Is V's story too depressing? [MAJOR SPOILERS]

+

What is your perspective of choice in an adventure/role play game?


  • Total voters
    78
I was really enjoying the game as I played it, but when you reach the end and find out there is no reward for all the shit V goes through, there is no catharsis, it really magnifies the crushing hopelessness and meaninglessness of everything there is to do in the game. I thought I was going to want to load it back up after the ending and go do other side missions, but I never loaded the game back up and wish I had just passed on the whole thing to begin with.
 

Guest 4400165

Guest
To say that people should avoid cyberpunk genre or that they only like the aesthetics because they didn't like the game's endings is a bit rude.
That's not what I and Deathlyhearts meant. He said he doesn't like heavy and depressing stuff in his entertainment, so an obviously fair question arises: "then what did you expect from a cyberpunk game?".
I'm not an expert on the genre, but I can't remember a single piece of entertainment set in a cyberpunk world where everything isn't depressing, and, almost completely, fucked.
 
I was really enjoying the game as I played it, but when you reach the end and find out there is no reward for all the shit V goes through, there is no catharsis, it really magnifies the crushing hopelessness and meaninglessness of everything there is to do in the game. I thought I was going to want to load it back up after the ending and go do other side missions, but I never loaded the game back up and wish I had just passed on the whole thing to begin with.
Literally the only thing that made me feel the "proper" emotion in the endings was Jackie's messed up engram. Getting to say goodbye or declare it wasn't actually him was heartbreaking. Beyond that I feel like the endings were aiming for something a bit more profound or existential, but it was mostly just irritation and confusion. It wasn't that the endings were too sad for me, they just felt so pointless. Same hat on regretting playing the game at all, probably would have been better to wait until expansions were out and see how it went from there.

There's a fine line, I think, between "nothing you do matters" as a theme and "nothing you do matters" as a gameplay choice that just didn't land on the right side. What is the point in going back and doing anything at all when you've unlocked all the endings in your first go around? None of it will change.
 
I agree with the OP. With everything going on in the real world, CP 2077 was a great escape for me and a chance to play a game that reminded me very much of Blade Runner which is one of my favorites of all time. What I did not need is every choice you make, no matter what, doesn't save V.

I don't mind darker endings but to have every option lead to V dying sort of feels like the devs gave me the middle finger. You can still have a darker ending with V living and you can also do the best of both worlds. Some choices lead to dying, others lead to surviving but after all that, a new threat looms on the horizon of NC. Far greater than anyone could expect. Back to work, no celebration. Just as you finally feel you've escaped NC, it ends with you getting pulled right back into the darkness of that town.

Many hours were spent building up this character as all of you here have done. There are 2 issues with these only doomed endings for me. The first is that it feels like the imminent death of V undercuts any growth he/she has as a character. There could have been more of this development regardless. Silverhand evolves and becomes a different man than what we saw from the start. It's gotta be a two way thing for me. Neither would grow if they didn't have each other.

The second issue is the game is nothing more than an exercise in futility. Movies and books can show this well but for gaming, it's not a very satisfying experience. There has to be some payoff and we don't necessarily get that with these ending. Although, I will concede that I did find some of the ending to be moving.

I really would prefer 3rd person considering this is what was indicated in a lot of the trailers leading up to release. Also this is a game that heavily relies and favors aesthetics. Your V has the potential to be a work of art with enough effort put into developing him/her.

I'd like to see my handiwork in cutscenes and game play. Having the ability to only see my female V in the inventory screen or a few select mirrors is a downer.

I hold out hope that the end isn't the end for V and a chance to survive presents itself in future content. They can do an impossible choice scenario. V lives but someone else has to die like Judy or Pan Am and her entire group of Aldecaldos. There are so many directions you can go in that aren't just about V living or dying without a hitch or pointless death.
 
The story like most of this game's features is just average. Then the endings come along and basically everything you did doesn't matter.
 
I've haven't played the game for a while now and had a chance to reflect on the endings.

I've come to the conclusion that not only do I not like the forced downbeat endings, but that they are just bad.

Ignoring what I suspect are bugs in the endings or at least such uncharacteristically poor character beats that they might as well be bugs; the turn by Judy in the devil ending between you calling her from the station and her messages in the epilogue being the prime offender here. The forced 6 months to live just breaks the rest of the endings, especially jarring with Misty's tarot readings in the epilogues.

During the Sun ending you see V push everyone away and go on a clear suicide mission for a probable AI. A sizable chunk of their remaining 6 months having clearly passed while V got set up in Afterlife. But after a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid fade to black, the reading you get is, things are sure looking great!

During the Star ending you head out of civilization with little hope of a cure seemingly content to live out your remaining weeks. And again you get another misplaced cheerful reading from Misty.

The negative reading in the devil ending at least fits how grim they seemed determined to make this ending, but the rest is packed with contradictions. Hanako both did and didn't send Takemura to speak to you. And she both has no use for you any more and wants to hire you.

Even the secret ending is just another suicide mission, all be it one where V gets to display some agency and in which you spare others form dying on your behalf, ignoring for a second all the Arasaka employees you have to mow down to get there.

And I think objectively the best ending - which is more than a little problematic - is the suicide ending. The reason that this comes off as the least bad is down to the "6 months to live" twist. Because this is the only base ending where you don't sacrifice anyone just to buy V a few more weeks. V and Johnny get some closure, Saburo does not regain control of Arasaka and you don't unleash Alt on the world. In other words it is the only ending where things are not made objectively worse by your continued existence. Understandably you get punished by the epilogues for this choice, and Misty encourages you to turn to your friends and do something else; unfortunately this is as good as it gets.
 
I would have preferred it if Jackie died a minute earlier, then he wouldn't have placed the chip in V and I get to hang out with Silverhand (in Jackie's body) lol.
Disclaimer, I personally like the "What if"-idea of Jackie surviving the Heist thanks to the Relic, but the Relic wouldn't have saved him because Jackie didn't get a brain injury, he ruptured his external iliac artery (which is located in the pelvis) and bled out.

Furthermore, the Relic only activated in V because it was damaged by Dex's bullet. Hellman tells you in the motel that they did clinical trials with the Relic on dead or dying test subjects, and none of them were restored to life by the Relic because it failed to activate in them. The only time it actually activated in a person was in V, and only after it had been damaged by a bullet.

So unless someone shot Jackie in the head and the bullet dinged the Relic in his chipslot, the Relic wouldn't have saved him, even if it could heal ruptured arteries (which it can't, because it was never designed to do so).

But it's a neat thought.
 
Well, you're in luck then, feller, because you did! It is still a piece of entertainment, no matter how joyful or depressing it might seem. It doesn't even matter if you weren't entertained, it's still would be called "entertainment".
Games, movies, TV shows and so on - it's all entertainment.

On the side note, it's a game set in a cyberpunk world, why would you expect, purposely exaggerating here, rainbows and unicorns?
I dunno..I never categorized "entertainment" as depressing. Mainly cause depressing things are not entertaining TO me. Strange how that works. On a further note, I didn't spend the cash to play a character who's sole purpose is to end up dying no matter what choices I make, or what I do.

So no, sorry, not really "in luck". Cyberpunk can be dark, grimy and dystopian..but it does NOT have to be depressing. Edgy? Sure. Dark? Definitely. But it does not have to be depressing. And that's what V's endings are. All of them. Depressing. Having positive endings while still maintaining core cyberpunk themes was entirely possible. It's just that in this case, they were more or less thrown out the window.

In retrospect the money I spent could have been better spent elsewhere. Buyer's remorse and all that.
Post automatically merged:

That's not what I and Deathlyhearts meant. He said he doesn't like heavy and depressing stuff in his entertainment, so an obviously fair question arises: "then what did you expect from a cyberpunk game?".
I'm not an expert on the genre, but I can't remember a single piece of entertainment set in a cyberpunk world where everything isn't depressing, and, almost completely, fucked.
Again, cyberpunk does not have to be depressing. The fixation on this is mystifying.
 
Last edited:

Guest 4400165

Guest
I dunno..I never categorized "entertainment" as depressing. Mainly cause depressing things are not entertaining TO me. Strange how that works. On a further note, I didn't spend the cash to play a character who's sole purpose is to end up dying no matter what choices I make, or what I do.

So no, sorry, not really "in luck". Cyberpunk can be dark, grimy and dystopian..but it does NOT have to be depressing. Edgy? Sure. Dark? Definitely. But it does not have to be depressing. And that's what V's endings are. All of them. Depressing. Having positive endings while still maintaining core cyberpunk themes was entirely possible. It's just that in this case, they were more or less thrown out the window.

In retrospect the money I spent could have been better spent elsewhere. Buyer's remorse and all that.
Post automatically merged:


Again, cyberpunk does not have to be depressing. The fixation on this is mystifying.
You're taking my words out of context: "entertainment" is movies, cartoons, games, TV shows, etc. Whether it fails to entertain anybody) or not, it's still a piece of entertainment. Whether it's sad or joyful - entertainment. I basically repeated my last post word for word.

I'll ignore the part where you contradict yourself and change opinion from post to post.

Now. The game has all that (edge, dystopia and whatever else fits the criteria of the genre), and only the endings can be upsetting. You can't label the whole story only by its ending, that's kinda dumb.

I believe the idea was to end the main game on 5 huge (vague) cliffhangers. And since we've known for years that story add-ons are coming, it's not really the time to wrap it up and treat it like it's the definitive end of the story.
 
I dunno..I never categorized "entertainment" as depressing. Mainly cause depressing things are not entertaining TO me. Strange how that works. On a further note, I didn't spend the cash to play a character who's sole purpose is to end up dying no matter what choices I make, or what I do.

So no, sorry, not really "in luck". Cyberpunk can be dark, grimy and dystopian..but it does NOT have to be depressing. Edgy? Sure. Dark? Definitely. But it does not have to be depressing. And that's what V's endings are. All of them. Depressing. Having positive endings while still maintaining core cyberpunk themes was entirely possible. It's just that in this case, they were more or less thrown out the window.

In retrospect the money I spent could have been better spent elsewhere. Buyer's remorse and all that.
Post automatically merged:


Again, cyberpunk does not have to be depressing. The fixation on this is mystifying.

cyberpunk doesn't have to have depressing ending, but it doesn't have to have a positive ending either.

That aside, entertainment also doesn't need to have a positive ending, I get that you specifically prefer one, but many many many stories don't end positively, and some have great success. Titanic, one of the biggest movies of all time. Logan, the highest rated and critically acclaimed wolverine. Romeo and Juliet. There is no reason to assume any random piece of entertainment you pick up will have a positive end, unless its marketed to you as such.

Then, the endings are not objectively depressing, some people enjoyed going off into the sunset with nomads escaping the city immensely. Others liked seeing V going on a huge heist, or soloing the whole of Arasaka tower. Some gave their body to a friend so he could live on. It seems many people only value life if its long and certain. Which is as valid as any other metric I suppose.

lastly, Its questionable if V's story ends here, they lead you to believe V is still trying to survive in two endings. If a book's epilogue ends with someone saying they gave the protagonist a slow acting poison, and the protagonist's last act is setting out on a journey to a place that may have an antidote, I'm not sure I would assume the protagonist dies.
Post automatically merged:

I've haven't played the game for a while now and had a chance to reflect on the endings.

I've come to the conclusion that not only do I not like the forced downbeat endings, but that they are just bad.

Ignoring what I suspect are bugs in the endings or at least such uncharacteristically poor character beats that they might as well be bugs; the turn by Judy in the devil ending between you calling her from the station and her messages in the epilogue being the prime offender here. The forced 6 months to live just breaks the rest of the endings, especially jarring with Misty's tarot readings in the epilogues.

During the Sun ending you see V push everyone away and go on a clear suicide mission for a probable AI. A sizable chunk of their remaining 6 months having clearly passed while V got set up in Afterlife. But after a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid fade to black, the reading you get is, things are sure looking great!

During the Star ending you head out of civilization with little hope of a cure seemingly content to live out your remaining weeks. And again you get another misplaced cheerful reading from Misty.

The negative reading in the devil ending at least fits how grim they seemed determined to make this ending, but the rest is packed with contradictions. Hanako both did and didn't send Takemura to speak to you. And she both has no use for you any more and wants to hire you.

Even the secret ending is just another suicide mission, all be it one where V gets to display some agency and in which you spare others form dying on your behalf, ignoring for a second all the Arasaka employees you have to mow down to get there.

And I think objectively the best ending - which is more than a little problematic - is the suicide ending. The reason that this comes off as the least bad is down to the "6 months to live" twist. Because this is the only base ending where you don't sacrifice anyone just to buy V a few more weeks. V and Johnny get some closure, Saburo does not regain control of Arasaka and you don't unleash Alt on the world. In other words it is the only ending where things are not made objectively worse by your continued existence. Understandably you get punished by the epilogues for this choice, and Misty encourages you to turn to your friends and do something else; unfortunately this is as good as it gets.

nothing about sun ending suggests V is planning on dying. Blue eyes think he is the opposite of suicidal (though reckless). V tells the LI they aren't trying to die alone. Tells others they intend on coming back. Rogue does not imply this is a suicide mission.

And star ending, panam clearly believes they will find a way.

I'm not saying V's life is certain, but neither is V's death.
 
Last edited:
You're taking my words out of context: "entertainment" is movies, cartoons, games, TV shows, etc. Whether it fails to entertain anybody) or not, it's still a piece of entertainment. Whether it's sad or joyful - entertainment. I basically repeated my last post word for word.

I'll ignore the part where you contradict yourself and change opinion from post to post.

Now. The game has all that (edge, dystopia and whatever else fits the criteria of the genre), and only the endings can be upsetting. You can't label the whole story only by its ending, that's kinda dumb.

I believe the idea was to end the main game on 5 huge (vague) cliffhangers. And since we've known for years that story add-ons are coming, it's not really the time to wrap it up and treat it like it's the definitive end of the story.

Not taking anything out of context. I said that _I_ do not find depressing things to be entertainment. Full stop. And I pointed out that no matter what you do, V ends up dying, which to me is pretty depressing. Hence my original position that we paid cash to play a character through a story when they have zero chance of survival. Not fun. Not entertainment - because having no chance of survival is depressing.

I hinted at this in my original post, but I'll go ahead and put it out here. in reality, I work a grim situation that is depressing in and of itself. And Covid-19 has made that one F'ing hell of a lot worse. I don't classify depressing things as entertaintment because there's plenty of depressing things around me in RL. Entertainment is a escape, not a goddamned reminder.

Please explain where I contradict myself and change opinion. I suspect it's more of a case that you simply don't understand what I wrote, but I'm willing to hear you out nonetheless.

While it's true that the DLCs may do something to sort V's sad little story out, unfortunately the damage is already done. CP 2077 was massively overhyped, and between the huge amount of issues on the consoles and PCs both, along with a myriad of bugs and the rather depressing story in which you have no chance of survival, most people will remember it as a overhyped "flop" than anything else. I point this out simply because I think that had V's story not been so depressing, people might have at least made a nod towards a good story with good endings..but as things stand, that's not even possible.
 
Not taking anything out of context. I said that _I_ do not find depressing things to be entertainment. Full stop. And I pointed out that no matter what you do, V ends up dying, which to me is pretty depressing. Hence my original position that we paid cash to play a character through a story when they have zero chance of survival. Not fun. Not entertainment - because having no chance of survival is depressing.

I hinted at this in my original post, but I'll go ahead and put it out here. in reality, I work a grim situation that is depressing in and of itself. And Covid-19 has made that one F'ing hell of a lot worse. I don't classify depressing things as entertaintment because there's plenty of depressing things around me in RL. Entertainment is a escape, not a goddamned reminder.

Please explain where I contradict myself and change opinion. I suspect it's more of a case that you simply don't understand what I wrote, but I'm willing to hear you out nonetheless.

While it's true that the DLCs may do something to sort V's sad little story out, unfortunately the damage is already done. CP 2077 was massively overhyped, and between the huge amount of issues on the consoles and PCs both, along with a myriad of bugs and the rather depressing story in which you have no chance of survival, most people will remember it as a overhyped "flop" than anything else. I point this out simply because I think that had V's story not been so depressing, people might have at least made a nod towards a good story with good endings..but as things stand, that's not even possible.

I can't argue that its a bad look for you, but as someone who only likes positive endings, how do you prevent yourself from getting negative ending entertainment, Its common enough that its always a possibility with movies, books, games, sports, etc.
 
Beyond that I feel like the endings were aiming for something a bit more profound or existential, but it was mostly just irritation and confusion. It wasn't that the endings were too sad for me, they just felt so pointless.
I think the irritation and confusion comes from the double whammy of the game deciding for you what V wants to do with her remaining time based on the rooftop choice you make, and then openly judging you for that decision. For the first thing, most players are going to avoid that dissonance by being successfully corralled by the game into the ending the devs decided was going to be the "good" one. For the second, an ending so blatantly telling you "the thing that you wanted is the wrong thing to want" is just too preachy for an RPG I think.

There's a fine line, I think, between "nothing you do matters" as a theme and "nothing you do matters" as a gameplay choice that just didn't land on the right side. What is the point in going back and doing anything at all when you've unlocked all the endings in your first go around? None of it will change.
The "nothing you do matters" as a theme hits correctly I think during side missions where you find out something much bigger is going on and there's nothing you can do, and in moments like the Sun ending where Delamain essentially tells you that all of your escapades amounted to a recoverable stock drop and some downtime for Arasaka in NC. When "nothing you do matters" turns in to "every inch of ground you fight for in the game is pointless because every path is doom" then...

As far as going back for side missions, my gripe isn't that I have all of the endings at my current save's fingertips, it's more... if all of the endings are just V radically changing lifestyle for 6 months and then dying anyway, what's the point in doing any side content in NC? Why would I want to go get the money to buy all of the cars or go finish the boxing matches with the Relic glitches constantly reminding me that all roads lead to a short death anyway?

Again, cyberpunk does not have to be depressing. The fixation on this is mystifying.
"When I wrote Cyberpunk back in the day, the idea was to show a dark mirror of the world we have been shaping since the 1980s. It was a warning, yes, but I also made all of you the heroes of this dystopian world. You weren’t there to be ground underfoot like Rick Deckard, or exploited and enslaved like Roy Batty. You were there to grab the wheel, steal the power, break the strangleholds of the corrupt and gun down the thugs they sent to crush you. You were [...] the heroes of the Cyberpunk Dark Future." - Mike Pondsmith
 
cyberpunk doesn't have to have depressing ending, but it doesn't have to have a positive ending either.

That aside, entertainment also doesn't need to have a positive ending, I get that you specifically prefer one, but many many many stories don't end positively, and some have great success. Titanic, one of the biggest movies of all time. Logan, the highest rated and critically acclaimed wolverine. Romeo and Juliet. There is no reason to assume any random piece of entertainment you pick up will have a positive end, unless its marketed to you as such.

Then, the endings are not objectively depressing, some people enjoyed going off into the sunset with nomads escaping the city immensely. Others liked seeing V going on a huge heist, or soloing the whole of Arasaka tower. Some gave their body to a friend so he could live on. It seems many people only value life if its long and certain. Which is as valid as any other metric I suppose.

lastly, Its questionable if V's story ends here, they lead you to believe V is still trying to survive in two endings. If a book's epilogue ends with someone saying they gave the protagonist a slow acting poison, and the protagonist's last act is setting out on a journey to a place that may have an antidote, I'm not sure I would assume the protagonist dies.
Post automatically merged:



nothing about sun ending suggests V is planning on dying. Blue eyes think he is the opposite of suicidal (though reckless). V tells the LI they aren't trying to die alone. Tells others they intend on coming back. Rogue does not imply this is a suicide mission.

And star ending, panam clearly believes they will find a way.

I'm not saying V's life is certain, but neither is V's death.

You pointed out something that is worthwhile tho you may not have realized it. I want to acknowledge that and say thank you.

Wolverine...I assume you mean the last movie Logan. I actually like that. That kid was over the top. lol.

With regards to your post, I think...it's worth pointing out that the death of a character itself is not depressing. Consistent doom and misery however is. If a main character dies at the end of a book or film or what-have you, but was otherwise not abused and or "prophesied" to die from the onset, that isn't really depressing.

V's story up until she puts the relic in, is NOT depressing...but having the knowledge she's going to die no matter what, and you're just going through the motions of her life while waiting, is.

---

All things said, I should NOT have to defend my own definition of depressing. if I believe something is depressing to me, it is, no matter what the fuck anyone else says. I found V's story to be depressing, and I do not find depressing things to be entertainment. @Ayinde_Palmer this is NOT directed towards you specifically, it's more of a basic observation that just ended up a reply to one of your posts.
Post automatically merged:

I can't argue that its a bad look for you, but as someone who only likes positive endings, how do you prevent yourself from getting negative ending entertainment, Its common enough that its always a possibility with movies, books, games, sports, etc.

(points up) As contradictory as it sounds, I don't only like positive endings..I just don't like miserable ones. One of my favorite sets of novels is the Gentleman Bastards. They get poisoned as part of a blackmail situation. The plot device works, and they continue on book to book, even tho they got poisoned. Not positive, but not depressing or miserable either.
 

Guest 4400165

Guest
Not taking anything out of context. I said that _I_ do not find depressing things to be entertainment. Full stop.
My words: "
It is still a piece of entertainment, no matter how joyful or depressing it might seem. It doesn't even matter if you weren't entertained, it's still would be called "entertainment".
Games, movies, TV shows and so on - it's all entertainment."
You reply with:
I never categorized "entertainment" as depressing. Mainly cause depressing things are not entertaining TO me. Strange how that works.
My point was - technically, it's still a piece of entertainment. Call it whatever you want, it won't cease being one.
I'll elaborate more, hopefully, without starting an off topic argument: Entertainment =/= only fun, laughs and giggles, more like involvement, immersion, escapism, distraction, makes you give a shit, simply put. Sad, happy, depressing, inspiring, motivational, heartbreaking, hateful, etc. - all counts. That's all what I meant.
So, you did spend your money on entertainment, but, from your words, it's just not what you (and some other people here) expected and really wanted. I dunno what to say here, really.

I read about your IRL stuff, I feel it, I get it - don't need to remind anyone about that one, we're all still in this shit. The story turned out the way it did and it "hit" you below the waist with its ending(s) - well, sorry, I guess, but we can't ask the game/movie makers to put out spoilers or story conclusions in the game/movie descriptions, so you know what to expect, it eliminates the whole purpose of getting into it. Remember how many movies you went to see and they turned out completely opposite of what you expected. It happens, better to get over it.

I'll purposely ignore the whole game criticising passage, because it's kinda irrelevant in this thread and seen that too many times already (some word for word, even).
 
I don't know about you, but the relationship system in this game is so shallow that I was left feeling used by these characters.

The problem with the relationship system is that it's like every other game, which tries to add something like this.

Do some missions -> relationship with set character.

Is it Crusader kings (obviously another genre) where your spouse actually impact things. For some reason games like CP / Mass effect doesn't really know how to expand or integrate a relationship system into the game, which is a shame, because it could be added as a buff system, mini game trying to maintain the relationship in form of side missions etc. You could bring them on missions, which could unlock certain special moves etc. But it always seems that it has to be this lame, do X mission and then sex and end of story.

I think most people really liked Jackie for instance, even though it was not a romantic relationship and despite all the bugs with him, having him around when doing missions, him commenting on things etc. Is what makes people care for him. This could simply be extended to a romantic options that you can bring on missions, but which is just more expanded on.

In regards to whether the story being depressing, I personally don't really have an issue with that. I think, the problem from such story is all the other content. Like you running around doing all kind of weird stuff, which makes no sense for a person to do that is about to die. That sort of ruins the immersion I think as they are trying to force two different types of storyline or what to say in your throat at the same time. One being you trying to earn the street cred and become this merc you dream of, and therefore it makes sense that you take on jobs. And then you have the other one, which is heavily narrated and with a very clear goal of trying to save your own life. But these two doesn't really go hand in hand.

The first one, signify ambitions, future etc. whereas the other one is about depression and no future.

I felt as if the whole thing is actually about Johnny, and V is just an NPC who is following up on his story.
The game is about Silverhand and even that in my opinion is poorly done. You as V don't really have any reason to be or get involved in his revenge mission.

Arasaka didn't do anything to V, you as a character broke in and stole from them and then Johnny ended up in your head. Adam smasher never did anything to V, and even him killing Jackie, is sort of a lame excuse for building a story, again V and Jackie chose to break in and steal from them, well knowing that they wouldn't just give you a warning if you were caught.

Dexter is the one that V ought to be angry at, but he is out of the picture rather fast, so that is solved. And Johnny claim that Adam smasher need to die so Rogue can get revenge, despite Rogue straight up telling you that it have nothing to do with Adam smasher. So it seems more like Adam smasher, because he looks badass, needed to be the villain, simply because of that, despite none of the characters, besides Silverhand, but for wrong reasons, really have an issue with him or Araska. So the story in my opinion is pretty weak to be honest, but it is delivered very nicely, due to the characters involved, but it hardly make any sense.

Another major factor of the story is the first person game mechanic. Despite what CDPR claimed, I never had the impression of immersion from this perspective - quite the opposite!
I think one of the main reasons of this choice is, because shooting tend to be better in FP than 3rd person. And lets be honest CP is first and foremost an action shooter game. For me, I kind of like that it is FP and it is more immersive in my opinion, you don't get that bird eye view as in 3rd person. You look up and can see these massive buildings to get a feeling of scale or you can be in a narrow passage and everything is very focused around you.

I do however agree, that in a lot cutscenes 3rd person would have been good and wouldn't have ruined the experience, but enhanced it. Like in the scripted 48 gameplay video, where you see V, to me that works a lot better than how it currently is.


What drove me the most throughout the story is not the story itself, but the potential of it that I managed to manufacture in my mind.
I agree, even though I enjoyed the missions etc. To me at least, the main story was the most boring one. And I think the game would have been much more interesting, had it been more sandbox and focused on V trying to make it as a merc, with the promise that your actions would greatly impact the story. I really don't feel like I want to do another playthrough anytime soon, because I honestly don't feel that my choices matters that much and to much of the game or events are so scripted that it's more like being in an adventure game, where you can't progress the story unless you do exactly as you are told to do.

So what made me enjoy the game, was the open world, characters and Night City itself. Not the main story.

Personally, I am shocked that CDPR had made such a letdown, comparing to Witcher series. And the comparison is inevitable.
The game was rushed and at some point, probably when Keanu were hired, it changed direction to the worse. And the whole RPG focus on V, somehow became a secondary thing, which is a shame.
 
My feeling for the sad V endings, it's rather normal.
He(you) is a merc and he leaves a lot of death behind him. Yes, he/you help some people, but overall he/you is a killer :(

And jhonny said the right sentence, at the end when V/you ask for a happier ending for everyone :
"Happy ending for people like us, in this city... don't dream V"
 
My feeling for the sad V endings, it's rather normal.
He(you) is a merc and he leaves a lot of death behind him. Yes, he/you help some people, but overall he/you is a killer :(

And jhonny said the right sentence, at the end when V/you ask for a happier ending for everyone :
"Happy ending for people like us, in this city... don't dream V"
Most of the quests can be done without killing anyone.
 
Top Bottom