Ladies and Gentlement welcome back to another Summary Post. My name is Nexus and you are listening to N54! Today we will be looking at what people are talking about Cyberpunk endings and plot from the page 91 up to 110. A reminder that whatever has already been discussed will most likely not feature no new editions of the topic.
Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3
This segment is sponsored by Biotechnica. Biotechnica: Adapting You to the Future
So far most of the people here understand and agree one of the biggest issues with Cyberpunk 2077 is the unimportance of any choice we make. People are asking for branching stories and meaningful endings. Each user with their different and equally valid argument, yet all of them converging on the same agreement. Your choices don't matter.
People are also interested on a way to save V, if not just to allow them to explore Night City as the V they created and related to, calling a "load your last auto-save to go to open-world" lazy writing and lack of interest. Or maybe DLC's that make use of the 6 months-time frame given to V to allow them to cure their situation and enjoy their happy ending.
Also, it's noteworthy people are indeed losing trust in CDPR. They feel betrayed and lied to. Not just because the game didn't deliver what was dutifully promised, but the plot itself lies to the player as they play, some say. There are some that claimed they've uninstalled and/or are not playing the game until CDPR addresses what they call "bad writing"/"bad plot".
In the end, almost everyone on this thread, whether they agree with the need of a happy ending or not, wishes the choices made during the game actually meant something.
Now, let's see what the users are saying:
@MandyZGaming replies to @AKANexus' rant saying that the game would never forewarn you that you will not survive, otherwise lots of people would not even want to play.
@Motsie notes they haven't announced what the DLC will be about, unlike what they did in Witcher 3, which was explained even before the game came out, so that could mean the DLC can go anywhere
@Anrix1 says they "don't care how hard the good ending is to get, [they] just want it to be possible"
@BGM45 cites Enderal, a huge total conversion mod for Skyrim in which 1 year after the mod was released they creators added a new ending in the form of a mid-game DLC
@amsquared cites Blade Runner, where Deckard survives; Deus Ex, where Jensen CAN survive, depending on the player's choices; Shadowrun Hong Kong where your character CAN die, but not necessarily, while @Rawls notes Deckard's love interest is dying, and, should Deckard be a replicant, so will he. He also praises the way the game forces you to decide how to proceed knowing death is coming soon is very interesting to him, as it's not something videogames usually do.
@amsquared finishes off saying you "spend 3/4 of the game doing everything in our power to save her, and she dies. That's not deep writing, it's lazy writing." They add "It's very obvious what happened here. CDPR wants a specific ending[...], most likely to make writing a sequel somewhere down the line easier - and they found a way to railroad us into it no matter what. [They]'d be fine with that if the game wasn't sold as an RPG where player choice matters. "
@Notserious80 mentions there's a difference between immortality and giving up your life for nothing. They state getting V killed solves nothing, and even then, you can't choose not to go down that way, as the choice is made for you. They end wondering whether they forced the dying endings to facilitate a sequel.
@oumajgad notes BioDyne [I'm assuming they mean Biotechnica, as BioDyne went bankrupt in 2006, might be mistaken] has developer nanites that can cure MS. These nanites could be used to fix V, and voilá, DLC materia, as they put it.
@amsquared says the plot is actually well written. As they put, writing, for them, "is broken down into two parts. There's the outline, literally the things you'd have on an outline, and there's the dialogue and setting, i.e. the things that flesh out all the points of the outline". They, then, proceed to summarize one of what they consider the biggest flaws on the writing, stating "There is no reason for the 6 months arbitrary death clock in the three otherwise decent endings"
@Cologan says the Judy with Nomad ending looks like it was "weirdly spliced to just pretend to have an ending with her"
@BlackHawkV even goes the full length and states they'd even pay for a DLC if it meant adding an ending where V doesn't die and the player can continue after solving the chip situation. [Some context here: CDRP is known for not selling their DLC, rather offering as content patches for free, as it was the case with Witcher 3]
@Shaamaan and @Simuxas agree that if CDPR would sell a DLC to fix the endings/add new better plot, they would risk losing even more trust than they've already lost
@AKANexus and @Nikola_Nesic both agree the very first character you build on an RPG you relate to, they're the most memorable one, while all the other roleplays with different characters, if you can't change the outcome, will kill any fun or will to replay the game
@tRYSIS3 exemplifies the loss of trust CDPR might face when telling us about their story. They say back then in 2013 they already got extremely excited for Cyberpunk 2077, "even pouring hundreds of hours in the last couple years creating fan art for the game. [They] were looking forward to having multiple playthroughs to experience different play-styles, and paths ", but after getting V killed, they thought making different choices during the plot would change the outcome, yet, as we all know that wasn't the case. They end with "If you consider those two reasons as being true, then you realise that the endings we got are pretty much the result of lazy writing, lack of interest/resources in remaking the side missions without Johnny or creating an ending that might seem counterintuitive (having Johnny stay in your head as if nothing happened). They definitely could have thought of a better way to end the game instead of the gut punch we got, which has left me disappointed if anything after all those years of anticipation."
@tRYSIS3 wonders if it "seems like an easy copout to have V die so they don't have to work on post ending gameplay. "
@djisma69 notes the percentages on the tarot cards mean zilch [I'm positively sure someone mentioned that already, but bear with me... there are over 100 pages for me to remember]
@modni states that for a game in development for 8 years, the main quest was extremely short, the world and its NPCs weren't interactive, the endings are frustrating and rolling back to before you die is what they call "meh"
@Buckadoz states that it is said Soulkiller ""destroys" something crucially important to a person", and yet V has no choice to question that. V cannot choose that whatever it destroys is too much of a great value for them, so the game forces you into accepting Soulkiller, and @Buckadoz acknowledges it as bad writing. They also state the endings and their supposed consequences are simply mean-spirited, leaving only the Panam/Nomads one as the only one that doesn't scream "Fuck you" to your face, consequently devaluating the other endings.
@Retro-_- asks "what is the point of putting a finite timefrane on V's life? It serves no purpose.", they go on saying either CDPR intends on using it as a get-out clause if someone asks for expanded endings, or they intend to use those 6 months as DLC material
@Kikinho says they've even lost interest in doing the side quests after doing the main quest, for the single motivation they currently have now is that doing those quests will mean simply their character will be stronger when going through the last mission, while @Retro-_- decided to stop playing when they called Panam and was greeted with the same four lines of dialogue that you always get when talking to her.
@Kikinho, @AKANexus, @HonestBenny and @Retro-_- all agreed they wanted to get rid of Johnny as fast as they could for various reasons, ranging from viewing Johnny as an abuser to seeing him on V's body betraying Panam to be too much of a heartache.
@Martynxas says Johnny "clearly changes his way by the end of the game", while @AKANexus points that change was too sudden and out of nowhere to be believable.
While @Martynxas states it was V's own fault she stole the chip and now she must face the consequences, whereas @Simuxas rebuts saying V did steal the chip, but it was Jackie who stuck it on V's port when dying.
@Nekatinyz says it wouldn't be right for a man who willingly chose death to out-live someone that is dying for him to survive
@Martynxas argues Silverhand deserved to live, and Alt was an evil AI, while V is just a "person, just as everyone in cyberpunk, and got pretty much same ending as other characters in night City", yet @Simuxas replies stating the story is not about Silverhand, nor the city. It's about V, and adds that they consider "V [getting] gutted for a single mistake, while Johnny gets a second fkn chance for KILLING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE with a nuke." flawed logic.
@Melra wonders if CDPR wouldn't just think of us looking at the story from the "wrong" angle, as some reviewers are stating, and worries if CDPR is pressured to create a new, happy ending, they will do something bland along the lines of "Eh, let's just write something that makes them happy" or would they put some real thought into.
@Simuxas also wonders whether people would have a slither of sympathy for SIlverhand if he weren't voiced by Reeves
@proxyrev suggests an "evil" ending for V, in which they would be (re)instated on Arasaka.
@MeinChurro agrees with @AKANexus on the fact the way Silverhand apparently redempts himself is either poorly written or cut short, making it unbelievable. @MeinChurro even states that Silverhand's redemption could only stem from his sacrifice to save V
@MandyZGaming and @Retro-_- intend on starting the #rapedemotions tag on the social networks
@BGM45 notes "everything that leads to them dying from the chip is actually out of their control". V had no voice, no choice when Yorinobu killed his father; T-Bug got caught; Jackie got injured when the AV's spotted them; the container got damaged during the fall; Jackie shoved the shard on V's head without even thinking; and Dex killed them. As they put, "V is a victim of the circumstances. not innocent, yes, but in no way their transgressions make them deserving of death or less deserving to live than Johnny"
@HonestBenny says the main purpose of having multiple endings is not to have a correct one, only endings that people would prefer and work towards.
@Martynxas's opinion is that it's not just Johnny, "V is not good either. Its just two characters put in fucked up situation", while @BGM45 rebuts stating on a role-playing-game, "V is what you want them to be"
@Retro-_- posts "We paid for a ticket on this journey, only to breakdown halfway through and have the driver go home in a taxi, leaving the rest of us in the middle of bum-fuck nowhere. " [And made me laugh again. Thanks, brodér]
@MeinChurro points out the story is not about V, but about Johnny and CDPR's attempt at writing him a redemption story, instead "What we got feels disjointed; a complete mess when it finally gets to the end", stating Maybe CDPR doesn't know how to write cyberpunk, rather creating a dark story for dark's sake.
@Silairel The game was rigged from the start.
@HonestBenny wants an answer from CDPR because they think the issue is not 1 ending they didn't like (which can happen with fixed stories), instead we got 6 endings copy pasted in between with different cosmetics
@BGM45 Notes CDPR mentioned the main team will be resting until February '21 while the second team patches last gen versions and remaining bugs.
@Buckadoz compares the endings with punishments for missing one or another spot or critical choice during the story
We also lost @kaz_ds, who stated they won't be playing the game again after this fiasco with the endings
@Ramzah says they enjoyed the endings as Claire says the only way to get a drink named after you is by going out with a bang, and that V actually died when Dex shot her, and most likely had lost her "soul". And also says in spite of preferring the current endings, they still see a light at the end of the tunnel, as Panam hints they can find a specialist to help V together
@Kikinho says the romance options with Kerry and RIver are bland to the point they don't even go with you if you take the Nomad ending, while @MandyZGaming notes "River doesn't because he doesn't wanna leave his family, because he thinks he needs to protect them and take care of them."
[Let me say I'm sorry @MeinChurro, I noticed I haven't mentioned your posts about the game pointing you toward saving Johnny, let me rectify that]
@MeinChurro says the game gravitates you towards saving Johnny by making all the other endings undesirable, obviously having the writer's choice superseding the player's choice, which is undesired on an RPG. Johnny deserves no salvation, according to them, because he already had a full life and decided to end his life by his own hands on his own terms, while V still has all her life before her, and has absolutely no choice on how to live anymore. While you are here just for the ride, Johnny, who is a terrorist killed innumerable people, detonated a nuclear warhead on a building in the middle of one of the most populous cities.
They state CDPR pushes the player to saving Johnny because the game's protagonist is Silverhand, not V, neither Night City. They wonder if CDPR shouldn't've gone with the Geralt path, in which you follow the character's story semi-passively, as the story is already pre-determined for you, with some changes here and there.
They say CP2077 was marketed to have dialog lines, agency and character input of Dragon Age Origins level, instead we got lied by CDPR.
@Simuxas points the infamous MacGuffin that allows Saburo to replace his sons mind with his own, yet not save V
@Simuxas also offers some more suggestions on how to fix things up
@Martynxas points that, although the comparison between Mass Effect 3's so called RGB ending the insatisfaction is pretty much silent, but @Simuxas says it's most likely because "more than half of people are not even able to play or finish the game because of the technical issues"
@Da0827 also cites Witcher 3, in which they didn't feel bad for getting a bad ending then, that was part of the game and they messed up, so they started a new game and strived for a better ending. The same doesn't happen in Cyberpunk.
@Melra dearly wishes they would rather have braindances of Johnny's torture, rather than help "a character that for a good portion of the story was abusive towards the main character and is simply a total douche in general"
That's all for tonight, folks! We hope we haven't missed anything important or got anything wrong.
One thing I'd like to point out is that the time this thread took to get to 1000 posts was about 5 times it took to get from 1000 to 2000, so yea, we are growing. On the other side, people are bashing on the same keys many times. To be honest I think went through one whole page with nothing to add to the post, either because there were people bickering, or stating stuff already said, or talking about stuff unrelated to the discussion.
Don't get me wrong, it's fun to talk about random stuff and all (minus the bickering, of course), I'm just stating that we are indeed growing!!!!
Well, we'll see each other soon!!!! Stay safe and happy netrunning!
Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3
This segment is sponsored by Biotechnica. Biotechnica: Adapting You to the Future
So far most of the people here understand and agree one of the biggest issues with Cyberpunk 2077 is the unimportance of any choice we make. People are asking for branching stories and meaningful endings. Each user with their different and equally valid argument, yet all of them converging on the same agreement. Your choices don't matter.
People are also interested on a way to save V, if not just to allow them to explore Night City as the V they created and related to, calling a "load your last auto-save to go to open-world" lazy writing and lack of interest. Or maybe DLC's that make use of the 6 months-time frame given to V to allow them to cure their situation and enjoy their happy ending.
Also, it's noteworthy people are indeed losing trust in CDPR. They feel betrayed and lied to. Not just because the game didn't deliver what was dutifully promised, but the plot itself lies to the player as they play, some say. There are some that claimed they've uninstalled and/or are not playing the game until CDPR addresses what they call "bad writing"/"bad plot".
In the end, almost everyone on this thread, whether they agree with the need of a happy ending or not, wishes the choices made during the game actually meant something.
Now, let's see what the users are saying:
@MandyZGaming replies to @AKANexus' rant saying that the game would never forewarn you that you will not survive, otherwise lots of people would not even want to play.
@Motsie notes they haven't announced what the DLC will be about, unlike what they did in Witcher 3, which was explained even before the game came out, so that could mean the DLC can go anywhere
@Anrix1 says they "don't care how hard the good ending is to get, [they] just want it to be possible"
@BGM45 cites Enderal, a huge total conversion mod for Skyrim in which 1 year after the mod was released they creators added a new ending in the form of a mid-game DLC
@amsquared cites Blade Runner, where Deckard survives; Deus Ex, where Jensen CAN survive, depending on the player's choices; Shadowrun Hong Kong where your character CAN die, but not necessarily, while @Rawls notes Deckard's love interest is dying, and, should Deckard be a replicant, so will he. He also praises the way the game forces you to decide how to proceed knowing death is coming soon is very interesting to him, as it's not something videogames usually do.
@amsquared finishes off saying you "spend 3/4 of the game doing everything in our power to save her, and she dies. That's not deep writing, it's lazy writing." They add "It's very obvious what happened here. CDPR wants a specific ending[...], most likely to make writing a sequel somewhere down the line easier - and they found a way to railroad us into it no matter what. [They]'d be fine with that if the game wasn't sold as an RPG where player choice matters. "
@Notserious80 mentions there's a difference between immortality and giving up your life for nothing. They state getting V killed solves nothing, and even then, you can't choose not to go down that way, as the choice is made for you. They end wondering whether they forced the dying endings to facilitate a sequel.
@oumajgad notes BioDyne [I'm assuming they mean Biotechnica, as BioDyne went bankrupt in 2006, might be mistaken] has developer nanites that can cure MS. These nanites could be used to fix V, and voilá, DLC materia, as they put it.
@amsquared says the plot is actually well written. As they put, writing, for them, "is broken down into two parts. There's the outline, literally the things you'd have on an outline, and there's the dialogue and setting, i.e. the things that flesh out all the points of the outline". They, then, proceed to summarize one of what they consider the biggest flaws on the writing, stating "There is no reason for the 6 months arbitrary death clock in the three otherwise decent endings"
@Cologan says the Judy with Nomad ending looks like it was "weirdly spliced to just pretend to have an ending with her"
@BlackHawkV even goes the full length and states they'd even pay for a DLC if it meant adding an ending where V doesn't die and the player can continue after solving the chip situation. [Some context here: CDRP is known for not selling their DLC, rather offering as content patches for free, as it was the case with Witcher 3]
@Shaamaan and @Simuxas agree that if CDPR would sell a DLC to fix the endings/add new better plot, they would risk losing even more trust than they've already lost
@AKANexus and @Nikola_Nesic both agree the very first character you build on an RPG you relate to, they're the most memorable one, while all the other roleplays with different characters, if you can't change the outcome, will kill any fun or will to replay the game
@tRYSIS3 exemplifies the loss of trust CDPR might face when telling us about their story. They say back then in 2013 they already got extremely excited for Cyberpunk 2077, "even pouring hundreds of hours in the last couple years creating fan art for the game. [They] were looking forward to having multiple playthroughs to experience different play-styles, and paths ", but after getting V killed, they thought making different choices during the plot would change the outcome, yet, as we all know that wasn't the case. They end with "If you consider those two reasons as being true, then you realise that the endings we got are pretty much the result of lazy writing, lack of interest/resources in remaking the side missions without Johnny or creating an ending that might seem counterintuitive (having Johnny stay in your head as if nothing happened). They definitely could have thought of a better way to end the game instead of the gut punch we got, which has left me disappointed if anything after all those years of anticipation."
@tRYSIS3 wonders if it "seems like an easy copout to have V die so they don't have to work on post ending gameplay. "
@djisma69 notes the percentages on the tarot cards mean zilch [I'm positively sure someone mentioned that already, but bear with me... there are over 100 pages for me to remember]
@modni states that for a game in development for 8 years, the main quest was extremely short, the world and its NPCs weren't interactive, the endings are frustrating and rolling back to before you die is what they call "meh"
@Buckadoz states that it is said Soulkiller ""destroys" something crucially important to a person", and yet V has no choice to question that. V cannot choose that whatever it destroys is too much of a great value for them, so the game forces you into accepting Soulkiller, and @Buckadoz acknowledges it as bad writing. They also state the endings and their supposed consequences are simply mean-spirited, leaving only the Panam/Nomads one as the only one that doesn't scream "Fuck you" to your face, consequently devaluating the other endings.
@Retro-_- asks "what is the point of putting a finite timefrane on V's life? It serves no purpose.", they go on saying either CDPR intends on using it as a get-out clause if someone asks for expanded endings, or they intend to use those 6 months as DLC material
@Kikinho says they've even lost interest in doing the side quests after doing the main quest, for the single motivation they currently have now is that doing those quests will mean simply their character will be stronger when going through the last mission, while @Retro-_- decided to stop playing when they called Panam and was greeted with the same four lines of dialogue that you always get when talking to her.
@Kikinho, @AKANexus, @HonestBenny and @Retro-_- all agreed they wanted to get rid of Johnny as fast as they could for various reasons, ranging from viewing Johnny as an abuser to seeing him on V's body betraying Panam to be too much of a heartache.
@Martynxas says Johnny "clearly changes his way by the end of the game", while @AKANexus points that change was too sudden and out of nowhere to be believable.
While @Martynxas states it was V's own fault she stole the chip and now she must face the consequences, whereas @Simuxas rebuts saying V did steal the chip, but it was Jackie who stuck it on V's port when dying.
@Nekatinyz says it wouldn't be right for a man who willingly chose death to out-live someone that is dying for him to survive
@Martynxas argues Silverhand deserved to live, and Alt was an evil AI, while V is just a "person, just as everyone in cyberpunk, and got pretty much same ending as other characters in night City", yet @Simuxas replies stating the story is not about Silverhand, nor the city. It's about V, and adds that they consider "V [getting] gutted for a single mistake, while Johnny gets a second fkn chance for KILLING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE with a nuke." flawed logic.
@Melra wonders if CDPR wouldn't just think of us looking at the story from the "wrong" angle, as some reviewers are stating, and worries if CDPR is pressured to create a new, happy ending, they will do something bland along the lines of "Eh, let's just write something that makes them happy" or would they put some real thought into.
@Simuxas also wonders whether people would have a slither of sympathy for SIlverhand if he weren't voiced by Reeves
@proxyrev suggests an "evil" ending for V, in which they would be (re)instated on Arasaka.
@MeinChurro agrees with @AKANexus on the fact the way Silverhand apparently redempts himself is either poorly written or cut short, making it unbelievable. @MeinChurro even states that Silverhand's redemption could only stem from his sacrifice to save V
@MandyZGaming and @Retro-_- intend on starting the #rapedemotions tag on the social networks
@BGM45 notes "everything that leads to them dying from the chip is actually out of their control". V had no voice, no choice when Yorinobu killed his father; T-Bug got caught; Jackie got injured when the AV's spotted them; the container got damaged during the fall; Jackie shoved the shard on V's head without even thinking; and Dex killed them. As they put, "V is a victim of the circumstances. not innocent, yes, but in no way their transgressions make them deserving of death or less deserving to live than Johnny"
@HonestBenny says the main purpose of having multiple endings is not to have a correct one, only endings that people would prefer and work towards.
@Martynxas's opinion is that it's not just Johnny, "V is not good either. Its just two characters put in fucked up situation", while @BGM45 rebuts stating on a role-playing-game, "V is what you want them to be"
@Retro-_- posts "We paid for a ticket on this journey, only to breakdown halfway through and have the driver go home in a taxi, leaving the rest of us in the middle of bum-fuck nowhere. " [And made me laugh again. Thanks, brodér]
@MeinChurro points out the story is not about V, but about Johnny and CDPR's attempt at writing him a redemption story, instead "What we got feels disjointed; a complete mess when it finally gets to the end", stating Maybe CDPR doesn't know how to write cyberpunk, rather creating a dark story for dark's sake.
@Silairel The game was rigged from the start.
@HonestBenny wants an answer from CDPR because they think the issue is not 1 ending they didn't like (which can happen with fixed stories), instead we got 6 endings copy pasted in between with different cosmetics
@BGM45 Notes CDPR mentioned the main team will be resting until February '21 while the second team patches last gen versions and remaining bugs.
@Buckadoz compares the endings with punishments for missing one or another spot or critical choice during the story
We also lost @kaz_ds, who stated they won't be playing the game again after this fiasco with the endings
@Ramzah says they enjoyed the endings as Claire says the only way to get a drink named after you is by going out with a bang, and that V actually died when Dex shot her, and most likely had lost her "soul". And also says in spite of preferring the current endings, they still see a light at the end of the tunnel, as Panam hints they can find a specialist to help V together
@Kikinho says the romance options with Kerry and RIver are bland to the point they don't even go with you if you take the Nomad ending, while @MandyZGaming notes "River doesn't because he doesn't wanna leave his family, because he thinks he needs to protect them and take care of them."
[Let me say I'm sorry @MeinChurro, I noticed I haven't mentioned your posts about the game pointing you toward saving Johnny, let me rectify that]
@MeinChurro says the game gravitates you towards saving Johnny by making all the other endings undesirable, obviously having the writer's choice superseding the player's choice, which is undesired on an RPG. Johnny deserves no salvation, according to them, because he already had a full life and decided to end his life by his own hands on his own terms, while V still has all her life before her, and has absolutely no choice on how to live anymore. While you are here just for the ride, Johnny, who is a terrorist killed innumerable people, detonated a nuclear warhead on a building in the middle of one of the most populous cities.
They state CDPR pushes the player to saving Johnny because the game's protagonist is Silverhand, not V, neither Night City. They wonder if CDPR shouldn't've gone with the Geralt path, in which you follow the character's story semi-passively, as the story is already pre-determined for you, with some changes here and there.
They say CP2077 was marketed to have dialog lines, agency and character input of Dragon Age Origins level, instead we got lied by CDPR.
@Simuxas points the infamous MacGuffin that allows Saburo to replace his sons mind with his own, yet not save V
@Simuxas also offers some more suggestions on how to fix things up
@Martynxas points that, although the comparison between Mass Effect 3's so called RGB ending the insatisfaction is pretty much silent, but @Simuxas says it's most likely because "more than half of people are not even able to play or finish the game because of the technical issues"
@Da0827 also cites Witcher 3, in which they didn't feel bad for getting a bad ending then, that was part of the game and they messed up, so they started a new game and strived for a better ending. The same doesn't happen in Cyberpunk.
@Melra dearly wishes they would rather have braindances of Johnny's torture, rather than help "a character that for a good portion of the story was abusive towards the main character and is simply a total douche in general"
That's all for tonight, folks! We hope we haven't missed anything important or got anything wrong.
One thing I'd like to point out is that the time this thread took to get to 1000 posts was about 5 times it took to get from 1000 to 2000, so yea, we are growing. On the other side, people are bashing on the same keys many times. To be honest I think went through one whole page with nothing to add to the post, either because there were people bickering, or stating stuff already said, or talking about stuff unrelated to the discussion.
Don't get me wrong, it's fun to talk about random stuff and all (minus the bickering, of course), I'm just stating that we are indeed growing!!!!
Well, we'll see each other soon!!!! Stay safe and happy netrunning!
Biotechnica: Adapting You to the Future
These memes make the whole situation a little bit less depressing lmao ty
Yea i couldent help to chuckle when i scrolled trough redit. did make me feel better for a second
Maybe.
Problem there is, we don't know if that would fix the problem. There's still the fact Dex lodged a large-caliber round in your grey matter, which was subsequently fixed by Johnny's biochip, operated on to remove said lead lump from your grey matter, then partially-overwritten by Johnny's biochip. Overall, I'm not the wagering type in this situation, but I'd put the odds of a successful rewrite after all the damage at being pretty low.
Were it me, I'd say just clone V a new body, implant copies of their cyberware, then load V's biochip into it.
stockholders need to play more games instead of staring blankly at a stock spreadsheets on a computer or smart phone. like a wise man told us: on my business card i'm a corporate president. in my mind i'm a game designer. in my heart i'm a gamer.
The ending I chose was to lead a raid to Arasaka Tower with the Aldecaldos because I romances Panam. My V was a street kid but going down with this ending my character becomes a nomad. When I entered Mikoshi, Alt says I can either give Johnny my body but enter cyberspace and become one with Alt or Johnny goes with Alt and I keep the body. However Johnny will die because he's not compatible with V's body and V will slowly die since Johnny's engram is the one keeping V alive and it's not in him anymore. So I decided to go back live my remaining days and I co-lead the Aldecaldos with Panam. I really liked this one because it felt wholesome to me and my V gets to live out his life with someone he loves, which is something I haven't seen in most RPGs I've played.
Last edited:
So, I was playing my corpo just now. I was about to pay off Vector then move on to my fate (act 2), but I didn't know I could have Misty read my tarot cards. Definitely a warning, and spot on, except for the last one, andI'm paraphrasing "you will meet someone important, charismatic, maybe someone you will grow to love". I was like.. that supposed to be Johnny?
I really don't think they intended for us to hate him.
I really don't think they intended for us to hate him.
In the emergency board call one of them atleast said they were playing the game on a base PS4, that is actually a stroke of hope!
Yeah we've heard that before. Something about how they were testing it on consoles, and it worked fine. Yeah.
GUYS, LET'S TEMPORARILY STOP SAYING WHAT KIND OF STORY SUCKS, ETC., CD PR RED RIGHT NOW
REALLY NEED OUR SUPPORT
THEY MADE GOOD GAMES FOR US, AND NOW IT HAPPENS, SHIT HAPPENS
if you haven't heard, the game was removed from the ps store, the studio lost a lot of reputation, now the question is not about what the dlc or part 2 will be, butwill it be or not
THEY MADE GOOD GAMES FOR US, AND NOW IT HAPPENS, SHIT HAPPENS
if you haven't heard, the game was removed from the ps store, the studio lost a lot of reputation, now the question is not about what the dlc or part 2 will be, butwill it be or not
No this was at the Emergency meeting a few days ago.
Q3: Okay; that last sentence, I think, is the key one. I don’t expect next-gen performance on last-gen, but I would like to be able to play through the game. Thank you very much.
MN: You will be able to. Thank you.
Reguardless if we can actually trust CDPR the investors seem to be aware of the state of the game.
First it's a company not a person, they don't need out support. Secondly I've already supported them, twice, or more. Once by buying the game (on GoG, their platform). Once by not refunding it. Thirdly, a bad game is a bad game. As a customer, not a supporter, not a friend, a spade needs to be called a spade, and not quieted down because I may hurt the corporations unfeeling feelings.
Secondly no one said that the story sucks. We said that the story can be better, and we've said that many things that should have been in there, things that they promised were in there, never showed up. That's not behavior that really deserves support. That aside, games, like books and other entertainment modules, need to be criticed, so that the devs know where they messed up, and how to fix it.
Yes we know. we cant support them in any way atm. meby tell them there good little boys and girls. They need to help themselfs by fixing the game so they can rerelease it.
Again we've heard this all before. Sure this comment was more recent, but it just piles into promises said, and not kept. No more delays, the consoles work fine, etc. etc. Heck they've told investors things that didn't happen before, the console thing for one. So now we are supposed to believe them just because it was recent?
You don't have to believe them if you don't want. I think it is in their best interest to make it right. Again they are banking on re-establishing their image and this is apart of it. Guess if things get worse than shame on me.
