[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

+

Do you want more RPGs with happy endings?


  • Total voters
    1,647
just replying to something asked earlier (like a few days ago)... fixers do actually respond differently if you muck things up a little (this had something to do with wakako iirc). now, back to the topic at hand; for instance: my first play through Reggie remarked that this job wasn't my best work when the tigerclaw diner job turned into a shootout (i made the misake of interupting an armed robbery next door or something and it spred to the target diner), just did it again on my new play through, no shootout, and reggie gave me a thumbs up (btw: there was no bonus objectives, nothing about keeping it quiet or anything, just retreve the client's eye).
 
Looking at the link from gamestar posted above - i pretty much lost all the hope i got for that project and the CDPR. Even though they say they are focused more on singleplayer content, those statements about multiplayer and microtransactions really says it all.

We did it guys - we all pretty much became V. Tried to, but didn't change shit.
Well i think that post is way before the games release, so many things can change.
 
While I didn't really like the "reload a save to continue playing" choice by the creator, I'm ok with the endings and I actually really liked the Nomad one.
And I think that the whole "6 months" thing is just a way for CDPR to leave the story on a cliffhanger...except for the "suicide" one, no other ending is definitive
 
Damn, well then RPG is gone.
Maaaaaybe the statement itself was older, but was put in a fresh post, but rn i just gave up.
Pretty damn awesome project was ruined by one "person" responsible for endings.
The sidekicks "optimisation", "bugs" and "future microtransactions" just kicked our V's cold body.
 
Maaaaaybe the statement itself was older, but was put in a fresh post, but rn i just gave up.
Pretty damn awesome project was ruined by one "person" responsible for endings.
The sidekicks "optimisation", "bugs" and "future microtransactions" just kicked our V's cold body.
It could just be some old news that were reposted, since i havnt hear anything of them saying after release.
 
its left kinda open like he could have found a cure (doubt it ) but i think they chose death as an ending because thats usually how the table top turns out but i didnt mind it i would have liked a happy sunshine option but i get it v (possibly) did some effed up stuff
 
In regards to the Gamestar article. They are misquoting what CDPR said. This is what they are basing their information on regarding story DLCs

"So I don't want to spoil anything right now, but very satisfying story arc, right? You're going to see characters and you'll see them develop. You're going to see them go through conflicts and resolve those conflicts. It'll be a very rewarding ending. We're not withholding content, we're not withholding story for the future to try to, you know, monetize it or sell it in pieces or anything like that. You're going to get the whole, full value game here."

while also saying

"We want to make sure everything's complete, but we also want to build open worlds. I know when I was playing The Witcher 3 and I finished everything, I still want to know what everyone was up to. I think we're going to have opportunities like that as well for Cyberpunk 2077."

In regards to what CDPR has done so far... I am also leaning more towards the "norm" of mid game DLC and one off games within a franchise that are not connected. Feels bad man...
 
I think they deliberated choose the "six months until die" end to leave options open for a sequel, as this end can be conclusive and not at the same time

-they can make a sequel with new characters and histories, V history is ended and die after six months

-they can make a sequel with V again, V cure will be part of the argument or the history in the next game.
 
Top Bottom