Do you hate unhappy endings? (spoilers)

+

Happy or Sad endings?

  • Happy

    Votes: 82 71.3%
  • Sad

    Votes: 33 28.7%

  • Total voters
    115
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.

I dunno, I think the mistake you are making is thinking it is a game to win rather than a story to experience.
 
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.
At least when you escape with the Aldecaldos with Panam and Judy, there is some hope to fix V's condition thanks to Panam's friends somewhere. Others only give you a choice between dying now or in 6 months and even if you let your body to Johnny, there is not much room for a sequel imo.
That's why I assumed that the Aldecaldos ending was canon (I might be wrong though) because somehow I want to save V and continue to play the game.
 
After learning about Stormtech, I can see most of the endings leading V to the Crystal Palace.

New Dawn Fades
Alt (and/or Johnny) takes V's engram there...for whatever reason.
Johnny (as stubborn as he is) might not want to have such a huge debt to V while Alt might have her own agenda.

Path Of Glory
V naturally goes there him/herself. Stormtech might be the real reason for going.

All Along The Watchtower
Aldecaldos/Stormtech takes him/her there. Aldecaldos want to take care of their own while Stormtech will help V in exchange for something.

Where Is My Mind
Arasaka actually fulfills the contract...probably with a lot of strings attached but V finds some way to get out of it. Maybe Stormtech or some other corporation (indirectly) saves V during some kind of corporate sabotage/espionage attempt.

The only true "bad endings" could be if V offs him/herself directly or indirectly in The Easy Way Out or during Don't Fear The Reaper.
 
I like good endings, happy or sad is irrelevant. Therefore I cannot vote.
This.

----

Sad endings tend to be more powerful and memorable because of the emotional impact they have, especially when it's a longer game. And I definitely think games with sad endings need to exist, just to balance out all the countless "live happily ever after" ones where the protagonist saves the world or defeats a great evil or whatever.

I've only played one game that has a sad ending no matter what you do; even in the best ending only the player character and their chosen companion survive, literally everyone else dies.
Not going to name the game despite the spoiler warning in the thread title, but its ending is the most powerful I've ever encountered even though I did get that least tragic version of it. Writing and especially character building on the NPCs played a huge role in that, naturally.

One sad ending I will never get is the worst ending of Witcher 3. I've seen it, just never played it because I managed to dodge it, and it would just too gragic for me. Extremely powerful, but just too sad and with too high an emotional impact.

Happy endings are so common that I can't think of one to point out as especially good. Ultimately, they're basically about how the protagonist is successful in whatever their mission is. Sad endings have more variety in that regard.

Then there are endings that are "grey". Those I think are the most interesting, because different people see them in very different lights. Some may consider them happy, others sad, still others neither happy nor sad. To use another example from CDPR games, Blood & Wine has endings that divide opinions. What I consider easily the best (and happiest) ending many see as the absolute worst one.


Don't get me wrong though, I've nothing against happy endings; of course it's nice to finish a game (or any story) with a success. There just isn't that much to write about them, really.
 
I can go either way but I do like good tragedy. SOMA, The Last of Us and Life is Strange all had great, narratively satisfying tragic endings. The world of Cyberpunk sort of precludes the possibility of happy endings in a way. The setting is that of a post capitalist society dominated by mega corporations. In a sense, they have already won and the time where they could be stopped by small revolutions has long passed.

I do think there is an argument to be made that Cyberpunk 2077's tragic endings are not narratively very satisfying. The nomad ending is probably the most satisfying ending in the sense that you have 6 months to live no matter what and you choose to spend that time with the family you found along the way. The tragic part of it is you lose half your family in the process (and I include Johnny as part of that family).

This part is fine as a tragic/bittersweet ending but there were other parts of this ending I found difficult to resolve or rationalise in my playthrough. I played the game where V finds common ground with Johnny and Takamura. In the nomad ending there was no way for me to not be a dick to Johnny. V also acts surprised that Alt would light her up with Soulkiller even though Alt explained this earlier in the Crypt cyberspace dive and V appeared to understand what this would mean.

There is no way for Takamura to not hate you. He kind of just disappears after I rescued him then he tells me to rot in hell. It is strongly insinuated that he commits suicide. I think this could have been resolved in a more satisfying way but it would require you to spend more time with Takamura post rescue. He would need to be involved in the Nocturne mission in some fashion but there needed to be a throughline to show how we get from rescued Takamura to seppuku Takamura. The great thing about this is that Takamura has no good options in this scenario. He is an outcast Arasaka soldier, fighting for the corporation that wants him dead, against the person who saved his life.

The first ending I got was the Johnny/Rogue ending and I didn't find it particularly satisfying because at no point did I ever think V was motivated to take Rogue's place as Queen of the Afterlife. The way it happened was really confusing in my playthrough. However, I did have a nice conversation with Johnny so that part felt good and with Rogue's death there is a kind of satisfyingly tragic conclusion to the central characters of the source material.

Johnny and Rogue realize what they had and squandered while they were both alive. Rogue was the last person Johnny needed to make peace with although in a bitter irony, they were only able to do so on a do-over of the Arasaka Tower assault, this time in the knowledge that she would not be coming back. She burns all her contacts and assets to do this and dies at the hands of Adam Smasher.

Everyone else in Johnny's old life has moved on or has been moved on. Him choosing to go with Alt beyond the blackwall and return your body to you felt like a good tragic ending for Johnny. The problem is that the good tragic ending for Johnny doesn't work as a good tragic ending for V. As satisfying as the nomad ending is for V, it is ultimately unsatisfying for Johnny. You spend most of the game either antagonising or finding common ground with him only for him to be completely absent in the home stretch. He is a deuteragonist!

There is this idea that V always wanted to be a legend but that motivation is not something I can really relate to. V initially wants to make a name for him/herself but that desire gets Jacky killed in the heist. After that, it sort of becomes a hollow wish. It is V's will to survive that motivates him/her to pull off the second heist on Mikoshi and the need to survive is the vital force that propels him/her from Edgerunner status to Legend. It is only when V subordinates his/her wants to the needs that he/she is able to rise to the status of legend, but it inevitably comes at the cost of his/her life. Remember V, Jacky and Claire talking about what it takes to be a Night City legend when you first visit the Afterlife? You don't get to be one unless you are dead and have a drink named after you.

Once it becomes clear that V's death is inevitable, why do the heist on Crystal Palace at all? I think it could have worked better if for example, V becomes motivated to take on a final suicide mission on Crystal Palace and leave the biggest payout of their life to Judy, Panam and the Aldecaldos etc. so they have a shot at a fulfilling life that V couldn't have. I think that could have been a narratively satisfying ending for both Johnny and V. Just as Johnny ties up the loose ends of his former life and makes amends with Kerry and the gang, V does the same while he/she still has time before the end. The Afterlife is the means by which this end may be achieved.
 
Last edited:
Seems like some of the endings were meant to punish those people who complained about The Witcher 3 being too long. Those are the only people who wouldn't do all the side quests in order to get the better ending.
 
I'm fine with either as long as they fit the story and setting and give a satisfying conclusion. I have a few problems with the game but the endings aren't one of them, none of them are particularly happy but I found the ones I saw at least to be quite satisfying.
 

Guest 4529090

Guest
Have you ever tried Disney movies? Girl meets the handsome prince, defeats the evil guy and everyone lives happily ever after! Well except for the bad guy but they don't deserve a happy ending because they are icky and mean, you don't have to watch the protagonist die of an illness and if there is an illness then it will be cured by magical unicorn farts and the only ethical quandary you will ever need to face is whether or not it is ok to violate consent to wake somebody from a coma!
I'll put it this way....I can love a good tragedy...I really enjoy them infact...but after 20+ years I've had my fill of them and would just like to return to my happy ending stories . I enjoyed Cyberpunk but I sort of wished for a happier ending .
 
Didn't vote. I like earned endings, not happy or unhappy. If it makes sense within a story, if it's properly developed and delivered, if there's something to chew on after everything is finished - it can be unhappy for all I care. There are many great bittersweet finales.
 
From any RPG or open world adventure, what I want is long massive journey with a hard earned most rewarding, fulfilling, satisfying, triumphant long ending. I want to feel rewarded.

Love those huge FFVIII and FFIX cutscenes, as well as long journeys like Baldur's Gate 2, or things like Persona 4 and 5... those games can truly spoil an RPG lover.

This industry deserves more of that. Expected nothing shorter nor less satisfying than Witcher 3 and got deeply disappointed.

The main story of this game feels like a good side quest. But waaaaaaay too short and with no satisfying ending for this type of game.

RPG players want to feel proud and happy for their characters, and in an industry where currently the main stream trend is to kill the main character having such an ending just make the game's main story script feel unoriginal, casual appealing. It's like CDPR just want mass appeal instead of caring, as they always said they would, first for the hardcore RPG mature gamer.
 
Last edited:
Have you ever tried Disney movies? Girl meets the handsome prince, defeats the evil guy and everyone lives happily ever after! Well except for the bad guy but they don't deserve a happy ending because they are icky and mean, you don't have to watch the protagonist die of an illness and if there is an illness then it will be cured by magical unicorn farts and the only ethical quandary you will ever need to face is whether or not it is ok to violate consent to wake somebody from a coma!
To use an example, Fallout 3 had a good sad ending I think. Sacrifice yourself to give the world clean water.
The big difference with CP2077 endings, is that in Fallout your sacrifice occurs immediately. As in, you die right there, and maybe see the aftermath of your efforts. sort of like hindsight thing.
In this case we were faced with the you'll live happy and surrounded by your loved ones after having toppled a nemesis, eccept your life will 'inevitably' end after a short while. <-- if you choose to live.
And this is a bit conflicting I think with the 'happy side of some of the endings, such as going with the Nomads one. I think it would've better if the 'happy ending' truly was that or make it about self sacrifice immediately as to not taint it.
 
I'm quite fond of the "earn your happy ending" trope.

CP 2077 is just a mess of different shades of grey in that regard which is really quite sad.

CP 2077 also suffers from being a mess narration-wise. There are simply too many inconsistencies and incoherencies across the endings as other members already mentioned. Probably am unfortunate result of scrapping the original story two years ago?
 
It's definitely brave the direction they took, with an ending where it's very bittersweet no matter what it creates these feelings of emptiness that come alongside the sad aspects of the endings. Not knowing what comes next with the endings doesn't help this feeling and for a lot of people I feel like they expected something less dark with the way the game was presented all the way up to the release. One thing with sad endings is that they take away from being able to further explore the world knowing it all ends sadly makes it seem all kinda pointless initially.
 
I mean, my V is still very much alive. Technically dying as his immune system now attacks his own brain, but still alive. And I get the feeling Mr Blue Eye's side of the "deal" mentioned in the obvious DLC teaser is hooking V up with some Biotechnica gene editing (what that cooperation is known for; in the table top they commonly used gene editing to create furry sex workers. GENE EDITING, not cyberware.) to actually cure him. Heck that could be an entire sequel.
 
i like sad endings if done very well, Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater, Red Dead Redemption

Yeah, MGS3 made me NOT to want to kill BB!

Controller problems meant I haven't finished playing RDR but I wasn't really into that game. Seems very PC or something to me, as in not very consoley.
 
Top Bottom