Do you hate unhappy endings? (spoilers)

+

Happy or Sad endings?

  • Happy

    Votes: 82 71.3%
  • Sad

    Votes: 33 28.7%

  • Total voters
    115
You still haven't answered my question and you've shifted from "sad endings" to endings with dying protagonists, while also refusing to acknowledge an ending with a dying protagonist (Arthur). You aren't interested in any honest conversation and aren't worth engaging with any further.

Ok yes yes, I was being slightly facetious in not acknowledging the fact that Arthur is the protagonist and he dies in RDR2, naughty Skadi, and to answer your question no sad endings are not automatically good.

Now if you will do me the same courtesy would you answer why the endings to RDR2 and TLOU us are so good and while I am assuming you have an issue with the ending of Cyberpunk 2077 could you tell me what they do better than Cyberpunk 2077?
Post automatically merged:

Quite frankly this post is just to taunt people. Has nothing constructive in it. Has no purpose other than let the OP gloat over how she has a "better understanding" about story telling.
Because you can only write a Disney story or a tragedy. No inbetweens? No compromise. No creativity?

Yeah I know the poll is a little binary and there is no room for nuance, but polls with a grey area usually don't really reveal interesting results. Consider the poll as what you prefer if you prefer an ending to lean happy or sad.
 
Maybe the expansion will be just that. Not V but your own character not directly tied to the V quest line? Sounds like a lot of folks would buy that up in a heart beat.

That would work better for a sequel, but for an expansion?

I don't see why it would hamper their ability to create expansions or sequels?
What's the point of an expansion if V dies anyway? There is nothing to expand. Game over.
However, I don't see a problem with a sequel. That could be a new character.
 
What's the point of an expansion if V dies anyway? There is nothing to expand. Game over.
However, I don't see a problem with a sequel. That could be a new character.

Plenty of other stories to explore in Night City mun, an expansion or DLC content does not need to continue or expand V's story, in fact I kind of think the main game should be able to stand on it's own without needing DLC to fill in the gaps, would much rather see DLC as their own stand alone stories rather than a continuation of the main story.
 
Ok yes yes, I was being slightly facetious in not acknowledging the fact that Arthur is the protagonist and he dies in RDR2, naughty Skadi, and to answer your question no sad endings are not automatically good.

Now if you will do me the same courtesy would you answer why the endings to RDR2 and TLOU us are so good and while I am assuming you have an issue with the ending of Cyberpunk 2077 could you tell me what they do better than Cyberpunk 2077?
Post automatically merged:



Yeah I know the poll is a little binary and there is no room for nuance, but polls with a grey area usually don't really reveal interesting results. Consider the poll as what you prefer if you prefer an ending to lean happy or sad.

Theres alot of subleties to Arthurs end, because it always does end, did he change as a person and become a better man? Or stay the course and become more bitter/ruthless? deer or wolf? Helo john escape or go back for the money? Who did he help and how did he help them? Find out with John and you'll find out how Arthur could've changed and influenced these ppl's lives.

Couple of short not very well written examples of how arthur dies and how playing as someone else can show you how he influenced those about him.

How you play arthur effects how arthur dies effectively, how you play V, who you're involved with and what choices you made to get to the end outside what choice of ending flavour you want matters not a zilch and ultimately because it puts you back were it does picking any of the endings has absolutely zero impact on anything in the world.

V says it best " i did all this for nothing"

Arthur looking at the sunset is at peace, the player is sad but content because they done good

We always knew from a certain point Arthur was going to die, it never stopped us playing
 
Game was dark enough, at least one of the endings should make us happy.
I kinda liked main story, but ending choices were annoying.

Imagine if TW3 endings were: 1) Geralt dies, 2) Ciri dies, 3) They both die, 4) Ciri becoming empress of Nilfgaard.
Thanks for playing, lol.

I prefer escapism in games, got enough sad shit in every days life.
 
I like satisfying endings. If something ends and your inner monologue makes a sad trombone noise that's an unsatisfying ending.
 
Plenty of other stories to explore in Night City mun, an expansion or DLC content does not need to continue or expand V's story, in fact I kind of think the main game should be able to stand on it's own without needing DLC to fill in the gaps, would much rather see DLC as their own stand alone stories rather than a continuation of the main story.
IMHO, a new character deserves his own game, and not just an expansion in an existing one. If you want to sell an expansion, an open ending is best ;)
 
I don't mind well-written happy endings. But I usually prefer the sad ones partly because of the overabundance of the other ones. They tend to be way more thought-provoking and a memorable experience. I guess if there wouldn't be dark, one wouldn't acknowledge the value of light.
 
V remaining terminally ill after Johnny is gone doesn't make any sense. Nor does searching for a "cure".

V isn't suffering some kind of terminal illness. It would be more accurate to say he/she is being erased. The Relic is overwriting V's consciousness with Johnny's engram.

When the Johnny engram is replaced with V's, the relic should have automatically started replacing whatever was left of Original V and Johnny with the new V engram. If anything, V should be experiencing some kind of multiple personality disorder as he/she "heals".
 
Nope, don't like bad endings. Mostly times they are a "cheap" way to bring depth and emotions in a story.

V remaining terminally ill after Johnny is gone doesn't make any sense. Nor does searching for a "cure".

V isn't suffering some kind of terminal illness. It would be more accurate to say he/she is being erased. The Relic is overwriting V's consciousness with Johnny's engram.

When the Johnny engram is replaced with V's, the relic should have automatically started replacing whatever was left of Original V and Johnny with the new V engram. If anything, V should be experiencing some kind of multiple personality disorder as he/she "heals".

Didn't unterstand that either. Johnnys engram "enters" Vs body and take over, changing it genectical from V to Johnny.
But if V's engram goes back in his body, this engram can't to the same.
Hä?
Why not?
If I got a hard disk (body) with Data (V) and I can overwrite it (Johnnys engram) one time, I can to it a second time, with the data that was already there (V's engram). The hard disk don't care, Data are just 0101110000111 etc..
Alt didn't say, that the procedure was a "burn the CD one time"-process. Or what is the difference between Johnnys and Vs engram. Nothing.

Makes no sense at all. They should have known it better. I mean somebody at CDPR should know how storage media works....
 
Here's the thing, I love good endings, be they happy or sad.
Although I will say for an RPG, which typically is played by people seeking escapist power fantasies, pulling off a sad ending that is satisfying for the player is harder, the criteria is higher.
Good endings like Planescape Torment, RDR are hard to pull off.
 
Theres alot of subleties to Arthurs end, because it always does end, did he change as a person and become a better man? Or stay the course and become more bitter/ruthless? deer or wolf? Helo john escape or go back for the money? Who did he help and how did he help them? Find out with John and you'll find out how Arthur could've changed and influenced these ppl's lives.

Couple of short not very well written examples of how arthur dies and how playing as someone else can show you how he influenced those about him.

How you play arthur effects how arthur dies effectively, how you play V, who you're involved with and what choices you made to get to the end outside what choice of ending flavour you want matters not a zilch and ultimately because it puts you back were it does picking any of the endings has absolutely zero impact on anything in the world.

V says it best " i did all this for nothing"

Arthur looking at the sunset is at peace, the player is sad but content because they done good

We always knew from a certain point Arthur was going to die, it never stopped us playing

Hmmm, complaining about lack of choice in Cyberpunk 2077 yet praising RDR2 for it? Makes no sense mun, I mean does not matter what you do in RDR2 you always get the same ending although if you end with low karma Micah gets to do his "you're no better than me speech" and it changes one or 2 lines of flavour dialogue.

While I do agree there are not enough choices in Cyberpunk that really effect the outcome apart from the big decision at the end there are still more ways that your ending will be different depending on the actions you made throughout the game, for instance whether or not you manage to save Takemura or spare Oda will effect the Arasaka ending, who your romance partner is will effect the Nomad and Night City legend endings, not to mention the 5 endings that are here are very different to each other and do have different sections leading upto them.
 
No, I love them. At this point in my life, I lowkey prefer them as happy endings in real life are so rare. Plus sometimes I need a good cry, but it can't be for nothing. A movie can get away with the protag dying or ending up in a hellish situation for no reason, as it's only a few hours long. However, a video game takes way more investment. I don't need to be made to feel happy, but I do need to feel like I did something, left some kind of impact with all of those hours I put in. If I wanted to be depressed, I'd just reflect on my own life, lol.

As for the initial ending I got, I'm still trying to figure out why my V ended up in space with a pistol in his hand, made no damn sense. He only ever talked about a achieving a vague legendary status. I understand he's dying, but like Delamain said, V had unlimited resources. Use that shit instead of throwing it away trying to rob some orbital bank where the majority of currency will be digital. Arasaka surely couldn't be the only corp in the world that could have helped him. Also, I romanced Panam, if I knew I was going to die, why not make an option to give a shit ton of resources to her and the Aldecados? Just not a big fan of doing things with no explanation.
 
Are sad endings automatically good?

Here's a critical thinking assignment: Why might someone love the ending of RDR2 and TLOU but hate this?
The murder of Joel in TOLU2 was shit writing. So no, that series is now screwed up. Red Dead 2 was a perfect conclusion to Arthur's story. And you got to kill Mica. The difference between Arthur and V. Is the story feels incomplete. Like there is a plan to continue V's story. But they won't directly state it. Because of whatever. DLC, sequel, other aspects. Everyone who's dammed V. I couldn't directly get rid of.

Dex, got killed by someone else. If you hate Johnny. ALT takes him. You can't kill Rouge, Kerry etc. as another option. Hanako and Yorinobu are not killed by V. Anyone that you would want to directly kill. Who is to blame for the chip. Died, suicides (Eve), or got killed by someone else. There's no direct revenge given to V. And I'm okay with all the endings. But there's no satisfaction ending. Sad endings are fine. But I want to burn the world down for the pain V suffers.
 
I prefer endings that suit the story whether happy or sad, none of these endings really seem to fill that void though but...

I personally prefer the Aldecaldos ending the most for Nomad V because it just makes sense. V's nomad path comes full circle, she gets to get the hell out of California gaining a new "family", and a sister figure in Panam plus the bonus prize of Judy coming with us.

Yeah it truly ends on a ballbusting cliffhanger which I despise when games do that but I like to think V's kickin it in Arizona with Judyboo. Its not happy or sad, its in-between, which is the best its gonna get until we see what they have in store for future updates.​
 
[Spoilers ahead, obviously]

Hot take, Cyberpunk has at least one if not three good endings (to varying degrees). You can check out what I've said before on the topic on this post on my reddit profile where I aggregated my analyses of the endings.

In short, the Aldecaldos ending implies heavily that V will find a cure with Panam and the others in Arizona. The Glory and leave-Arasaka's-Satellite endings are open-ended, but provide enough ambiguity that, if we presume the narrative and thematic content is continued by V in their fight for survival that they've been doing since the game started, then we'd recognize they'd try to find a cure. It's because of this that I really bet that a future DLC will have V go with the Aldecaldos to Arizona to find a cure no matter what.

This is made even more believable when checking out this post from another user on Reddit, who found Cyberpunk lore indicating that the Aldecaldos legitimately have powerful contacts in Arizona who have a high potential to have the tech and power to save V.

Y'all honestly need to interrogate the media you consume a bit more; look for things in the game that are, in some way, talking to the viewer/player more than V (especially Misty's tarot readings; the game makes it abundantly clear these are legitimate and accurate, implying that, consequently, they are a message to V, and even moreso, the player, of the future holds.)
 
[Spoilers ahead, obviously]

Hot take, Cyberpunk has at least one if not three good endings (to varying degrees). You can check out what I've said before on the topic on this post on my reddit profile where I aggregated my analyses of the endings.

In short, the Aldecaldos ending implies heavily that V will find a cure with Panam and the others in Arizona. The Glory and leave-Arasaka's-Satellite endings are open-ended, but provide enough ambiguity that, if we presume the narrative and thematic content is continued by V in their fight for survival that they've been doing since the game started, then we'd recognize they'd try to find a cure. It's because of this that I really bet that a future DLC will have V go with the Aldecaldos to Arizona to find a cure no matter what.

This is made even more believable when checking out this post from another user on Reddit, who found Cyberpunk lore indicating that the Aldecaldos legitimately have powerful contacts in Arizona who have a high potential to have the tech and power to save V.

Y'all honestly need to interrogate the media you consume a bit more; look for things in the game that are, in some way, talking to the viewer/player more than V (especially Misty's tarot readings; the game makes it abundantly clear these are legitimate and accurate, implying that, consequently, they are a message to V, and even moreso, the player, of the future holds.)
couldn't have said it better, thanks
 
I don't hate unhappy endings. What I hate is 6 different endings and not one of them is 'happy.'

I hate putting in 80 hours to clear the whole map, do every side quest, get every option in the final moments, and it all amounts to "pick who dies, but it's still probably everyone."

I feel like if you put all the work in to do absolutely everything there should be SOME positive reward for it.
 
[Spoilers ahead, obviously]

Hot take, Cyberpunk has at least one if not three good endings (to varying degrees). You can check out what I've said before on the topic on this post on my reddit profile where I aggregated my analyses of the endings.

In short, the Aldecaldos ending implies heavily that V will find a cure with Panam and the others in Arizona. The Glory and leave-Arasaka's-Satellite endings are open-ended, but provide enough ambiguity that, if we presume the narrative and thematic content is continued by V in their fight for survival that they've been doing since the game started, then we'd recognize they'd try to find a cure. It's because of this that I really bet that a future DLC will have V go with the Aldecaldos to Arizona to find a cure no matter what.

This is made even more believable when checking out this post from another user on Reddit, who found Cyberpunk lore indicating that the Aldecaldos legitimately have powerful contacts in Arizona who have a high potential to have the tech and power to save V.

Y'all honestly need to interrogate the media you consume a bit more; look for things in the game that are, in some way, talking to the viewer/player more than V (especially Misty's tarot readings; the game makes it abundantly clear these are legitimate and accurate, implying that, consequently, they are a message to V, and even moreso, the player, of the future holds.)

Again, I thank you very much for sharing the long post and work/time you put in, here and on reddit!
 
Top Bottom