[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

+

Do you want more RPGs with happy endings?


  • Total voters
    1,647
All the seven ends are really dark and sad. Like really. we need a happy ending.


Edit: What do you think of the alternative endings, all of them are sad, and from what I see that people want at least one a happy one, atleast like a Top secret-Easter Egg, at least to achieve it with legendary clothes and level 50, or at least in extreme hard mode. What would be the best idea to fit?

Ah, you make me feel such a great nostalgy. I really do miss Prince of Persia Warrior Within, where you are able literally change your fate and kick the ass of the main antoganist in case if you collect some items.
It is so satisfying when you can discover things like that and so bitter when you can't change your fate.

And I can't agree with the people who compare RDR2 with CP2077 or ME3 with CP2077 in the sense of the endings:

For me the best part of the ME series is the second one ME2, especially because the ending can be very optimistic depedning on your choices.
I apologize if I would be rude and completely wrong, but I do believe that the probability that critics would poorly acclaim good endings (in writings, films, plays) in any work seems to be very high.
"Oh, if it is not a bittersweet plot twist then there is a lack of emotions\feelings\expressions etc, oh no no no, this is a poor product, low score, or at least not the great one" (I can be perfectly wrong here, that's why it is PROBABILITY and my opinion),
"Oh, Here we go agian, Disney's ending, 6 out of 10, I am so tired, where is my Dostoyevskiy or Hugo".

And maybe writers are trying to be prone to that concept and kinda evade from any good finale. ("So boring, so obvious, so good, meh, hate it")

And I do believe that concept played an evil joke with ME3 creators, because players can't feel that they can change something, there is no light in the end, no hope, only acceptance of inevitable.

Moreover, idk who decided to cut content with the illusive man as a final boss, ah, "it would be so arcade", damn you who has decided to do so, it was so empty without such a fight with him, at least it could be skipped depending on choices through game. But hell no, they've decided that lacking of it would be for the best.

It all was sad for their users' reviews and perception of the whole product.

In my opinion, only bad endings (or bittersweet ones) in the games with choices are: perfect for the critics, bad for the players and, I hope, disastrous for future sales ;)
But in case if something is hiden somewhere or will be presented in one of the DLCs, as in Witcher 3, then it will be awesome, personally I can forgive almost anything for that, even heavy and stupid bugs, damn physics, cut conent ;)(of course not, CDPR should make it better!)

And about RDR2, it was clear from the very beginnig what will happen, the game is not about choices. There is no feeling of responsibility for the protagonist's main choices or for his way of thinking through the game. I can't consider minor decisions and simple moral system as something what would affect story as the whole. It is not an RPG, but CP2077 seems to be one. I saw "98%" stuff, but I never counted it, as probably many other people either, and I have no intention in it, even if it seems to be very real.
Moreover, you can play through the whole game without killing a lot of people, there are specific implants which allow you do that. It is a small feature, slightly bugged, but make you feel more responsible for your playthrough as V. In RDR series I can't go through the game without killing.
Damn, maybe leaving the gang with your beloved one would be the better option, or getting somewhere warm and dry, but you are not given the option to make that decision.

Personally, I believe that great RPG game should give you options to take decisions which affect your final result in more ways than simply cosmetic changes.

The very good ending seemed pretty damn possible for Arasaka, why it shouldn't be for V?
 
Last edited:
Mhm, I just thought about a DLC to fix the endings and I came to realize that it really would be a shitty move, especially if you ask for money.

I mean I would still buy it, but it is scummy.

Here is a comparison using their other franchise of The Witcher:

Imagine Witcher 3 ends after the Battle or Kaer Morhen.

You accomplish the mission, Ciri is alive. You lost Vesemir and other friends, but your goal is achieved, Ciri is here.
Cut to the credits boys, we done.

Same as in Cyberpunk, your goal of survival is fullfilled or you are free/Johnny is free. Except for the suicide ending, you somehow are still there. In different forms sure, but still there. Goal achieved.

Back to Witcher 3.

So after we celebrate that Ciri is alive and well, we drunkenly realize that the Wild Hunt still exists. Oops.
You and Ciri probably have some weeks left, before those guys appear again and end their work for good. so you are on a timer.
Sounds familiar?

Here comes Cyberpunk again slapping you in the face with the 6 months.

But you know what, you might get that fixed in the DLC that will come out next year! That you have to pay for. And it will probably actually be a DLC with Johnny in 2020, huehuehue.
Not telling you haha.

Now imagine if Witcher 3 did this, around the likes of:

Well yeah, the Wild Hunt is still around and you are in sooo much danger to lose Ciri. But hey, we got a DLC coming up.
But we won't tell you if you really go and defeat the Wild Hunt. It might also be a Gwent tournament DLC, yaaay!
Tension is good, right?
Oh, and you have to pay for it.

My point here is that you should never be in the situation where a DLC has to conclude your base game. It is terrible writing.

If Witcher 3 would have been handled like this CDPR wouldn't exist anymore.

Instead you should have a self-concluding base game and build DLC upon that. W3 already had fine endings, in came B&W and kicked it even higher. THAT is how you should do it.

And if you really need to have a cliffhangar ending, because you want to start a trilogy or franchise, make it unmistakeanably clear that loose ends will be adressed in the sequel.

Sorry for the wall of text.

Fallout 3. You die period.
Oh wait, DLC says you passed out only, here's REAL ending behind paywall.
 
Ah, you make me feel such a great nostalgy. I really do miss Prince of Persia Warrior Within, where you are able literally change your fate and kick the ass of the main antoganist in case if you collect some items.
It is so satisfying when you can discover things like that and so bitter when you can't change your fate.

And I can't agree with the people who compare RDR2 with CP2077 or ME3 with CP2077 in the sense of the endings:

For me the best part of the ME series is the second one ME2, especially because the ending can be very optimistic depedning on your choices.
I apologize if I would be rude and completely wrong, but I do believe that the probability that critics would poorly acclaim good endings (in writings, films, plays) in any work seems to be very high.
"Oh, if it is not a bittersweet plot twist then there is a lack of emotions\feelings\expressions etc, oh no no no, this is a poor product, low score, or at least no the great one" (I can be perfectly wrong here, that's why it is PROBABILITY and my opinion),
"Oh, Here we go agian, Disney's ending, 6 out of 10, I am so tired, where is my Dostoyevskiy or Hugo".

And maybe writers are trying to be prone to that concept and kinda evade from any good finale. ("So boring, so obvious, so good, meh, hate it")

And I do believe that concept played an evil joke with ME3 creators, because players can't feel that they can change something, there is no light in the end, no hope, only acceptance of inevitable.

Moreover, idk who decided to cut content with the illusive man as a final boss, ah, "it would be so arcade", damn you who has decided to do so, it was so empty without such a fight with him, at least it could be skipped depending on choices through game. But no, they've decided lacking of that would be for the best.

It all was sad for their users' reviews and perception of the whole product.

In my opinion, bad endings (or bittersweet ones) in the games with choices are: perfect for the critics, bad for the players and, I hope, disastrous for future sales ;)
But in case if something is hiden somewhere or will be presented in one of the DLCs, as in Witcher 3, then it will be awesome, personally I can forgive almost anything for that, even heavy and stupid bugs, damn physics, cut conent ;)

And about RDR2, it was clear from the very beginnig what will happen, the game is not about choices. There is no feeling of responsibility for the protagonist's main choices or for his way of thinking through the game. I am not able to count minor decisions and moral system as making choices. It is not an RPG, but CP2077 seems to be one. I saw "98%" stuff, but I never calculated it, as probably many other people, and I have no intention in it even if it seems to be very real.
Moreover, you can play through the game without killing a lot of people, specific implants could allow you that. Small feature, slightly bugged, but make you feel more responsible for your playthrough as V. In RDR series I can't go through the game without killing.
Damn, maybe leaving the gang with your beloved one would be the better option, or getting somewhere warm and dry, but you are not given the option to make that decision.

Personally, I believe that great RPG game should give you options to take decisions which affect your final result in more ways than simply cosmetic changes.

The very good ending seemed pretty damn possible for Arasaka, why it shouldn't be for V?
Question we ask ourselves every day
Post automatically merged:

I hate this game....
1608675725586.png
 
End: "So, you will die in six months, V!"

V: "Uh, didn't Victor already told me that when I woke up after crawling our from the dumpster? Is this some matrix-glitch-shit or something?"

End: "No! It is peak RPG-Storytelling for the new millenium! Plagues, moronic presidents, Altered Carbon cancelled! Nobody wants to see you getting to live, V! But don't worry, we'll add a DLC to expand on your ending!"

V: "Uh, sounds great...?"

End: "YES! 3 additional minutes of a slideshow showing you slowly but surely making the best out of your six months! We even hired your voice actress again, for only she can realyl sell the agony, and fear of death, and hopelessness you will experience these six months as the clock's ticking!"

V: "This deal getting worse all the time ... "

End: "Indeed! We even have scenes of your potential loved ones, watching you as your brain detoriates! So much fun to make the best of six months and live life to its fullest! We even added a scene of all your friends at your funeral, V! Of course, with only first person view, all you will see is a dark black screen, though you maybe hear the dirt and soil hitting your casket!"

V: "Wow...if only I had taken that boring job at the supermarket ..."

End: "Too late, dearest V! And YOU players, don't forget to buy our next big game in 12 years!"

Hello? Yes, one eyebleach please.
 
Mhm, I just thought about a DLC to fix the endings and I came to realize that it really would be a shitty move, especially if you ask for money.

I mean I would still buy it, but it is scummy.

Here is a comparison using their other franchise of The Witcher:

Imagine Witcher 3 ends after the Battle or Kaer Morhen.

You accomplish the mission, Ciri is alive. You lost Vesemir and other friends, but your goal is achieved, Ciri is here.
Cut to the credits boys, we done.

Same as in Cyberpunk, your goal of survival is fullfilled or you are free/Johnny is free. Except for the suicide ending, you somehow are still there. In different forms sure, but still there. Goal achieved.

Back to Witcher 3.

So after we celebrate that Ciri is alive and well, we drunkenly realize that the Wild Hunt still exists. Oops.
You and Ciri probably have some weeks left, before those guys appear again and end their work for good. so you are on a timer.
Sounds familiar?

Here comes Cyberpunk again slapping you in the face with the 6 months.

But you know what, you might get that fixed in the DLC that will come out next year! That you have to pay for. And it will probably actually be a DLC with Johnny in 2020, huehuehue.
Not telling you haha.

Now imagine if Witcher 3 did this, around the likes of:

Well yeah, the Wild Hunt is still around and you are in sooo much danger to lose Ciri. But hey, we got a DLC coming up.
But we won't tell you if you really go and defeat the Wild Hunt. It might also be a Gwent tournament DLC, yaaay!
Tension is good, right?
Oh, and you have to pay for it.

My point here is that you should never be in the situation where a DLC has to conclude your base game. It is terrible writing.

If Witcher 3 would have been handled like this CDPR wouldn't exist anymore.

Instead you should have a self-concluding base game and build DLC upon that. W3 already had fine endings, in came B&W and kicked it even higher. THAT is how you should do it.

And if you really need to have a cliffhangar ending, because you want to start a trilogy or franchise, make it unmistakeanably clear that loose ends will be adressed in the sequel.

Sorry for the wall of text.

I would argue that ... you could argue the story of V as of now IS complete though...

I mean...CDRed can always say "what do you mean, "real" ending? The ending of CP2077 main game is what you got, and now we tell another story of V..."

That's how I would try to sell it to the public... ^^ - And if they do it, I'll play the game again as Corpo-Ninja-assassin as I had already planned. Seems I might have a knack for Corpo-thinking ... ^^

But I actually think the above is a valid interpretation to how the DLc does not need to be viewed as "scummy", especially if a lot of people who played the game aren't as emotionally hit by the current endings. For them it is not "rectifying the nonsense six months to die ending", but just more story of "V"...
 
Just one last thing before I get to sleep.

Mistys Tarot cards.

I see a lot of guys arguing that the Nomad Ending is happy, because the Tarot cards promise "a good life in the badlands".
One post that I am to lazy to find and quote right now also spoke about how the ending credits feel like they take place AFTER the 6 months already, so everything has to be fine.

I really, really want to believe that. It would instantly make the game replayable to me.

But please debunk my gloomy take on that first:

The Tarot cards imply that you live the best life... FOR 6 MONTHS.
I am no expert on Tarot but I do think that could be a viable interpretation.

Regarding the second argument about the credits I will state something even more depressing:

It appears to me that all these messages are left unread on your phone, because you died already.
Much like you can call Jackie and leave a message after he died we see the credits from the perspective of someone who found V's phone next to his body.

With these joyful thoughts I now head to bed.
 
They promised one free dlc. So not really a paywall if dlc will address endings in any way. Still, with current state of things I still believe endings are ok as they are, and would be better if there would be clarification as to why we can't save V. Meanwhile CDPR fixes way more pressing issues with the game and adds more to the game of what was promised. Also haven't seen Mike do any reaction to current state of things.
 
It appears to me that all these messages are left unread on your phone, because you died already.

Hahah, you know, from my view, that would be the shitty move and not the payable dlc. Cause if dlc would be payble, maybe devs' crunches would be covered with these means, but idk.

Moreover, in the Nomad ending, Panam said: "I'm so lucky to have you" and not "had", let's cross fingers ;)
 
The very good ending seemed pretty damn possible for Arasaka, why it shouldn't be for V?

I liked your whole post, I only shortened it to highlight that sentence, which makes a very good point.

Many others get what they wanted, only V has to die.

Judy and Panam get what they wanted if we do all their quests.
Johnny gets a new body and can start a new life.
If Johnny goes into cyberspace he loses nothing, since he already is an engram and AI Alt will likely support him.,
In the Arasaka ending Saburo gets Yorinobu's body and a new life. His rogue son is punished, the Arasaka clan is more powerful than before.
Takemura gets his job back, maybe he will have a rocky ride at first, cause he did not protect Saburo, but I think his efforts will likely be rewarded.
Hellman is back in Arasaka as a scientist, they probably forgave him his defection.
 
More importantly, that ending just highlights the game's massive elephant in the room that never gets addressed. Johnny's engram is NOT Johnny himself. The real Johnny was born, lived his life and then died. The engram imprinted on V's chip is just a copy of Johnny, therefore killing V so that copy can live out a new life is an incredibly dark ending - the original Johnny would have hated to have murdered V in such a way.

It's very odd how the story is written as if Johnny's engram is Johnny himself back from the dead, instead of acknowledging that it's just a copy that's acting as random neuro-malware and killing an innocent person.

This really annoyed me as it is exactly what I saw Jonny as the entire way through. A clever program mimicking a personality of someone who is dead. Yet I could not take the story in this direction. You have no choice but to treat Johnny as a real living person who is trapped in your head. Sure you can refuse to give him control and miss out on a bunch of the games content, but you can never put him in his place.

And on top that, I have no sympathy for him at all. He is a selfish ego maniac who cares for nothing but himself. Constantly F'ing over V for stupid personal gains. Never remorseful for his actions
 
Finally finished the game and gotta say Im pretty pissed to find no happy ending.

Have tried to stay positives through the bugs and other crap going on with the game etc but now? The games been ended for me in a way that leaves a bad lasting impression. Just more well thought out decision making from you guys, im done with defending you guys and frankly, done saying im enjoying the game because this has soured literally everything to date i liked.

Oh and i did every side quest including police gigs.
 
I liked your whole post, I only shortened it to highlight that sentence, which makes a very good point.

Many others get what they wanted, only V has to die.

You know, that's exactly what I would be glad to see.

In your playthrough, your V has to die because you choose the way leading to it.
In my playthrough, for example, my V shouldn't die because of my choices.
 
Finally finished the game and gotta say Im pretty pissed to find no happy ending.

Have tried to stay positives through the bugs and other crap going on with the game etc but now? The games been ended for me in a way that leaves a bad lasting impression. Just more well thought out decision making from you guys, im done with defending you guys and frankly, done saying im enjoying the game because this has soured literally everything to date i liked.

Oh and i did every side quest including police gigs.
Welcome.gif

Post automatically merged:

You know, that's exactly what I would be glad to see.

In your playthrough, your V has to die because you choose the way leading to it.
In my playthrough, for example, my V shouldn't die because of my choices.
That's what we all expected :giveup:
 
Top Bottom