeping you appraised!
People also heavily complain about choices not mattering, since CDPR explicitly promised an interactive world in which our choices would matter, even altering the main quest itself, something CDPR marketed as "something never done before".
Another point repeatedly brought up were the plot holes that, according to some, were created exclusively to force the plot into what the writers wanted.
Players are also suggesting an ending where V and Johnny could coexists peacefully, with no one overriding each other.
At last, the consensus people appear to be gravitating towards is to not alter the current endings themselves, but add more endings (preferably happy), as well as tweaking the current endings to allow players to enjoy the promised open-world setting.
We've avoided repeating topics as the intention of this is to summarize what has been discussed.
Now, let's check what the users are saying:
@Simuxas says Alt's ending should not have had explicitly talked about the "6 months" nor what precisely what Soulkiller does, and left the question open for player interpretation, and suggests an ending where Alt would clean slate your brain, and send you back to NC to try and seek back your former life.
@Tigrevolution suggests an ending where both V and Johnny coexist on a single body.
@kaz_ds points that V's death wouldn't be much of an issue if at least you got to "experience what you fought for, whether it is family or fame", whereas right now, the endings feel rushed and done in the nick of time
@Retro-_- wonders if CDPR can't say anything about DLC because there were so many suggestions that one of us might "have hit the nail on the head so now they can't say anything because someone has already figured it out"
@AKANexus and @BlackHawkV wonders whether the game is incomplete/rushed and CDPR should've gone with "When it's ready" deadline rather than push the game in time for Christmas
@neocyril points that with the cyberpunk genre, you, as the player/character/reader are nothing but a speck "of dust, irrelevant and changing the world for the better is basically impossible. The best you can count on is to continue living in some fucked up way.", pointing out the current endings are not bad or good, but bittersweet.
@TheGrandSage and @BlackHawkV point out that genres don't define the story. As they put, "just because something 'is' doesn't mean it always has to be that way."
@Kikinho says that for many people this is the first contact with the cyberpunk universe, and "that it can be expected that not everyone will be so understanding towards the ends. Even if the ends were influenced by the creator of the IP. You need to have at least 1 ending that will please the average consumer. ", and @BlackHawkV suggests most people playing CP2077 are not familiar with the genre since the genre is not popular precisely because "be it a book a movie or a game it is quite dark and as you say that the best one could hope for usually is a bittersweet conclusion"
@Simuxas compares CP2077 to Blade Runner (1982), in which the ending is not dark or gritty, instead ending "with the question on who main protagonist really is after his journey. It let's viewers themselves to decide who he really was. This could have been perfectly adapted to at least one ending if you wanted that mysterious ending. ". @Master_Plot notes Ghost in the Shell also ends with Kusanagi surviving at the end.
@AKANexus quotes three members of the development team whose statements don't match what we currently have.
@RayBotty and @kaz_ds wonder why if Johnny's construct could replace V's brain with nanites trying to "repair" it, couldn't Ctrl+V's extracted construct's nanites repair the damage caused by Johnny's construct, and @GottMonsanto agrees, saying that even in 2020 we already have immunosuppressants for implants and transplants, so they would likely have something equivalent developed by then
@fatal1ty3910 argues that the genre does not define its content and exposes their argument, calling the current game Doomer 2077. They also compare the game to the movie Upgrade (2018), yet points out that, although representing a similar situation, Cyberpunk 2077 is a videogame, "in which the player's involvement and promise of choice and agency are a key part of the whole formula".
@Buckadoz wonders whether "at some point, it may have been planned to be able to get to help in time to rip out Johnny without side effects. ", and that "The realistic reason this was probably canned was time restraints"
@MandyZGaming notes some more issues with the current endings. Among them they point out the game needs to allow V to live their remaining life on the open-world setting, letting the player to explore romances and live with the consequences of their choices. They also note the choices taken during the course of the main mission are "meaningless without a life after the ending" as well as during the story.
@Cologan states that Alt blatantly answers the V/Ctrl+V conundrum and says this should have been left open to the players themselves to think about, and personally states that the moment V dies, Ctrl+V, being a separate new entity, the discussion is over.
@Da0827 suggests that copying V's engram, which has been partly rewritten, will be missing the rewritten pieces, Ctrl+V is not the same as original V. They also point that, in spite of the cyberpunk genre usually ending with bad endings, V giving their body to Johnny to have a second chance to finally destroy Arasaka and get his revenge for Alt is a happy ending for Johnny, just not for V. @Simuxas agrees saying that while V, who fought for survival dies in all 7 endings, while "Johnny, who blew up a tower with a nuclear device, killing who knows how many innocent people in there, get's a second chance to live"
@Buckadoz states the game presents the V/Ctrl+V conumdrum as "any copy is just a copy, the original is still boned", and while Alt explicitly points that out, the rest of the game treats Ctrl+V as a perfect flawless copy with no consequences.
@Nekatinyz says that despite people liking or not bad endings, in "in our mind and heart, we want a good ending to finish a beautiful game, with a beautiful end, that's the reason we play games again and again.
@neocyril is surprised on how much people are pissed and dissatisfied with the endings, and with the "fact that there was a possibility that CDPR might take that [only "bad" endings] route", and says CDPR might've gone wrong by telling a good story using a bad medium, an RPG, where player agency is paramount.
@Nekatinyz states that the story shouldn't've given hints to save the character if they had no plans to do so, turning the whole mid-game meaningless.
@Kikinho says, once again, that the issue about the endings is that they killed the game's replayability, while @NChabb expands on the notion saying "the lack of post-game save means you're stuck with an everlasting random condition OLD RELIC MALFUNCTION triggering from time to time, reminding you of the curse that slowly kills you", while "you're stuck in an endless narrative loop where you can't save yourself because neither the game nor the story will allow it"
@TheSaintOne says that adding a new ending to the current story just because people are not satisfied with the current endings would feel artificial, and compares Cyberpunk 2077 story to an already written book, where the author cannot change what has already been written
@Kikinho notes CDPR has stated they realize they have lost the trust of their player base, and are going to do everything to earn it back, and suggests this thread as a means of communication with CDPR. @GreyRaconteur adds that if they are, indeed working on regaining our trust, they'll at least consider what we've been discussing for over 2000 posts
@MandyZGaming notes that, contrary to a book, where you are a passive reader, on an RPG you are right in the story, and what CDPR provided us as an RPG is simply not satisfying. And calls Johnny Johnny Silverass
@BlackHawkV notes that we were promised "an immersive game where our choices mattered and the outcome was influenced by them" and @kaz_ds extends on that notion stating what we currently have are meaningless choices that have no impact and a story that ends on a credits roll
@Simuxas and @AdamTaylor suggests the endings should've been left open and ambiguous for each player to muse over, rather than explicitly state what is going on, just like the Blade Runner game
@kaz_ds and @Retro-_- state one of the main issues with the endings is that they are crude, unfinished and cheap, and that "we don't get to experience much of anything on the journey, we just navigate it ". @Retro-_- adds that even the romances are bad written, as "the way romances build over the game culminate in a short sex scene and then just fade from the story with no 'I love you' or acknowledgement [...] progress like an integral game mechanic and finish like a cheap achievement" [15G points, to be precise.], even though the relationships felt organic in a way.
@BGM45 points out the thread is filled with different opinions, yet all "under the same umbrella notion of being unsatisfied with the endings shows that it's not just someone's subjective problem, but a systemic problem with the game itself ". We have people who want more and meaningful choices. "people who want deeper explorations of themes barely touched upon yet fundamental for some endings". People who want new and/or happy endings.
@dunwich42 states the "punk" part of cyberpunk is represented well enough, since "You have to accept you have to change, because the world won't let you be whoever you want to be., you die every second of your life and become better and stronger for it."
@Motsie posts some suggestions on how CDPR could tackle the endings with DLCs
@LordSareth cites many quests, gigs and side jobs V is part of that end in "good endings" for everyone, yet V is denied a good ending themselves
@BGM45 notes the game always pushes you for time, having V have strokes every 5 minutes and pushing the player to hurry up and try to save themselves, while most of the quests have a "wait for X" step
@amsquared says as long as Ctrl+V was created by Alt, they're the same, while copies made with the Soulkiller are imperfect due to it being a prototype. They also suggest a couple more endings that CDPR could use to better improve what we currently have now
@Simuxas suggests an ending where V sides with Yorinobu
@fatal1ty3910 argues that Ctrl+V is not a copy of original V, but a transfer, as Soulkiller would redirect your brain eletric impulses to another brain, essentially not copying, but moving it around.
@Notserious80 wonders if the game seems so much gutted out because they already planned what we feel is missing as DLC
@Enerccio points out that based on the explanation that V's consciousness will be rejected because the Relic has changed V's DNA enough to perceive it as a foreign body, all V would have to do to survive would be something akin to taking steroids, something that transplantees already are familiar with in 2020
@BGM45 notes Witcher 3's Blood & Wine turned out way different from what they initially planned, so it's not farfetched to expect CDPR to change their initial ideas on DLCs, and wonders, along @MeinChurro whether CDPR already has an overarching plot already mapped out, or they are "play[ing] 4D chess with the plot, withholding information and manipulating the audience"
@amsquared recalls 2032's Soulkiller and what it actually does, and how it compares to 2077 one.
@EngryEngineer is fine with all endings being bittersweet, but disagrees with the lack of choices
@Cyber.D.G. notes that the Cyberpunk 2077 official Twitter account mentioned "Cyberpunk 2077 - the ROLE-PLAYING GAME of the dark future." up until June 2019, when it read "Cyberpunk 2077 - an open world, ACTION-ADVENTURE STORY developed by. " from then on, but everywhere else the game is listed with an "RPG" or "Role-playing" tag
@Motsie suggests the time V spends in the cyberspace is infinitely faster than outside time, similarly to Star Trek's the Next Generation Episode "The Inner Light" in which Cpt. Picard gets his mind invaded by an Kataan probe and experiences a full life time in what amounts to about 15 minutes in real life, meaning that for V, while they spend time in cyberspace, their body and brain experience what would amount to a near-death experience, like those one would have during emergencies and mishaps during surgeries.
@amsquared expands on the notion that our consciousness are merely brain cells and electric signals by quoting a line said by EDI, an artificial lifeform, from Mass Effect, where she asks Shepard "Are we more than our thoughts"?
@cooperblack states that having at least one good ending is not a prerequisite for RPGs, citing Planescape Torment and Disco Elysium as examples, while @BGM45 reminds us that there is a good ending in Disco Elysium, based on the player's choices
Moy russkiy yazik neskolka plokha, but @BGM45 and @Cyber.D.G. stated they enjoyed the russian translation of the game due to the immersion the actors lines provide by using local/slavic mannerisms and expressions.
@Simuxas notes the game was supposed to have a subway rail system, instead what we got was a on-rails game
@amsquared provides us with more insight on their definition of consciousness [personally I haven't understood half of what they wrote, I'm a programmer, not a psychiatrist, but it's worth reading if you are familiar with stuff like that]
@Motsie wonders whether the writers just used the Soulkiller as a plot-device or they actually intended players to wonder about its meaning, purpose and usage
@Buckadoz expands on the notion that Ctrl+V is a copy even if Ctrl+V doesn't know it, comparing the situation to a file copying system, in which "moving" data is actually copying data and destroying the original from its original location
@neocyril blatantly hijacked the thread to advertise their topic. jokes aside, they have created a new topic where they ask people to say what they actually liked and what they would like to change both in relation to the gameplay as well as the story. You can check it here.
@BGM45 reminds us that if Bethesda retconned Fallout 3, and Bioware added a new ending to Mass Effect 3, we can only wait and expect what CDPR could come up with
@AKANexus points two more game descriptions on GOG.com that reveal we haven't been given what was promised.
@MeinChurro et al agree that CDPR might've pulled the 'bait and switch' tactic, as the game was not ready to be published and still meet the expectations provided
@amsquared says that for everone outside of the V/Ctrl+V situation, there wouldn't be any difference, and if everyone is treating Johnny's construct as himself, they might as well consider Ctrl+V a full fledged individual. They also state the story might not have been about survival originally, but was made about survival, and states "Survival stories where the hero doesn't survive have been rare since the dawn of the printing press (until recent RPGs, apparently) for good reason. Nobody wants them. "
@GreyRaconteur considers the religious and esoteric characteristics of the "what is a soul" question, and argues the more they think and try to find a decisive answer from what the game provides, the farther they are from it
@mouser9169 states the game, on the character menu, i.e. external from the game universe, explicitly states "Evelyn Parker, Anders Helman, Arasaka - you'll have to track down every lead to make it through this alive.", yet we all know that is a blatant lie. They also say "The game actually punishes you for focusing on the main quest", for usually open-world games let you go back and finish the side content you skipped. yet in CP2077 you can only go back, and you already know what is going to inevitably happen. "As a player, you're much better off ignoring the main quest and working on the side stories in blissful ignorance". At last, they also say the replayability has been compromised due to the lack of different paths and choices, and wonders if we aren't being played for the way V was played for.
@BGM45 says CDPR has grown from an AA-studio to a large game development, yet they "like CDPR themselves have forgotten where they've started. if you remember that post on reddit from presumably an ex-employee, there is a sentence there about how the management kept repeating that they are making "the game of the century". if nothing else out of that whole post, []they] believe this sentiment. pair this unhealthy sense of self-grandiosity with lackluster management and meddling from higher-ups we heard about post-TW3, and you get a recipe for disaster."
@Motsie comments about the spiritual and mystic elements of the game, such as the tarot cards, and that their meaning shouldn't be discounted.
@Miles_White points out their experience with the cyberpunk genre was Deus Ex and Ghost in the Shell, and in neither the protagonist need to die.
@Buckadoz says they're not angry with Johnny, specifically, instead they hate what the chip is doing to you
@AKANexus points out "Jackie just shoves the Relic on our slot, we don't even get a say whether we want that chip or not"
@MandyZGaming recalls our choices aren't important, and that the only character "allowed" to have a "good ending" is Silverhand because he's played by Keanu Reeves
@Simuxas made laugh by saying "If [they]'d want to think about futility of life, [they]'d run in the nearest mall and lick a thing or two. That come real fkn fast. Then again, would be my choice" [for real, I laughed for half a minute reading this...]
@BGM45, @Simuxas, @MandyZGaming and @AKANexus point how they expected Cyberpunk 2077 to be a form of escapism from the issues of real life, mainly the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, and ended up just even more depressed
@Cyber.D.G. wonders if the multiplayer mode will happen, based on the issues with the release state of the game
Aaaaaand that's what we have for now, chooms! Stay tuned for more on our next summary of "About the Endings!". Have good night, everyone!
Here's a link to the previous posts.
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...lert-about-the-endings.11041109/post-12396899 https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...lert-about-the-endings.11041109/post-12402323
One point repeatedly brought up is that CDPR is currently focusing on bugfixing and performance improvement for last-gen consoles, so we should not expect any news on DLC yet. Also, around the Net people have been noticing chooms praising the story and focusing more on the bugs and performance, which could shadow the insatisfaction people are currently having with the story so far. Despite that, we will keep covering the issue and keeping you appraised!
People also heavily complain about choices not mattering, since CDPR explicitly promised an interactive world in which our choices would matter, even altering the main quest itself, something CDPR marketed as "something never done before".
Another point repeatedly brought up were the plot holes that, according to some, were created exclusively to force the plot into what the writers wanted.
Players are also suggesting an ending where V and Johnny could coexists peacefully, with no one overriding each other.
At last, the consensus people appear to be gravitating towards is to not alter the current endings themselves, but add more endings (preferably happy), as well as tweaking the current endings to allow players to enjoy the promised open-world setting.
We've avoided repeating topics as the intention of this is to summarize what has been discussed.
Now, let's check what the users are saying:
@Simuxas says Alt's ending should not have had explicitly talked about the "6 months" nor what precisely what Soulkiller does, and left the question open for player interpretation, and suggests an ending where Alt would clean slate your brain, and send you back to NC to try and seek back your former life.
@Tigrevolution suggests an ending where both V and Johnny coexist on a single body.
@kaz_ds points that V's death wouldn't be much of an issue if at least you got to "experience what you fought for, whether it is family or fame", whereas right now, the endings feel rushed and done in the nick of time
@Retro-_- wonders if CDPR can't say anything about DLC because there were so many suggestions that one of us might "have hit the nail on the head so now they can't say anything because someone has already figured it out"
@AKANexus and @BlackHawkV wonders whether the game is incomplete/rushed and CDPR should've gone with "When it's ready" deadline rather than push the game in time for Christmas
@neocyril points that with the cyberpunk genre, you, as the player/character/reader are nothing but a speck "of dust, irrelevant and changing the world for the better is basically impossible. The best you can count on is to continue living in some fucked up way.", pointing out the current endings are not bad or good, but bittersweet.
@TheGrandSage and @BlackHawkV point out that genres don't define the story. As they put, "just because something 'is' doesn't mean it always has to be that way."
@Kikinho says that for many people this is the first contact with the cyberpunk universe, and "that it can be expected that not everyone will be so understanding towards the ends. Even if the ends were influenced by the creator of the IP. You need to have at least 1 ending that will please the average consumer. ", and @BlackHawkV suggests most people playing CP2077 are not familiar with the genre since the genre is not popular precisely because "be it a book a movie or a game it is quite dark and as you say that the best one could hope for usually is a bittersweet conclusion"
@Simuxas compares CP2077 to Blade Runner (1982), in which the ending is not dark or gritty, instead ending "with the question on who main protagonist really is after his journey. It let's viewers themselves to decide who he really was. This could have been perfectly adapted to at least one ending if you wanted that mysterious ending. ". @Master_Plot notes Ghost in the Shell also ends with Kusanagi surviving at the end.
@AKANexus quotes three members of the development team whose statements don't match what we currently have.
@RayBotty and @kaz_ds wonder why if Johnny's construct could replace V's brain with nanites trying to "repair" it, couldn't Ctrl+V's extracted construct's nanites repair the damage caused by Johnny's construct, and @GottMonsanto agrees, saying that even in 2020 we already have immunosuppressants for implants and transplants, so they would likely have something equivalent developed by then
@fatal1ty3910 argues that the genre does not define its content and exposes their argument, calling the current game Doomer 2077. They also compare the game to the movie Upgrade (2018), yet points out that, although representing a similar situation, Cyberpunk 2077 is a videogame, "in which the player's involvement and promise of choice and agency are a key part of the whole formula".
@Buckadoz wonders whether "at some point, it may have been planned to be able to get to help in time to rip out Johnny without side effects. ", and that "The realistic reason this was probably canned was time restraints"
@MandyZGaming notes some more issues with the current endings. Among them they point out the game needs to allow V to live their remaining life on the open-world setting, letting the player to explore romances and live with the consequences of their choices. They also note the choices taken during the course of the main mission are "meaningless without a life after the ending" as well as during the story.
@Cologan states that Alt blatantly answers the V/Ctrl+V conundrum and says this should have been left open to the players themselves to think about, and personally states that the moment V dies, Ctrl+V, being a separate new entity, the discussion is over.
@Da0827 suggests that copying V's engram, which has been partly rewritten, will be missing the rewritten pieces, Ctrl+V is not the same as original V. They also point that, in spite of the cyberpunk genre usually ending with bad endings, V giving their body to Johnny to have a second chance to finally destroy Arasaka and get his revenge for Alt is a happy ending for Johnny, just not for V. @Simuxas agrees saying that while V, who fought for survival dies in all 7 endings, while "Johnny, who blew up a tower with a nuclear device, killing who knows how many innocent people in there, get's a second chance to live"
@Buckadoz states the game presents the V/Ctrl+V conumdrum as "any copy is just a copy, the original is still boned", and while Alt explicitly points that out, the rest of the game treats Ctrl+V as a perfect flawless copy with no consequences.
@Nekatinyz says that despite people liking or not bad endings, in "in our mind and heart, we want a good ending to finish a beautiful game, with a beautiful end, that's the reason we play games again and again.
@neocyril is surprised on how much people are pissed and dissatisfied with the endings, and with the "fact that there was a possibility that CDPR might take that [only "bad" endings] route", and says CDPR might've gone wrong by telling a good story using a bad medium, an RPG, where player agency is paramount.
@Nekatinyz states that the story shouldn't've given hints to save the character if they had no plans to do so, turning the whole mid-game meaningless.
@Kikinho says, once again, that the issue about the endings is that they killed the game's replayability, while @NChabb expands on the notion saying "the lack of post-game save means you're stuck with an everlasting random condition OLD RELIC MALFUNCTION triggering from time to time, reminding you of the curse that slowly kills you", while "you're stuck in an endless narrative loop where you can't save yourself because neither the game nor the story will allow it"
@TheSaintOne says that adding a new ending to the current story just because people are not satisfied with the current endings would feel artificial, and compares Cyberpunk 2077 story to an already written book, where the author cannot change what has already been written
@Kikinho notes CDPR has stated they realize they have lost the trust of their player base, and are going to do everything to earn it back, and suggests this thread as a means of communication with CDPR. @GreyRaconteur adds that if they are, indeed working on regaining our trust, they'll at least consider what we've been discussing for over 2000 posts
@MandyZGaming notes that, contrary to a book, where you are a passive reader, on an RPG you are right in the story, and what CDPR provided us as an RPG is simply not satisfying. And calls Johnny Johnny Silverass
@BlackHawkV notes that we were promised "an immersive game where our choices mattered and the outcome was influenced by them" and @kaz_ds extends on that notion stating what we currently have are meaningless choices that have no impact and a story that ends on a credits roll
@Simuxas and @AdamTaylor suggests the endings should've been left open and ambiguous for each player to muse over, rather than explicitly state what is going on, just like the Blade Runner game
@kaz_ds and @Retro-_- state one of the main issues with the endings is that they are crude, unfinished and cheap, and that "we don't get to experience much of anything on the journey, we just navigate it ". @Retro-_- adds that even the romances are bad written, as "the way romances build over the game culminate in a short sex scene and then just fade from the story with no 'I love you' or acknowledgement [...] progress like an integral game mechanic and finish like a cheap achievement" [15G points, to be precise.], even though the relationships felt organic in a way.
@BGM45 points out the thread is filled with different opinions, yet all "under the same umbrella notion of being unsatisfied with the endings shows that it's not just someone's subjective problem, but a systemic problem with the game itself ". We have people who want more and meaningful choices. "people who want deeper explorations of themes barely touched upon yet fundamental for some endings". People who want new and/or happy endings.
@dunwich42 states the "punk" part of cyberpunk is represented well enough, since "You have to accept you have to change, because the world won't let you be whoever you want to be., you die every second of your life and become better and stronger for it."
@Motsie posts some suggestions on how CDPR could tackle the endings with DLCs
@LordSareth cites many quests, gigs and side jobs V is part of that end in "good endings" for everyone, yet V is denied a good ending themselves
@BGM45 notes the game always pushes you for time, having V have strokes every 5 minutes and pushing the player to hurry up and try to save themselves, while most of the quests have a "wait for X" step
@amsquared says as long as Ctrl+V was created by Alt, they're the same, while copies made with the Soulkiller are imperfect due to it being a prototype. They also suggest a couple more endings that CDPR could use to better improve what we currently have now
@Simuxas suggests an ending where V sides with Yorinobu
@fatal1ty3910 argues that Ctrl+V is not a copy of original V, but a transfer, as Soulkiller would redirect your brain eletric impulses to another brain, essentially not copying, but moving it around.
@Notserious80 wonders if the game seems so much gutted out because they already planned what we feel is missing as DLC
@Enerccio points out that based on the explanation that V's consciousness will be rejected because the Relic has changed V's DNA enough to perceive it as a foreign body, all V would have to do to survive would be something akin to taking steroids, something that transplantees already are familiar with in 2020
@BGM45 notes Witcher 3's Blood & Wine turned out way different from what they initially planned, so it's not farfetched to expect CDPR to change their initial ideas on DLCs, and wonders, along @MeinChurro whether CDPR already has an overarching plot already mapped out, or they are "play[ing] 4D chess with the plot, withholding information and manipulating the audience"
@amsquared recalls 2032's Soulkiller and what it actually does, and how it compares to 2077 one.
@EngryEngineer is fine with all endings being bittersweet, but disagrees with the lack of choices
@Cyber.D.G. notes that the Cyberpunk 2077 official Twitter account mentioned "Cyberpunk 2077 - the ROLE-PLAYING GAME of the dark future." up until June 2019, when it read "Cyberpunk 2077 - an open world, ACTION-ADVENTURE STORY developed by. " from then on, but everywhere else the game is listed with an "RPG" or "Role-playing" tag
@Motsie suggests the time V spends in the cyberspace is infinitely faster than outside time, similarly to Star Trek's the Next Generation Episode "The Inner Light" in which Cpt. Picard gets his mind invaded by an Kataan probe and experiences a full life time in what amounts to about 15 minutes in real life, meaning that for V, while they spend time in cyberspace, their body and brain experience what would amount to a near-death experience, like those one would have during emergencies and mishaps during surgeries.
@amsquared expands on the notion that our consciousness are merely brain cells and electric signals by quoting a line said by EDI, an artificial lifeform, from Mass Effect, where she asks Shepard "Are we more than our thoughts"?
@cooperblack states that having at least one good ending is not a prerequisite for RPGs, citing Planescape Torment and Disco Elysium as examples, while @BGM45 reminds us that there is a good ending in Disco Elysium, based on the player's choices
Moy russkiy yazik neskolka plokha, but @BGM45 and @Cyber.D.G. stated they enjoyed the russian translation of the game due to the immersion the actors lines provide by using local/slavic mannerisms and expressions.
@Simuxas notes the game was supposed to have a subway rail system, instead what we got was a on-rails game
@amsquared provides us with more insight on their definition of consciousness [personally I haven't understood half of what they wrote, I'm a programmer, not a psychiatrist, but it's worth reading if you are familiar with stuff like that]
@Motsie wonders whether the writers just used the Soulkiller as a plot-device or they actually intended players to wonder about its meaning, purpose and usage
@Buckadoz expands on the notion that Ctrl+V is a copy even if Ctrl+V doesn't know it, comparing the situation to a file copying system, in which "moving" data is actually copying data and destroying the original from its original location
@neocyril blatantly hijacked the thread to advertise their topic. jokes aside, they have created a new topic where they ask people to say what they actually liked and what they would like to change both in relation to the gameplay as well as the story. You can check it here.
@BGM45 reminds us that if Bethesda retconned Fallout 3, and Bioware added a new ending to Mass Effect 3, we can only wait and expect what CDPR could come up with
@AKANexus points two more game descriptions on GOG.com that reveal we haven't been given what was promised.
@MeinChurro et al agree that CDPR might've pulled the 'bait and switch' tactic, as the game was not ready to be published and still meet the expectations provided
@amsquared says that for everone outside of the V/Ctrl+V situation, there wouldn't be any difference, and if everyone is treating Johnny's construct as himself, they might as well consider Ctrl+V a full fledged individual. They also state the story might not have been about survival originally, but was made about survival, and states "Survival stories where the hero doesn't survive have been rare since the dawn of the printing press (until recent RPGs, apparently) for good reason. Nobody wants them. "
@GreyRaconteur considers the religious and esoteric characteristics of the "what is a soul" question, and argues the more they think and try to find a decisive answer from what the game provides, the farther they are from it
@mouser9169 states the game, on the character menu, i.e. external from the game universe, explicitly states "Evelyn Parker, Anders Helman, Arasaka - you'll have to track down every lead to make it through this alive.", yet we all know that is a blatant lie. They also say "The game actually punishes you for focusing on the main quest", for usually open-world games let you go back and finish the side content you skipped. yet in CP2077 you can only go back, and you already know what is going to inevitably happen. "As a player, you're much better off ignoring the main quest and working on the side stories in blissful ignorance". At last, they also say the replayability has been compromised due to the lack of different paths and choices, and wonders if we aren't being played for the way V was played for.
@BGM45 says CDPR has grown from an AA-studio to a large game development, yet they "like CDPR themselves have forgotten where they've started. if you remember that post on reddit from presumably an ex-employee, there is a sentence there about how the management kept repeating that they are making "the game of the century". if nothing else out of that whole post, []they] believe this sentiment. pair this unhealthy sense of self-grandiosity with lackluster management and meddling from higher-ups we heard about post-TW3, and you get a recipe for disaster."
@Motsie comments about the spiritual and mystic elements of the game, such as the tarot cards, and that their meaning shouldn't be discounted.
@Miles_White points out their experience with the cyberpunk genre was Deus Ex and Ghost in the Shell, and in neither the protagonist need to die.
@Buckadoz says they're not angry with Johnny, specifically, instead they hate what the chip is doing to you
@AKANexus points out "Jackie just shoves the Relic on our slot, we don't even get a say whether we want that chip or not"
@MandyZGaming recalls our choices aren't important, and that the only character "allowed" to have a "good ending" is Silverhand because he's played by Keanu Reeves
@Simuxas made laugh by saying "If [they]'d want to think about futility of life, [they]'d run in the nearest mall and lick a thing or two. That come real fkn fast. Then again, would be my choice" [for real, I laughed for half a minute reading this...]
@BGM45, @Simuxas, @MandyZGaming and @AKANexus point how they expected Cyberpunk 2077 to be a form of escapism from the issues of real life, mainly the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, and ended up just even more depressed
@Cyber.D.G. wonders if the multiplayer mode will happen, based on the issues with the release state of the game
Aaaaaand that's what we have for now, chooms! Stay tuned for more on our next summary of "About the Endings!". Have good night, everyone!
Kiroshi Opticals
We got our eye on you!
We got our eye on you!
Last edited:
That could have been one of the bittersweet endings, you live but your love interest probably leaves you. V stays in the city, love interest abandons you, V lives.
That space casino gig is so over the top it's fkn stupid, there was no need for it.
Yeah.. wouldn't the millions made in night city pay for that corporate level healthcare? Really nonsensical writing there.
Nah V would rather spend it on a dozen supercars, or whatever, they get to drive for 2 days.
As a book or a movie, I would watch it or read it numerous times. As a game where choice is supposed to matter but you don't find out until the end of the game that it doesn't, That's the heart of the issue for me. You work the entire game to try to survive, then no matter what you do, no matter how you played or how you chose to act, it doesn't matter.
Its not the fact that you died that gets me for the most part, its that i did not expect to die. I played the game, did what was asked and did the side missions. I expected to live, not as a hero or riding off into the sunset kind of ending but more of an ending where your free of Johnny and you step back into the world to keep on grinding. Or head out with the nomads, or whatever ending you decided on. Would I be ok with this if I missed an important detail or side quest? Yes, instant replayability in that. A more oh crap what did I miss kind of moment, would make me listen harder, look deeper and think more about my choices. That is what gets me the most about it.
Its not the fact that you died that gets me for the most part, its that i did not expect to die. I played the game, did what was asked and did the side missions. I expected to live, not as a hero or riding off into the sunset kind of ending but more of an ending where your free of Johnny and you step back into the world to keep on grinding. Or head out with the nomads, or whatever ending you decided on. Would I be ok with this if I missed an important detail or side quest? Yes, instant replayability in that. A more oh crap what did I miss kind of moment, would make me listen harder, look deeper and think more about my choices. That is what gets me the most about it.
Except, the game doesn't really portray it this way. You work for an end goal that never materializes. It's not like RDR2, where you know it's terminal, where you accept it. The opposite in fact. The player (and V) is strung along the entire story, only to get told at the very end "nope lol
Post automatically merged:
They should, if they want to continue the franchise. The bugs are taking the spotlight though. My YouTube recommended is filled with meme videos about the bugs. I don't think I've seen anything on the endings yet, unfortunately.
Post automatically merged:
Like others were speculating earlier. It looks like Johnny wasn't going to be as important, until Keanu Reeves was on board. Also, like I said, they tried to have their cake and eat it too. They had already marketed this game a certain way, they couldn't just COMPLETELY scrap their original plans with V.
Yeah I get what you mean but they fr did V super dirty regardless. They literally couldn't be bothered to have ONE not so bleak ending in an RPG. It's just crazy to me that they thought these endings were a good way to add replayability.
yep, rather stay with your love for those 6 months, except that trip to space lets you fully recover and you can live longer with your love after.
It's really unforgiveable that they not only include a textbook abuse scene with Johnny (he even asks for a cigarette).. they mix in suicide. What was CDPR actually thinking? Just trying to live on the edge? This is completely unforgiveable.
Keep in mind this is a first person RPG, where the player gets personally involved in the story for tens upon tens of hours.. which makes it even worse.
I wouldn't say stay with the lover. I say no needed for 6 months at all. You attacked Arasaka, puleld through, Johnny goes with Alt, V survives goes back to the city, bam. Unless there will continuation in DLC.
More likely it would be filled with hackers that make the game unplayable (if it wasn't already). At least on PC. Just like GTA Online, or Red Dead Online.
My guess is that all the content dlc will be some big side mission, because doing it after the end, you'd have to write it for both Johnny and V, and what if you chose suicide? Just too many variables for a after game dlc. So my guess all the dlc will be mid game and will have zero to no effect on the ending, except maybe another voice mail.
But no to playing as someone else. I don't even like playing as Johnny since every time you do, you lose control over your character and are railroaded into the devs story. It's like a GM deciding he doesn't like the way you're playing a PnP RPG and taking your character away and forcing them to act the way they want you to act.
But doing that in a DLC, just hell no.
Yeah but who do you write it for? Johnny or V? Rogue or Panam or Arasaka? And is Judy with you or not? After ending DLCs for multiple ending games just either piss off part of your fan base because they ignored all your choices, or piss off all your fan base because they tend to be a chaotic jumble that tries to please everyone, and pleases no one.
Honestly my favorite option is a DLC mid-game that unlocks a side story that could add on a new ending without affecting the old ones. Like right now you can play the game without completing Panam's sidequests however it will lock you out of her factions ending. So like you help out certain people and unlock a new ending. Someone mentioned Biotechnica earlier and that could be a cool addition.
just read online that CDPR already lost 1 billion dollars already because of their ridicoulous game. Maybe we have a chance, seeing as they may want to try get money back in.
Not exactly what it said. Basically what it's saying is that the stock dropped to the point that if they sold right now they'd loose, collectively, about a billion dollars. Except only idiots would sell right now, if they are smart, they're buying from the idiots who are selling, looking forward to the fact that CDPR can redeem themselves, and also make money off the multiplayer.
It also makes no mention of the dividends that CDPR will pay out to their stockholders, and concidering how many copies were sold, I would expect dividends to be pretty decent..