You seem to be fixated on the main story needing to deliver on saving V's life. I don't get this at all. The story was about V 's attempts to cheat death - which is ultimately futile. V should be dead at the hands of Dex, it was only the chip which prolonged their life at all.
. I think that's allowed.I also get where you're coming from and I know this is an ache for a lot of players of the game, but I also disagree. Especially how you phrase things, it's like there is one way to tell a story, more even, only one story could be told from the initial premisse. If that would be the case, it's quite a limitation on story telling, without any unpredictability. If every storyteller followed those rules, playing the beggining of the game would make everyone kbow how it would end, we would just playout how to get there.
REGARDLESS, I was never claiming "LOTR was done like this, so CP needs to be family friendly!". LOTR was just an example, I could've just as easily cited Nolan's Batman for instance. I was just drawing attention to the way those stories are structured and how they're similarly building up to a well defined goal. Now, I can understand that "6 months" is meant as a plot twist i.e. you expect that V's life is going to be saved, that's the climax it's building up to, that's the touchdown, but -plot twist- you've only got 6 months. I get that, and I think that's fine if you then do something with that plot twist (e.g. 6th Sense dealt with its twist at the end, which was a famously unconventional thing that worked brilliantly). But In CP, that twist isn't really dealt with - the 6 month thing is just sort of left open and hanging there (with the implication that she's still looking for a solution, whether it's the Nomad or Casino endings). Which is fine with me if the plan is to continue that story and bring closure there - if they don't I'll be really disappointed. So... time will tell 
The whole debate is perhaps fruitless if approached only compared to works of fiction, the general idea I believe is to degree at least disintegration and integration in psychological terms. That leaves option for new protagonist and cover fate of V like William Gibson did with protagonist of Neuromancer, his fate is mentioned in last novel of Sprawl trilogy of novels and it doesn't need to be death.I get the feeling you think I'm anti-sad endings or something. If that's the case, you can get that idea out of your head right now
Yeah and this might be influenced by generational culture gaps to an extent!?
Yeah well, I see what you mean but in general entertainment space in relevant genres, I think there's sort of conflict with producers and audience. It's not only about different tastes but that show get canceled and / or build for next step that never comes. I can see how that can be economical from production point of view but at the same time, can be very annoying to audience and generates distrust. For different tastes I recall I watched about 2 and a half seasons of X-Files because it became obvious that solving anything would be counterproductive for financial goals for producers. That's not to say it was a bad show but it just wasn't for me.
Absolutely agree. I've mentioned it before in other threads, but the game follows the classic, literary arc of "The Quest for Immortality".You seem to be fixated on the main story needing to deliver on saving V's life. I don't get this at all. The story was about V 's attempts to cheat death - which is ultimately futile. V should be dead at the hands of Dex, it was only the chip which prolonged their life at all.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I get what your saying, but I disagree
Not as simple as that. It's far more context sensitive topic. There's definitely a slope to a classic trap here, old tales, Romeo and Juliet being famous example, author realizing that letting these characters live would never work for audience yet audience wanted a love story of a life time, so he did that. LOL and game explores that off shoot of that, association with love and death that cultures inherited from and deconstructs on philosophical level in Sun ending via Rogue and Johnny relationship.
Sorry if I had missunderstood your meaning. I love the fountain alsoI'm actually very much in favour of stories breaking "rules" - and I'll absolutely enjoy it more when they can pull it off. The Fountain is one of the most unconventional and unpredictable movies I've ever seen and is my all-time favourite. In fact, I think most of my favourite stories break the rules in one form or another. So the idea that I think stories must "strictly be a certain way" isn't true at all. CP2077 is one of my favourites and it breaks conventions in a number of ways that I absolutely love. I love that I can play as a trans character for instance. And actually, it's because I enjoy CP so much, that I have such strong criticisms. In any case, I'm not saying, "this is wrong storytelling!"; I'm saying, "this aspect of the story doesn't work for me and here are the reasons why." And like I said earlier, I think writers are well within their rights to write whatever they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to work for me (and I'm certainly not trying to act like if it doesn't that it can't work for you). That being said, I don't think CP is trying to be unconventional from a story point of view - it's got a pretty familiar structure like a lot of action adventure games. I also don't think that CP is trying to be structured like a Shakespearean tragedy like, say, Romeo and Juliet, which is deliberately building towards a tragedy in order to understand why it happened. I just didn't get the sense CP was trying to do that either. If other people did, then fair enough
I think I hear what you and LeKill3rFou are saying about CP77's themes - the little guy vs the big man, helplessness, failure, struggle in the face of adversity - that sort of thing... But, to be fair, you could say the exact the same about LOTR
Hmm, that's debatable. I bring it up because I do not believe that is what the narrative was about. To me it was about a character facing impending death and the player being given leeway to decide how that character responded to it.
The technogical construct bit is questionable. The game doesn't clearly say this is what the sub-choice embedded within various ending pathways to cede the body involves. I believe there is mention of V "merging" with Alt if they stay in Cyberspace. What does that mean? Who knows.... Do they retain awareness and autonomy if they take this option? Again, who knows.... If this is supposed to be about sacrificing humanity for digital immortality one would think it would be crystal clear. Instead the game implies it's an end for V. V making a sacrifice to give Johnny another go of it (or Johnny forcing V do it in the Sun).
Fair point. This is what the story is about so it has to play out this way or it doesn't fit. That only works if the story is actually about the concept of chasing immortality. As noted above, I question whether it was in the first place.
Not a quest for immortality. The Relic is presented as immortality but the logic behind it (as presented to the people of NC) is that the person that slots the relic in stays in contact with a deseased person's engram. So the imortality here is from the person "slotted in". Anyways a game's themes can be plenty and the main theme doesn't need to show up on the objectives list; they are many times in the background. Immortality comes up a lot in many places;
Yeah, there was an advertisement of it playing on tv's at various points. Yes, later V learns what the relic is about and a greater understanding of the secure your soul program. The actual reason it exists being one of those tidbits. What does V know before the Heist blows up in their face? At that point it's just a high risk, high reward job. Everything points to stealing the Relic because of it's value. Not to unlock immortality.
Yes, there are many themes in the background. The key here is in the background. I'm not saying immortality isn't touched upon. Only that the story is not based upon achieving it in any literal sense. Not for V.
It is directly established with the existence of Mikoshi tech. That's what it is. You "Secure Your Soul" by becoming a digital construct like Johnny. That's not "interpretation" -- it's clearly and directly defined by the game.
Shakespeare didn't create Romeo and Juliet. He adapted it from a classic, Italian story that was already centuries old at his time. Shakespeare was his time's Disney -- he took time-honored tales and re-imagined them in both a contemporary and universal way. The comparison really only applies insofar as modernizing classical themes. (And Romeo and Juliet isn't a love story -- it's tragedy about gang violence. That's the most direct parallel to draw to our time. In fact, several characters, most prominently the Nurse and Friar Lawrence, go to some length about how Romeo and Juliet are not in love with each other. They're just silly kids infatuated with one another...but Lawrence politics a way of using them to end the feud between the Montague and Capulet families. And for whatever reason, the Nurse thinks this is a good idea instead of slapping him upside the head.) It's a story focusing on the classic themes of "The Feud" or "The Duel". (And Shakespear lambastes both of those things in numerous works.)
You are feeding me back what I have some others has went over in other topics many times and I'm going to cut this short. See...
I never made such argument, opposite in fact.
He indeed did copy Italian story and also copied solution. I got familiar with this on university course, there were video lecture part of that and professors were from some New York academy and Royal Shakespeare something, anyway they had peer reviewed study. There was one different take to why Shakespeare killed Romeo and Juliet and that was from actress that was studying in London. So....
You keep saying this and if CP 2077 were build on those rules this might work, but like I wrote before CP 2077 genius is in that it takes so yeah, Shakepeare and that, you are right about pattern, but it's very clear, I have zero doubt here, someone at CDPR had enough brains to think outside of the box and for example decided to throw Freud at Shakespeare and that's why it works! So this is the game CDPR made and no disrespect, but if want to argue about that, you need to take that to them.
It's there where the Monks, Johnny during Sinner Man and many more dialogues/moments launch the debate
Those weren't directed at your comments. For the "Let's just ignore the story and do it differently," I'm addressing the general consensus among people that want to say the story is unqualified or forced. I argue it's not -- it's inherent in the arc created. "Changing it" isn't really possible -- not without disqualifying what has been strongly established.
Yeah, there have been a lot of courses and documentaries and such that I've seen that never seemed to actually visit the source before coming to some interesting conclusions and interpretations. The whole reason he was so successful then -- and remains even more successful today -- is because he knew how to distill human nature down to its core. His words and ideas resonate so strongly.He indeed did copy Italian story and also copied solution. I got familiar with this on university course, there were video lecture part of that and professors were from some New York academy and Royal Shakespeare something, anyway they had peer reviewed study. There was one different take to why Shakespeare killed Romeo and Juliet and that was from actress that was studying in London. So....
Anyway, it's important as it describes real problems still relevant today for creators, I mean Judy and Panam topics?
There's trend in academia sometimes ignore previous stuff and come up with some sort of mystery, publishing shit show part, visibility, perhaps additional grant for further research, frankly abusing poor peer review process in some universities.
Here, I have to disagree. I don't think the game did anything to "deconstruct" the classical themes. They simply re-explored them in a new setting with new characters. I can find nothing -- not one example from anywhere in the story -- that deviates from the classic "Quest For Immortality" theme. Nothing. At the same time, I can run down the list and tick off all the boxes that line up nicely with every other piece I've ever read surrounding this. I can even applaud the beautiful nuance of using existing elements of Cyberpunk 2020 to blend this story in seamlessly. We have the trusted friend lost on the path...we have the supernatural messenger...we have sudden realization that grasping at power -- not wanting it -- is the critical mistake...we have the final choice and sacrifice. Every part of the motif is there. All of it. Everything.
I wouldn't say your point of view and yours, CS554 are very different overall; more the "deconstruct" term discussion so common in the arts world. I personally prefer reconstruct as a lot (most?) Ideas have been explored, we can ultimately find our authentic way of pondering upon and expressing them, inline with the available technology and influenced by it's contemporary society, culture, zeitgeist.
