Endings are Mass Effect all over again, my hope is now on PL and mods

[jeffaubin24]

I see your point. At the end of the day, the story of Cyberpunk is up to interpretation, and we could both be right. I do find it weird how the dialogue strongly implies the takeover is mental, and then V shows physical symptoms. How would the relic cause a problem in the lungs? Still, I disagree about there not being any conflict between V and Silverhand in terms of who is taking over. It's subtle, and they don't actually point it out, but it can be detected in the dialogue in certain scenes.

For example, in the conversation with the Doll, the doll will say a sentence clearly meant for Silverhand, and then follow it up with one clearly meant for V. The doll is reading parts of both their personalities, and is uncapable of knowing where one ends and the other one begins. V also shares a fear multiple times throughout the game that they aren't sure if the decisions they make are truly theirs. A few lines clearly seem to be inspired by Johnny's personality, but it's hard to tell because they are so intertwined by the end of the game.

While some themes would still be satisfied with this hypothetical Lion King ending, other major themes go completely ignored. First of all, as with your LotR example where the core conflict is defeating Sauron, the core conflict of the Lion King is defeating Scar. Also, the main theme of the movie IMO is Simba not being ready to lead. He can't live to the expectations of his parents, he can't bring harmony and end the violence because he isn't ready to lead. He isn't a lion by accident : Disney centered the movie on Simba's path to becoming a leader. Him never leaving the jungle would go completely against that, and thus would be a disastrous ending that doesn't respect the themes of the movie.

 

[gogman54321]

In any case, even if V lives, I don't think they should be back in the sequel.

V really is a nobody it seems. I thought, especially towards the end, it would be really helpful if V at least had a nemesis (like Silverhand has Adam Smasher) but I could not think of anybody who could be a nemesis on the bad guy's side. Arasaka doesn't care about V (since they booted him, if corpo). This is weird because he stole their biochip and presumably they'd want it back. Even if they didn't want it back, wouldn't they try to get V just to make a point that one does not steal from Arasaka? Yorinobu does not know who V is. Smasher does not know who V is. They don't even notice V throughout the story.

i'm very much not a fan of the spend the entire game trying to save yourself only for the ending to go, gotcha you fail!

This is how I feel. And it goes back to what @koalahugs wrote too. It seemed to me the entire point of everything was that V tries to save his life. Only to be told in the end: 'Sorry, wasn't going to happen. Wrong people, wrong city, etc.'

I think, I would have been more content with the endings as they are, if the story had changed the main goal to something else at some point.
Say, early in the story, perhaps this happens: The first time V meets Alt, she tells him: 'You can't save yourself. You are going to die. Sorry. But! You can still help Silverhand, and you can help us get back at Arasaka and you can go out in a blaze of glory. Are you in, or out?'
I suppose, I would have accepted this and wouldn't have been disappointed in the end.

StudioBinder does an excellent job of explaining what they think tends to work with audiences in terms of endings (this vid is about denouement specifically - the bit right after a climax - but it's applicable to endings generally I think).

They suggst 3 things often happen to make audiences really satisfied, but they're not necessary and it's one of those things you judge on a case by case basis. Those 3 things tend to be:

1. Conclude the main conflict
2. Provide resolution
3. Resonate the theme

That being said, you can do all 3 and audiences might still hate your film, conversely you can leave some of those things ambiguous and still have a mostly satisfied audience. All a bit subjective really.

Still, though, as a reflection exercise I think it's useful to consider when looking at why an ending was controversial or successful.

Some examples:

Mass Effect 3:
1. Concluded main conflict ✓
2. Lacked character resolution ✗
3. Resonated the theme ✓

Lacking character resolution isn't necessarily a bad thing depending on the story, but in the case of ME, that was always going to be a very hard thing to justify. The characters are what we were emotionally invested in, after hundreds of hours of conversations.

Avengers Endgame:
1. Concluded main conflict ✓
2. Provided character resolution ✓
3. Resonated the theme ✓

I included this example because I feel like too much of the discussion around this tends to get tunnel visioned on whether or not the protagonist lives or dies, without putting this into context and considering whether or not the ending stuck the landing, narratively speaking. Endgame overwhelmingly satisfied most audiences. It concluded the main conflict ✓, it resonated the theme ✓, and it provided character resolution ✓ (especially in the epilogue, giving substantial scenes for surviving characters to grieve, reflect, look forward, etc.).
If Mass Effect's ending focussed more on the characters, instead of a voice-over about the galaxy at large, it probably would've landed far, far better IMO.

In the case of Cyberpunk 2077 though, the protagonist's survival is intrinsicly tied to the main conflict of the story.

Each ending handles things differently:

Star Ending:
1. Didn't conclude main conflict ✗
2. Ambiguous character resolution ✗/✓
3. Resonated theme about family and hope? ✓

The conflict isn't concluded here because V's objective hasn't changed; only the obstacle has - the conflict is effectively ongoing.
There's resolution in the sense that she's with family now, but she lacks resolution regarding her actual problem, which most of the game focusses on.
The theme they choose to resonate is family and hope, but does that fit with 1 and 2? It feels a bit muddled on what they were trying to do here. If V had actually succeeded in curing her problem then this ending would've felt a lot more organic. She would actually have hope and she would actually be able to focus on being with family. It's my canon ending, but it feels a bit incongruent with itself.

Sun Ending:
1. Didn't conclude main conflict ✗
2. Ambiguous character resolution ✗/✓
3. Resonated theme about being a legend? Quest for immortality? Surviving against all odds? ?

This also felt a bit confused. The whole reason she goes to space is because she'd "do anything for even a slim chance of survival" (Mr Blue Eyes' words), and she's got "nothing more to gain but nothing left to lose" (her words). So she's not doing it to be a legend then? She's still just trying to get a cure? But thematically, the whole vibe is, "she's a legend now". So which is it then? I can't tell if they're trying to end the story on that note, or if they're saying, "to be continued".
It's maybe a good ending for players who opted to play the version of V who was obsessed with becoming a legend; but it didn't quite work for players like me who played the opposite version of V who was openly critical of that idea and was just trying to survive and be free and not let NC beat her.

Devil Ending:
1. Didn't conclude main conflict ✗
2. Ambiguous character resolution ✗/✓
3. Resonated the whole Icarus theme? ✓

THIS ONE IS INTERESTING. I actually think this ending is one of the few that actually worked ✓. Why? The theme; you flew too close to the sun and you got burned. This is the most Black Mirror ending out of the lot. That theme JUSTIFIES not concluding the main conflict. The resolution is a little clearer if you chose to go back to Earth because we get the sense that V recognises that she fucked up. If you chose Mikoshi, it's a little more vague... but again, it fits anyway. She's effectively chosen purgatory, and the whole point of purgatory is that you're stuck in limbo.
So this ending is a really good example of not doing all 3 things, but having a logical justification for it. A solid ending IMO, but definitely not my canon one, more of a cool bonus really.

Temperence Ending:
1. Concludes main conflict ✓
2. Strong character resolution for Johnny albeit ambiguous resolution for V ✓ / ?
3. Resonated redemption? ✓

This one basically ticks all the boxes, but it's a bit of a weird one simply because it's so focussed on Johnny instead of the protagonist. I do wonder if players of the tabletop click with this ending more. But for players like me who have played this game in isolation, this ending really just feels like a "bonus" ending more than anything else. BTW, it's also worth noting it's the one ending where V survives, but it's a phyrric victory.

Path of Least Resistance Ending:
1. Concludes main conflict ✓
2. Provides character resolution but I'm not sure it makes sense ?
3. Resonated Fatalism? Corpos always win? I'm honestly not sure ?

The problem I have with this is that, although I understand V not wanting anyone she cares about to get hurt, I don't understand why the idea of going solo doesn't pop up. To me this whole scene is just so out of character for both of them and just felt far too easy and lacking in conflict. Gets a shrug from me.

Anyway, if we get another ending where V actually survives, I just hope it'll be a satisfying ending above all else. I still have a feeling that V's story will continue in Orion in some form though. In any case I do think V deserves an ending where she survives and gets her life back, simply because why spend all of that time focussing on trying to do that?

EDIT: another thing that I think is worth bearing in mind is what themes in the game are most important to you? I think for me, survival, family, and hope, are the main ones - so V surviving, with those themes resonant, would probably be the ending that makes the most sense.

This post is very well thought through. I also think that unlike CP, ME was never about Shepard surviving primarily. Shepard is perhaps irrelevant to the main theme. This is a problem for players like me, who want their guy to live. However, with ME, each ending sucks in its own way, on top of Shepard dying.
Destroy? Yes, but you also have to do a little genocide against the Geth and then kill EDI.
Control? Nope, this was not supposed to happen. Shepard's orders, given by Hacket, are to destroy them, not to appoint himself their leader!
Synthesis: Not even going to talk about that.

With CP, it is the other way around. The endings are mostly okay, except for the fact that V dies in all of them but V's survival for me was the main point of the story not a side show.

 

[jom81518]

I

I couldn't disagree more, honestly. Mass Effect was a game all about being the hero and trying to save as many people as you can, deciding whether you're a good person or not, and how that affects the world around you. It made sense, with the lore and the themes explored by the game, to have an ending that was satisfying and allowed everyone to live happily ever after. The fact that Bioware didn't offer an ending like is the reason the endings were so disappointing.

Cyberpunk 2077 is a very, very different game. You are not a hero, and the world influences you a lot more than you influence it. Cyberpunk isn't about whether you can change the world or not, or about whether you're a do-gooder who makes things better and saves people or an asshole who ruins the lives of the people around him. Ultimately, Cyberpunk is mostly about free will in a city that will do everything to strip that away from you. Managing to go out on your own terms is enough of an accomplishment on its own, having a happy ending is pushing it too far and being unrealistic.

Having an ending where V gets the chip out, lives happily ever after and leaves everyone satisfied would've ruined the game in my opinion. It would've shown the devs didn't really understand the genre. I know it sucks to say, but if you want satisfactory endings that leave everyone happy, stay away from the Cyberpunk genre. It just doesn't fit.

I think I'm starting to see in a general sense (games tv and film) the specific closure that people want when they say happy ending. Its not necessarily sunshine and roses like the end of an Adam Sandler comedy.

I think its more so people want the main character they sympathize with to be seen rewarded with the fruits of their labor. Bittersweet and sobering high cost victory stories also fit into this rather than having the ultimate price hanging over their head.

Its probably because outside of cyberpunk if we look at other contemporaries RDR2, TLOU2 for etc theres a prevailing sentiment that riding off into the sunset cheapens the grit of these conflict stories, that to fight/die/suffer is the only fitting end for a warrior's story to reconcile the reality of war and as the blunt instrument protagonist has served its purpose.

But I agree that goin out like a champ is just a key part of this genre as its bleakness is just the noir story tradition, just in a high tech setting.

So while not necessarily in cyberpunk but in other gritty fiction, I think the way to satisfy the hopeful consumer and realist consumer demands is to discover a purpose or duty mid story for the protagonist that logically extends beyond the main story. Thus extending their story lifespan by illustrating their utility and hinting at new things on the horizon.

Only problem is if it its good, people treat that as sequel bait rather than a true ending in its own right.

 

[Notserious80]

Well i kinda made this argument after the first time i came to the rooftop. I felt a surge of dread and got ME3 flashbacks even before i started the ending pretty much. Not that i consider the games similar or anything, it was just the same awful feeling as the RGB ending pre patches and DLC that i got. I hate when games gives you a choice of the ending. id rather have my actions up to that point dictate what ending i get.

The RGB endings are way diffrent then playing the end in Cp2077 tho so credit there. Alot in the game is left very unresolved and its just deppresing tho so, yea cyberpunk... i get what they were going for but still, i dont like it.

 

[Fujisteria]

Huh... weird. I don't remember the endings in CP2077 being multicolored...

 

[alittleLowkey]

V really is a nobody it seems. I thought, especially towards the end, it would be really helpful if V at least had a nemesis (like Silverhand has Adam Smasher) but I could not think of anybody who could be a nemesis on the bad guy's side. Arasaka doesn't care about V (since they booted him, if corpo). This is weird because he stole their biochip and presumably they'd want it back. Even if they didn't want it back, wouldn't they try to get V just to make a point that one does not steal from Arasaka? Yorinobu does not know who V is. Smasher does not know who V is. They don't even notice V throughout the story.

Smasher not knowing who V is fits the narrative, and it's also kind of satisfying having someone as legendary and mighty as him going down to an (in his eyes) nobody.

I would however have liked it if others slowly began to realise exactly how tough V is. Like Placide and the VB's should be shitting bricks after V starts moving them down.

 

[chadesh]

As the base game was written the original V will die and nothing could help them, but A copy of V could be saved kinda like lizzy wizzys love interest wanted to do to her. The fact that that quest line was even put in the game is a mega slap in the face to players. (carrot on a stick) that quest and other actual statements in the game show that V could have been saved from the get-go, but CDPR apparently wanted to give what they believe was a proper ending for the cyberpunk world.

There is also a different version of soul killer that don't kill the person being copied. V has the original prototype 2.0 version of the chip which hadn't been completely perfected. Saburo Arasaka has the current version (lets say version 2.5) that he uses on his son to take control of his empire.

Unfortunately to save V you will have to work with arasaka or the NUSA and each has their own issues and draw backs.

But the bottom line is neither has any reason to go above and beyond to save a nobody merc no matter what they have done. Also the only way V can live, is for original V to die.

Look at it this way. V is a powerful merc and has done allot in the time they came to NC. Put them back down to level 1 kills the original V or making them a construct also puts them back to level 1.

The original V no longer exists in either scenario.

when I did hanako ending and choosing to be put on a chip. I had a head cannon that someone raid mikoshi and took several engrams one being V and the group wanted to save the engrams from araska prison to give them a chance at a new life.

 

[CTPhipps]

V really is a nobody it seems. I thought, especially towards the end, it would be really helpful if V at least had a nemesis (like Silverhand has Adam Smasher) but I could not think of anybody who could be a nemesis on the bad guy's side. Arasaka doesn't care about V (since they booted him, if corpo). This is weird because he stole their biochip and presumably they'd want it back. Even if they didn't want it back, wouldn't they try to get V just to make a point that one does not steal from Arasaka? Yorinobu does not know who V is. Smasher does not know who V is. They don't even notice V throughout the story.

They may not know you at the beginning of the story story but they fucking sure know you at the end.

 

[gogman54321]

I finally* got around to enjoying the new base game ending. I am curious as to what you all think about it. I haven't fully thought it through, but this my first impression of the new ending.

During the PL story I was asked a few times as to why I made certain decisions and every time I answered basically: “I just want to live.”. However, I didn’t want to live at any cost, like Songbird. She killed everybody at the stadium (mass murder just to save herself). It was a massacre. I, my V, wouldn’t have done that.

Anyway, seeing as all the base game endings sucked, I did not really believe that I (rather V) would get to live in the end. I was half expecting that Reed and Mayers would screw me over when all was done. In fact, I recall that Reed did say that they tried the cure on Songbird first and it didn't take and then they put it in storage to use on V. Does this mean that if the FIA could have saved Songbird, they would have left V to die (the cure can only be used once)? But lo and behold: The FIA did come through for me! It was all I ever asked for. V lives on.

All avenues are still open to me except maybe becoming a legend at the afterlife (being a merc is out of the question without cyberware). Becoming a fixer in Night City is just as possible as taking the FIA up on their offer and working an FIA desk job at Langley. And anything in between (becoming a ripper doc, etc.).

Of course, the point wasn’t lost on me that CDPR tried to make it seem like a bad ending at first glance but the more I think about it, the more I like this ending.

Now, for the downsides of this ending. None of the downside are intrinsically linked to the procedure of removing the Relic in my opinion. In other words, CDPR arbitrarily threw in some curveballs just to make sure that going out in a blaze of glory, striking at Arasaka still seems like the best ending (which it isn’t, not for V, considering that V dies a few weeks or months afterwards).

• Songbird was unable to escape Mayer’s clutches. I do feel bad for her but then I remember how this two-faced, double-crossing snake lied to me and tried to trick me at every single turn. I remember that her plan was to take the only cure for herself and leave V in the dust to die.
• The fact that the FIA couldn’t be bothered to at least call Panam and tell her that V was in a coma is annoying because poor Panam thought that V was either dead or was ghosting her. Not fair to Panam. This could have been avoided by making one phone call.
• There’s the problem that V can’t use implants/cyberware anymore. This rules out any security or merc work but it is a small price to pay in exchange for not dying.
• Johnny had to go. Oh well. He already died 50 years(?) ago at the hands Arasaka. I don’t feel super bad for him. Of course, it would have been better, had they been able been to extract the Relic without erasing Johnny.
• As for the overall political situation: Arasaka is on the way out and Militech is on the rise. A zero sum game, I suppose. Peralez is mayor. Good for him. I hope he escaped the people who were brainwashing him because my V didn’t take the time to do that.

Anyway, what do you all think?

*I wanted to enjoy it in 4K so I needed a new GPU and I was waiting for the 4080 Super to come out. The joke was on me. It was only 5% faster than the 4080. Anyway, when I had the new GPU, I was in the middle of playing Starfield.

 

[northwold]

I finally* got around to enjoying the new base game ending. I am curious as to what you all think about it. I haven't fully thought it through, but this my first impression of the new ending.

During the PL story I was asked a few times as to why I made certain decisions and every time I answered basically: “I just want to live.”. However, I didn’t want to live at any cost, like Songbird. She killed everybody at the stadium (mass murder just to save herself). It was a massacre. I, my V, wouldn’t have done that.

Anyway, seeing as all the base game endings sucked, I did not really believe that I (rather V) would get to live in the end. I was half expecting that Reed and Mayers would screw me over when all was done. In fact, I recall that Reed did say that they tried the cure on Songbird first and it didn't take and then they put it in storage to use on V. Does this mean that if the FIA could have saved Songbird, they would have left V to die (the cure can only be used once)? But lo and behold: The FIA did come through for me! It was all I ever asked for. V lives on.

All avenues are still open to me except maybe becoming a legend at the afterlife (being a merc is out of the question without cyberware). Becoming a fixer in Night City is just as possible as taking the FIA up on their offer and working an FIA desk job at Langley. And anything in between (becoming a ripper doc, etc.).

Of course, the point wasn’t lost on me that CDPR tried to make it seem like a bad ending at first glance but the more I think about it, the more I like this ending.

Now, for the downsides of this ending. None of the downside are intrinsically linked to the procedure of removing the Relic in my opinion. In other words, CDPR arbitrarily threw in some curveballs just to make sure that going out in a blaze of glory, striking at Arasaka still seems like the best ending (which it isn’t, not for V, considering that V dies a few weeks or months afterwards).

• Songbird was unable to escape Mayer’s clutches. I do feel bad for her but then I remember how this two-faced, double-crossing snake lied to me and tried to trick me at every single turn. I remember that her plan was to take the only cure for herself and leave V in the dust to die.
• The fact that the FIA couldn’t be bothered to at least call Panam and tell her that V was in a coma is annoying because poor Panam thought that V was either dead or was ghosting her. Not fair to Panam. This could have been avoided by making one phone call.
• There’s the problem that V can’t use implants/cyberware anymore. This rules out any security or merc work but it is a small price to pay in exchange for not dying.
• Johnny had to go. Oh well. He already died 50 years(?) ago at the hands Arasaka. I don’t feel super bad for him. Of course, it would have been better, had they been able been to extract the Relic without erasing Johnny.
• As for the overall political situation: Arasaka is on the way out and Militech is on the rise. A zero sum game, I suppose. Peralez is mayor. Good for him. I hope he escaped the people who were brainwashing him because my V didn’t take the time to do that.

Anyway, what do you all think?

*I wanted to enjoy it in 4K so I needed a new GPU and I was waiting for the 4080 Super to come out. The joke was on me. It was only 5% faster than the 4080. Anyway, when I had the new GPU, I was in the middle of playing Starfield.

At the end of the day, Cyberpunk, through its exploration of what it means to have a soul, etc, is throughout the game rooted in sort of existentialist questions not just of what it means to exist but what is the purpose of existence. So the PL ending, to me, fits. Life is what you do with it. And, given that everything V did with it is gone and they will be starting again, you can see that as happy or sad. Basically, was it worth it? Up to you.

 

[S0lstafir]

At the end of the day, Cyberpunk, through it's exploration of what it means to have a soul, etc, is throughout the game rooted in sort of existentialist questions not just of what it means to exist but what is the purpose of existence.

I apologize, by whom exactly, where and when is this defined?

 

[northwold]

I apologize, by whom exactly, where and when is this defined?

Not sure I understand the question in that I don't think at any point anyone sits down and says "this is all about existence", although when you catch up with the monks who were kidnapped by maelstrom later on, in the market, the discussion of the nature of an engram might be said to be pretty explicit,

Spoiler: Spoiler

and the game does flash up right in front of you on a billboard "secure your soul" at the moment of the final decision.

It's more there are clear elements of it suffused throughout the game. The most obvious example of the *purpose* question is do you want to be a legend, set up from very early on, and from there V's own journey and choices. See also eg Sinnerman, Panam (for the family), etc etc. The "what it means to exist" stuff, most obviously, is in the whole concept of the Relic (but see also eg Brendan, Alt, the meditation quests, the many, many nuggets about the nature of the soul and eg Cartesian dualism (the game actually has a band called "the Cartesian Duelists"), the questions of agency in the Peralez quest, the concept of dolls in terms of what actually are they when they're "active", etc).

 

[gogman54321]

There’s the problem that V can’t use implants/cyberware anymore. This rules out any security or merc work but it is a small price to pay in exchange for not dying.

Since I wrote this, I read something on Reddit where someone pointed out that when V becomes a merc and sees Viktor for the first time, Viktor says: "Really? Now? Finally?"

So it was possible for V to be an Arasaka counter intel agent without any cyberware to speak of. This kind of reaffirms for me that most careers and life goals are still possible for V after the Tower ending.

Even combat is not entirely out of the question. I am thinking:

• In game, I can still hold my own in combat without any cyberware, just using gun play.
• Takemura can fight off Arasaka goons during Search and Destroy, even though Arasaka deactivated all of his implants.

Am I mistaken?

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Since I wrote this, I read something on Reddit where someone pointed out that when V becomes a merc and sees Viktor for the first time, Viktor says: "Really? Now? Finally?"

So it was possible for V to be an Arasaka counter intel agent without any cyberware to speak of. This kind of reaffirms for me that most careers and life goals are still possible for V after the Tower ending.

Even combat is not entirely out of the question. I am thinking:

• In game, I can still hold my own in combat without any cyberware, just using gun play.
• Takemura can fight off Arasaka goons during Search and Destroy, even though Arasaka deactivated all of his implants.

Am I mistaken?

Not sure what kind of cyberware V had when working for Arasaka, but surely some kind of top-end "neural booster" & "hormones regulater/manager" (not sure^^). At least, we know that V's coatch keep an eye on V's data 24/7 or almost. So V is not "cyberwareless" during the Corpo intro, that's for sure.

Edit : Without talking about the fact that V (if you decide to) can knock out two big dudes when getting out the AV at the Lizzie's Bar in no time (one punch for one and with the basket ball for the second). And then, V can score a basketball basket from far enough to ashame a NBA's player, so...

And for Viktor, I think he's referring to "high-tier" cyberwares. V already currently (when asking) have "basic" cyberwares but now want "tools not "toys".

V : Need some new kit - but tools, not toys. Time I bumped up my sights and got a grip.
Viktor : heheheh. Really? Now? Finally?
V : Shit's gettin' real. Got a job from Dex DeShawn - hittin' the major leagues. Need tech that can perform.

And well, Goro can fight Arasaka goons during Search and Destroy, sure. But I assume you know what happen if if V doesn't come back to help him.

Spoiler

He dies

 

[InfectedSoul]

Cyberpunk is not all like mass effect though

 

[ExSteam]

At some point I realized V was just along for the ride. Basically every step someone else was in control and we were doing our best to make it out alive and do right by others caught in the same web.
I tried, I cried, Night City grabbed the heart strings and played a wicked song.
Whispered promises of being a legend until I was done and gone.

 

[gogman54321]

At some point I realized V was just along for the ride. Basically every step someone else was in control and we were doing our best to make it out alive and do right by others caught in the same web.
I tried, I cried, Night City grabbed the heart strings and played a wicked song.
Whispered promises of being a legend until I was done and gone.

I think we've touched upon this already but yeah, V is not the main character. I don't think that is particularly great given that V is the player character . Johnny is the main character imo and he gives bad advice a lot. If I follow Johhny's advice, I leave Takemura for dead in Search and Destroy. I don't tell the Peralez couple that Holt assassinated the mayor. Johhny is like a ghost I talk to who hasn't much of wisdom or insights to offer. He's basically like "Fuck corpos" and "Look out for yourself".

I don't agree with V not being in control though. V is very much in control. V can make his own choices throughout for the most part. V can choose how it all ends. V can assault Arasaka's tower or cut a deal with them. V can enlist the Aldecaldos or not. Same for Rogue. V can let Johnny take over or V can choose to do nothing and die. V can make a deal with the FIA and get Johnny removed. V is dealt a very bad hand but I think he's still able to make his own choices.

My gripe used to be that all the choices available were bad choices but no more since we got PL.

 

[S0lstafir]

Consequently, Night City is not a city of opportunity. It's a city of promises.

 

[Guest 4719259]

I'm probably a little late to this but I just finished it now for the first time, so straight to my main issue: Why do Sci-Fi writers seem to have this weird fascination with killing off the main character, bringing them back to life only to kill them off again?

The curse of ancient Egypt?
Some Sci-Fi writers are into Egyptian history, and they have one of the basic themes there - the death of Osiris and his subsequent resurrection. Christianity is following, with the idea of Christ's resurrection ...
The paradigms of thinking are set. It might be hard to shake off that legacy, as well as come up with something completely original themselves.

 

[FelineWitcher]

I disagree, I find 2077 more wholesome than ME3. Then again the earlier is a standalone game.