The job is about the Crystal Palace heist, and to be fair there are a couple of mentions regarding some kind of job, but the problem is that it's much too vague. V knows about the heist from the get-go, but we as players don't and that's a problem. V is the player character and we should be in the know what our character is doing rather than be left guessing up until the last minute.
The only kind of explanation to give regarding the ownership of the Afterlife is that V needs to be in a position where they have/can acquire resources to help them. Whether CDPR did this so we could make up headcanons about V's fate ourselves or if they have something planned, remains to be seen.
I think there is a clear narrative tension here. Some people want to "own" the character to the point they know everything he knows and everything going on in his head. Others still want storytelling technique to take a degree of precedence.
That is always going to be a matter of taste but CDPR has always tended to the latter approach.
I do not personally think knowing the legalities of Rogue's testamentary arrangements would be interesting in any way. It would bog the story down and is plain boring. I don't care and the time jump facilitates not caring.
I do like finding V in a new, unexpected situation, his life having developed in my absence in not wholly revealed ways in pursuit of an aim that is not fully elaborated. That, to me, is narratively interesting and intriguing. I do not want my stories tied up in bows (assuming that this ending is supposed to lead somewhere in future).
I'm sorry but the law is the law and if you think corporations would not want things to pass onto their kids.. i cant help you understand that concept..
Reassure me, aren't you talking about IRL laws applicable to the Cyberpunk universe ?
If yes, I don't know what I can said, except as you wish
(I hope, it's not the case for the jobs)
Anyway, Rogue die, V become the boss of the AfterLife. It's like that. If it's not logic for you, the same, as you wish
I do like finding V in a new, unexpected situation, his life having developed in my absence in not wholly revealed ways in pursuit of an aim that is not fully elaborated. That, to me, is narratively interesting and intriguing. I do not want my stories tied up in bows (assuming that this ending is supposed to lead somewhere in future).
Given this, what people are telling you is that it's entirely possible to play the game expressing certain beliefs and positions, only for the choice at the ending to lock your V into a personality that is inconsistent with the way you were able to play the rest of the game, even though nothing about that particular choice is inconsistent in and of itself.
Well, the choices available to the player are incorporated into the game before it's in their hands. The developer cannot account for everything. This is why I thought those choices needed to be available to the player. All of them. Not one choice leading to the chain reaction plugging in the decision for the other choices. So, the following choices...
1. Who you gonna call? Ghostbusters.... The Nomads? Johnny/Rogue? Just Johnny if you unlocked the option? Are you just going to throw in the towel (suicide)? Accept the proposal by Hanako?
2. Are you staying in or leaving NC?
3. Thematically, what is most important to your V at the end? Survival? Fame, glory and cementing a legacy? Family and friendship? What makes your V tick?
4. The needs and wants of your romance selection or your own, competing desires? This one is an extension of #2. It's an indirect decision from the choice made for #2.
These are all important choices. When you consider the options and all the potential pairings it offers a lot of freedom if you could decide upon all of these individually.
Since those choices are all tied up in a neat little box with a bow on it a number of potential V's cannot exist. Even though the player couldn't know this before hitting the end. It's all setup to point to a series of streamlined versions of V. If your V isn't one of those streamlined options you're basically screwed.
This part here is probably why there are such competing views on the endings. Some people formulated headcanon for their view matching one of those streamlined options. It played out exactly as they wanted. Others didn't. Others made up headcanon for a V not fitting those options. Those people felt railroaded and screwed over.
At the end of my first run through the game the "basically screwed" option is exactly what happened.
The headcanon for my V is they didn't care about fame, glory and legacy. My V valued survival the most. They valued their friends and new family in the Nomads. I wasn't assaulting Arasaka out of a need for vengeance or to knock the terrible megacorps down a peg. It wasn't to earn notoriety, acquire wealth, or poke the bear and survive to tell about it. My V was doing it to survive. It's not about saving the world but saving yourself. Well, that's exactly what I was aiming toward.
On the roof I was thinking about which group offered the best chance for success. Which group was the most expendable? It's a high risk, low chance of success plan. Who was I willing to bring into the lions den? I thought I could make various other choices later when the dust settled. Even though I feared it was a trick question. Hell, I probably spent 10-15 minutes thinking about it before deciding. I want to do this but, wait a minute, what if it's been railroaded to mean this? Then I just said fuck it. Let's see what happens. Rogue/Johnny, let's do this thing.
I sure as hell wasn't going to blow my brains out and toss in the towel. Not when there are a few more stones to turn over and a chance. Even though everyone kept telling me I was completely screwed. I wasn't going to accept the Arasaka/Hanako plan either. Sorry Takemura, you're my boy now but I just can't pick your team. I can't trust them and they're indirectly how this mess started in the first place.
My V wasn't intending to remain in NC. They picked Judy as a romance option. Judy made it very clear she wanted out of NC. My headcanon plan was to blast my way into Arasaka, get out from under the relic and when the dust settled move on. The cesspool known as NC didn't have anything to offer. All it gave my V from the moment they arrived was more problems. Hold on for a second Nomads. Hang out for a bit Judy. I'm fixing this problem and when it's resolved we're leaving.
When it's all said and done this is not what happened. No, the game said calling Rogue/Johnny means your V values fame, glory and legacy. The game says this means V wants to stay in NC. V wants to inherit the Afterlife and become the best fixer/merc/whatever in all the land. The game forces me to prioritize those desires above Judy and the Nomads. The game instructs me to meet Blue Eyes. It then sends me off to space because I'm the best merc in the land.
Getting back to your comment on inconsistency.... How does one manage that? It's an RPG. Choices/consequences. Why? It's a simple question, really. For the people constructing the game. What type of character would the player create? How would they want to express it? Let's build some options, branches, choices. Make them mean different things. Okay, now a player has options. They could express the character this way or that way. Cover enough options and you cover enough bases. The more constrasting options, the more ways to express the character, the more ways to avoid inconsistencies.
To me, the endings could have been setup as, say, a combination lock. Let's say it has 4 individual knobs with a value of 1 or 0. The player can pair them together as they see fit. They could decide 1010 fits their character. Another player might think 0101 fits their character. A third might feel 1011 fits. Instead they were setup as flipping a coin. Heads means 1010. Tails means 0101.
Since I know it's going to be said the obvious observation there is a combination lock is a much tougher nut to crack. This is a big part of the disappointment. The great pyramid was right there. A couple more stones and it's finished. Upon reflecting on the ending construction it sure looks like that combination lock could have been provided. Instead it's the coin flip. Instead the pyramid was missing it's top.
story feels like a bright flash
u don't have much time left
and that's why epilogues are so unsatisfying
story should feels like a long journey
to prepare player to accept almost any fate in the end
cyberpunk moralizes and blames for being wrong person in the wrong city
and you can not avoid it
that's wrong
everything will change...
you will accept any answer ...
only there you will understand the severity of existence ...
and afterall everything was pointless
what a grand finale
It is a happy ending. It is also a sad ending. Because along the way he faces death, and proceeds down the quest lines for both his gang, and several members, and resolution. At the end of the day Arthur accomplished something and we the players did it with him. When we see the various gang members who live who we have met and encountered over time moving on, we can smile and wonder where they are going. Arthur is dead - but the legacy of something he has achieved lives on. Directly from things the player does. Someone whose husband is murdered goes from Rescued, to learning to be a member of the gang, to learning to shoot, to riding off in the sunset a gunslinger. You saw and partook of her journey every step of the way.
Happy doesn't have to be sunshine and rainbows. At the end of Shawshank Red follows the bread crumbs to find his friend. But he's still a 60 year old man whose life is mostly over and is still lost in the world. But he found a good friend who escaped injustice. You smile as its both earned, as well as what you hope for.
In CP2077 - Nothing feels earned or due to the player.
You can:
Get Rogue's bar. Why? You barely know each other. You never mention wanting a bar - you want to live/survive. It doesn't go to her OWN SON but instead given to a near stranger who is a forced physical coexistence with an old acquaintance of hers. She suddenly retires - why?
You get a posh penthouse with a flying car. Why? You want to live and should be spending all your well earned monies on researching and hiring doctors and researchers. But you spend it on a penthouse and flying car...... zero player input.. comes of of left field
You get an ending where are near invalid after thematic betrayal.. never fun to experience
You can have an ending where you leave night city for some vague promise in another state - yet never had any say in leaving. See ya River/Kerry - F off I'm out to take a chance on this vague hope in another state.
We have no say in the epilogues... what happens in the epilogue come out of left field as not set up in the narrative.. (exception of betrayal - but being betrayed is never ever fun)
There are no 1000 forum posts criticizing the ending of RDR2 - even when the player characters avatar dies
RDR2 is about saving the gang. (starts with gang nearly out of resources, wounded people, captured people), etc, etc
CP2077 is about saving yourself (i want to live over and over.. )
One of these games you feel you have accomplished the goal.
Post automatically merged:
This is the Bioware response. We're sorry you didn't like our ending to ME3 - you just don't get it - they were really good and you all just don't get it or being unfair.
Bioware has learned since then (pre presales of ME:A) that you dont give your player base a middle finger and tell them we know better, you all are wrong.
V's adventures can choose to help:
panam to make up with her family and change the fate of her aldecado family
Judy leave the city and find her self
river save his nephew and his own life
Kerry kick depression and find inspiration in music, and become relevant again
Johnny help his friends and right some of their wrongs
rogue face who she has become, and put to rest many of her demons she has been carrying with her.
takemura regain his position and honor, and solve his homelessness
the state of Delamain's consciousness
numerous bit characters, but I'm assuming they aren't important enough to matter to you.
so if rdr is a good ending because you can look at the effect he had on his chosen friends, the same can be said about V. V has an extremely large impact on the people and events of night city.
Its also weird to say V can't choose their ending when they most literally can. One can say they wish they could choose their ending irrespective of previous important decisions, but I thought numerous people complained about them feeling their choices don't matter? Most of the few mutually exclusive decisions V has, are then complained about because they lock players out, or because the player didnt realize the implications ahead of the time... Both of which are generally the case with forked choice decisions. Which the game goes out of their way to make fairly rare, allowing the player to alter things mostly by what they choose to do, not what they didn't choose.
There are problems, and choices made with certain endings that may have been, imo not the best ones(sometimes, some endings), However V's impact on the world and people around him is huge, and based on the things the player chooses to do quite directly. If one can find solace on a main character's effect on others in their deaths, you can find that here.
The game is subtle, they don't beat you over the head with things, but if you look at the events and results of various choices, or things V can choose to do or ignore, there is a lot that V achieves even while still making you feel powerless. Which is actually quite an achievement.
One of the big dilemmas with a cyberpunk videogame is making it seem like the world is an oppressive force that its hard to change, while balancing the fact that the whole world in videogame tends to revolve around the protagonist, and they apparently somehow achieved both narratively.
I think the reality is, some people don't like the feeling of powerlessness, even if the reality of the game presents V as a god level catalyst of NC changing fortunes and deciding the fate of gods, legends, and societies.
Reassure me, aren't you talking about IRL laws applicable to the Cyberpunk universe ?
If yes, I don't know what I can said, except as you wish
(I hope, it's not the case for the jobs)
Anyway, Rogue die, V become the boss of the AfterLife. It's like that. If it's not logic for you, the same, as you wish
Explain "the logic"
You are merely stating two different data points. Rogue is boss of afterlife. V is now boss fixer and owner of afterlife. Please provide the bridge where A turns into B.
Please provide how it was setup.
Please provide where it was reasoned.
Please provide where it was explained.
Logic: "reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity"
Otherwise, the natural law and reasoning should prevail.
Wealthy people enjoy directing where their assets go.
Rogue has a next of kin // Rogue retiring suddenly turning over Bar ( and profession to dying V)
If Rogue is dead - no other established Fixer in the City steps into the void........
but the dying, zero conacts of their own Merc, can sudenly become the best fixer in the city.. in a month or two ????
and they get the bar.... somehow.
Logic is the reasoning of a thing. See definition. Merely stating well it was Rogue's.. now its V - the game says so - it makes logical sense.
V's adventures can choose to help:
panam to make up with her family and change the fate of her aldecado family
Judy leave the city and find her self
river save his nephew and his own life
Kerry kick depression and find inspiration in music, and become relevant again
Johnny help his friends and right some of their wrongs
rogue face who she has become, and put to rest many of her demons she has been carrying with her.
takemura regain his position and honor, and solve his homelessness
the state of Delamain's consciousness
numerous bit characters, but I'm assuming they aren't important enough to matter to you.
so if rdr is a good ending because you can look at the effect he had on his chosen friends, the same can be said about V. V has an extremely large impact on the people and events of night city.
Its also weird to say V can't choose their ending when they most literally can. One can say they wish they could choose their ending irrespective of previous important decisions, but I thought numerous people complained about them feeling their choices don't matter? Most of the few mutually exclusive decisions V has, are then complained about because they lock players out, or because the player didnt realize the implications ahead of the time... Both of which are generally the case with forked choice decisions. Which the game goes out of their way to make fairly rare, allowing the player to alter things mostly by what they choose to do, not what they didn't choose.
There are problems, and choices made with certain endings that may have been, imo not the best ones(sometimes, some endings), However V's impact on the world and people around him is huge, and based on the things the player chooses to do quite directly. If one can find solace on a main character's effect on others in their deaths, you can find that here.
The game is subtle, they don't beat you over the head with things, but if you look at the events and results of various choices, or things V can choose to do or ignore, there is a lot that V achieves even while still making you feel powerless. Which is actually quite an achievement.
One of the big dilemmas with a cyberpunk videogame is making it seem like the world is an oppressive force that its hard to change, while balancing the fact that the whole world in videogame tends to revolve around the protagonist, and they apparently somehow achieved both narratively.
I think the reality is, some people don't like the feeling of powerlessness, even if the reality of the game presents V as a god level catalyst of NC changing fortunes and deciding the fate of gods, legends, and societies.
I'll take each of these in return. But when you are going to engage in debate - I would vastly appreciate not having to tackle strawman arguments.
Newsflash - no where did I, or others, say the game had no content or no quests. It';s the ending is not set-up and removes all player agency as we decide which friend to call, then that decision triggers so any decisions totally outside of the players control and not set-up.
And thematically... RDR2 is about Arthur saving the gang.
CP2077 seems to be a horrible bouillabaisse of.. become a super legend (in weeks even!! the bestest evah!!!!!!! . OR.. save others.. not save yourself you dont matter .. OR become a nomad and run away OR save johnny....
I wonder why its themes aren't sticking.... hmmmmmm
(panam to make up with her family and change the fate of her aldecado family) Yes, we see this questline and are a part. But only in one ending of 5 is this resolved and we see payoff.
(Judy leave the city and find her self) - Um.. NO. Some endings she goes to Oregon even before the ending.. some endings she dump's you for being a self centered GF not spending your days with her but too busy inheriting magically a bar and fixer job.. sometimes she goes to Oregon.. and other times she goes with the nomads.... her resolution is all over the place
(river save his nephew and his own life) Yes - we go on a single quest and resolve this. The game indeed has content. Then a single quest hanging out at his house cooking. If you date him you give him the cold shoulder and the middle finger as only some people get to actually get to stick with their romance partner - straight gals dump him and run off for some vague hope in another state.
(Kerry kick depression and find inspiration in music, and become relevant again) Ummmmm.. except for a conversation after johnny exits control.. and the romance quest... Johnny does this. Not the player. We have no say except avoid the quest. We are a passive observer and have no agency. Curse of Johnny as co-protagonist
(rogue face who she has become, and put to rest many of her demons she has been carrying with her.) No.. she doesnt. She has mixed emotions with Johnny and has some interaction with V. We go off to hunt johnny's killer.. somehow for Rogue but shes not really interested in it.. in some endings she continues being her.. others she retires and V is new rogue.. there are vast thematic differences in rogue continuing being rogue but how you assault a building changes her to wanting to retire
(takemura regain his position and honor, and solve his homelessness) No - the player has zero influence beyond saving him or not in the raid. Everything else he does is part of the main quest/off screen. No matter what choices player makes he ends up with the daughter's group. (except saving him). The player has very little agency....
(the state of Delamain's consciousness) Yes - the game has content. and this quest actually gives us a bloody choice!!!!!!! CDPR actually is capable of writing in some player agency?! OMG
(numerous bit characters, but I'm assuming they aren't important enough to matter to you.) Nice snark but total fail. RDR2 - my example... has many many NPCS but I was speaking to the theme of the game where it is save the gang and a GOOD ending in spite of the main character dying, and CDPRs endings muddle and muddy things so much as they are so divergent. Sad attempt to say criticize the ending = not caring about any NPCS. Strawman on fire.
(The game is subtle, they don't beat you over the head with things, but if you look at the events and results of various choices, or things V can choose to do or ignore, there is a lot that V achieves even while still making you feel powerless. Which is actually quite an achievement.)
(I think the reality is, some people don't like the feeling of powerlessness, even if the reality of the game presents V as a god level catalyst of NC changing fortunes and deciding the fate of gods, legends, and societies.)
So in a first person game... for immersion... its somehow a success to make the player feel powerless and helpless and their choices dont matter.. in a ROLE PLAYING GAME.. not in an action narrative game like Last of Us where you are an observer in cutscenes.. but given "choices" that dont seem to matter much is an achievement to you?!?!?
No.. the GAME.. doesn't present V as having any power at all.. no choices made except at the micro level do we accomplish (we kill some gang members.. rescue some npcs.. small micro level things..)
only in the endings.. where the player has no say.. no influence.. no agency.. all because of WHO WE CALL FOR HELP ON A ROOFTOP
magically transform things into we change the world... somehow.. are a legend/ bestest evah...
When V's goal stated over and over is TO LIVE. I'm sorry if the game corrects your head canon over and over and over. I want to live is a repeating mantra from V.
If anything - ALT is the powerhouse... ALT brings down mikoshi... all we do is shoot some guards to get her in there.
Once again - what other game has 1000+ page posts on its ending.
If Bioware hadn't kept closing forum posts - the other participant in this category would be ME3. NOT GOOD COMPANY
CP2077 is almost ready to be sub 10K players on steam. It is routinely beaten by other , better, games.
\so if rdr is a good ending because you can look at the effect he had on his chosen friends, the same can be said about V. V has an extremely large impact on the people and events of night city.
It's certainly possible for some people to look at it that way, but all else being equal it doesn't come close. V's only fixed motivation is that of survival. There is no moment, like Arthur has, where V realizes that there is no hope whatsoever and radically refocuses her goal on something else in her final moments. Well, that's not entirely true, as you can say that's what V does in the Star and Sun endings, without player input; the ending you get determines V's attitude so severely, though, that they don't even feel like my character. Even then, there is no moment in Cyberpunk that even comes close to "In the end, Micah, despite my best efforts to the contrary, it turns out I've won." Not even close.
Its also weird to say V can't choose their ending when they most literally can. One can say they wish they could choose their ending irrespective of previous important decisions, but I thought numerous people complained about them feeling their choices don't matter? Most of the few mutually exclusive decisions V has, are then complained about because they lock players out, or because the player didnt realize the implications ahead of the time... Both of which are generally the case with forked choice decisions. Which the game goes out of their way to make fairly rare, allowing the player to alter things mostly by what they choose to do, not what they didn't choose.
An unexpected outcome is "I uploaded Alt and that might've been more dangerous than I was anticipating." Not "I chose to attack Arasaka with the Aldecaldos so now I fucking hate NC and my LI"
One of the big dilemmas with a cyberpunk videogame is making it seem like the world is an oppressive force that its hard to change, while balancing the fact that the whole world in videogame tends to revolve around the protagonist, and they apparently somehow achieved both narratively.
I think the reality is, some people don't like the feeling of powerlessness, even if the reality of the game presents V as a god level catalyst of NC changing fortunes and deciding the fate of gods, legends, and societies.
The bitter irony is that there's so little of this actual "oppression and powerlessness" except when it comes to the fact that V is fucked no matter what. You can easily singlehandedly wipe out an entire gang that is legendarily difficult to get ahold of with nothing but a stupid fucking ninja sword in this game. The secret ending is even more over the top power fantasy. The fact that the journey was all for nothing in the end is just some artificial bullshit to make the ending feel somehow deeper for some people.
You are merely stating two different data points. Rogue is boss of afterlife. V is now boss fixer and owner of afterlife. Please provide the bridge where A turns into B.
Please provide how it was setup.
Please provide where it was reasoned.
Please provide where it was explained.
Logic: "reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity"
Otherwise, the natural law and reasoning should prevail.
Wealthy people enjoy directing where their assets go.
Rogue has a next of kin // Rogue retiring suddenly turning over Bar ( and profession to dying V)
If Rogue is dead - no other established Fixer in the City steps into the void........
but the dying, zero conacts of their own Merc, can sudenly become the best fixer in the city.. in a month or two ????
and they get the bar.... somehow.
Logic is the reasoning of a thing. See definition. Merely stating well it was Rogue's.. now its V - the game says so - it makes logical sense.
HOW HOW HOW HOW HOW HOW
Post automatically merged:
I'll take each of these in return. But when you are going to engage in debate - I would vastly appreciate not having to tackle strawman arguments.
Newsflash - no where did I, or others, say the game had no content or no quests. It';s the ending is not set-up and removes all player agency as we decide which friend to call, then that decision triggers so any decisions totally outside of the players control and not set-up.
And thematically... RDR2 is about Arthur saving the gang.
CP2077 seems to be a horrible bouillabaisse of.. become a super legend (in weeks even!! the bestest evah!!!!!!! . OR.. save others.. not save yourself you dont matter .. OR become a nomad and run away OR save johnny....
I wonder why its themes aren't sticking.... hmmmmmm
(panam to make up with her family and change the fate of her aldecado family) Yes, we see this questline and are a part. But only in one ending of 5 is this resolved and we see payoff.
(Judy leave the city and find her self) - Um.. NO. Some endings she goes to Oregon even before the ending.. some endings she dump's you for being a self centered GF not spending your days with her but too busy inheriting magically a bar and fixer job.. sometimes she goes to Oregon.. and other times she goes with the nomads.... her resolution is all over the place
(river save his nephew and his own life) Yes - we go on a single quest and resolve this. The game indeed has content. Then a single quest hanging out at his house cooking. If you date him you give him the cold shoulder and the middle finger as only some people get to actually get to stick with their romance partner - straight gals dump him and run off for some vague hope in another state.
(Kerry kick depression and find inspiration in music, and become relevant again) Ummmmm.. except for a conversation after johnny exits control.. and the romance quest... Johnny does this. Not the player. We have no say except avoid the quest. We are a passive observer and have no agency. Curse of Johnny as co-protagonist
(rogue face who she has become, and put to rest many of her demons she has been carrying with her.) No.. she doesnt. She has mixed emotions with Johnny and has some interaction with V. We go off to hunt johnny's killer.. somehow for Rogue but shes not really interested in it.. in some endings she continues being her.. others she retires and V is new rogue.. there are vast thematic differences in rogue continuing being rogue but how you assault a building changes her to wanting to retire
(takemura regain his position and honor, and solve his homelessness) No - the player has zero influence beyond saving him or not in the raid. Everything else he does is part of the main quest/off screen. No matter what choices player makes he ends up with the daughter's group. (except saving him). The player has very little agency....
(the state of Delamain's consciousness) Yes - the game has content. and this quest actually gives us a bloody choice!!!!!!! CDPR actually is capable of writing in some player agency?! OMG
(numerous bit characters, but I'm assuming they aren't important enough to matter to you.) Nice snark but total fail. RDR2 - my example... has many many NPCS but I was speaking to the theme of the game where it is save the gang and a GOOD ending in spite of the main character dying, and CDPRs endings muddle and muddy things so much as they are so divergent. Sad attempt to say criticize the ending = not caring about any NPCS. Strawman on fire.
(The game is subtle, they don't beat you over the head with things, but if you look at the events and results of various choices, or things V can choose to do or ignore, there is a lot that V achieves even while still making you feel powerless. Which is actually quite an achievement.)
(I think the reality is, some people don't like the feeling of powerlessness, even if the reality of the game presents V as a god level catalyst of NC changing fortunes and deciding the fate of gods, legends, and societies.)
So in a first person game... for immersion... its somehow a success to make the player feel powerless and helpless and their choices dont matter.. in a ROLE PLAYING GAME.. not in an action narrative game like Last of Us where you are an observer in cutscenes.. but given "choices" that dont seem to matter much is an achievement to you?!?!?
No.. the GAME.. doesn't present V as having any power at all.. no choices made except at the micro level do we accomplish (we kill some gang members.. rescue some npcs.. small micro level things..)
only in the endings.. where the player has no say.. no influence.. no agency.. all because of WHO WE CALL FOR HELP ON A ROOFTOP
magically transform things into we change the world... somehow.. are a legend/ bestest evah...
When V's goal stated over and over is TO LIVE. I'm sorry if the game corrects your head canon over and over and over. I want to live is a repeating mantra from V.
If anything - ALT is the powerhouse... ALT brings down mikoshi... all we do is shoot some guards to get her in there.
Once again - what other game has 1000+ page posts on its ending.
If Bioware hadn't kept closing forum posts - the other participant in this category would be ME3. NOT GOOD COMPANY
CP2077 is almost ready to be sub 10K players on steam. It is routinely beaten by other , better, games.
Alt failed for years at taking down mikoshi before V.
V's decisions on a roof, are in fact Vs decisions.
Whether takemura lives or dies, and whether he restores himself is based on Vs choice. If V doesn't choose to help Arasaka, Hanako dies, and takemura is ruined, even if you save his life.
Judy does not leave NC if you ignore her after MQ. She stays and sends you a message about wishing she had the courage to leave and feeling like shit.
Johnny helps Kerry improve, but V finishes the job, leading to Kerry making peace with Us Cracks, getting a new tour, and finding his ability to write songs again (the boat scene) as well as the joy of living.
The reason I brought up those points about how V helps their friends was not to say the game has quests, but to show you that V's choices can improve the lives of their friends. Which you said made rdr worthwhile.
As far as rogue, there is no logical reason she would hand over afterlife to her son, he is a spoiled manchild who knows nothing of fixers and mercs, and not the proper person to inherit the place that represents that side of rogue's self. She has money, she can give him money. Giving him afterlife would essentially destroy afterlife. Also, she only hands over afterlife(management) if she lives, in which case she still probably profits, and she still has money to support her son. If she dies, its likely V either took over, or purchased it.
Rogue started afterlife as a remembrance to the friends and life she lost(hence the name, and the drinks). People who lived dangerously, and hard, risking it all to achieve their goals. She lost her way (in her opinion). Seeing Johnny again raises these questions, and she is looking to find herself again, and pass the torch, instead of to just be a top fixer. V is Johnny's spiritual successor, for whom Johnny gives his life, and apparently a living legend by mercenary standards. She wants V to survive and thrive due to her connection to Johnny, and because V is a merc she can respect.
now I will say specifically, rogues story is extremely subtle, and they don't have her literally explain herself with exposition. They also time skip in that ending the most, which makes it the least explicit. But if you look at all her conversations, and actions, her motivation becomes more clear.
It's certainly possible for some people to look at it that way, but all else being equal it doesn't come close. V's only fixed motivation is that of survival. There is no moment, like Arthur has, where V realizes that there is no hope whatsoever and radically refocuses her goal on something else in her final moments. Well, that's not entirely true, as you can say that's what V does in the Star and Sun endings, without player input; the ending you get determines V's attitude so severely, though, that they don't even feel like my character. Even then, there is no moment in Cyberpunk that even comes close to "In the end, Micah, despite my best efforts to the contrary, it turns out I've won." Not even close.
An unexpected outcome is "I uploaded Alt and that might've been more dangerous than I was anticipating." Not "I chose to attack Arasaka with the Aldecaldos so now I fucking hate NC and my LI"
The bitter irony is that there's so little of this actual "oppression and powerlessness" except when it comes to the fact that V is fucked no matter what. You can easily singlehandedly wipe out an entire gang that is legendarily difficult to get ahold of with nothing but a stupid fucking ninja sword in this game. The secret ending is even more over the top power fantasy. The fact that the journey was all for nothing in the end is just some artificial bullshit to make the ending feel somehow deeper for some people.
well like I said, they create the illusion that V is powerless, clearly they are not. But also considering what V achieves in two-4 weeks before mikoshi, and what V achieves in 2-3 months in the sun ending. I don't think I would be sure V couldn't survive with 2 more months of time. Point being, I'm not sure V is unable to save themselves.
I think going from zero to surviving in two weeks was less likely than going from Sun level of money and influence to surviving in 2 months.
Also, I can't say its all for nothing, V lives longer, achieves more of their goals, and helps the people they care about, and has the chance to keep living, thats all any one can ask for.
I find it weird when someone says V can choose their ending
They choose how to approach a mission(though techically i suppose suicide one is actually choosing a character ending).
Based on a mission choce you then get forced down a rigid ending where instead of you making your character choices the a doppelganger version of V makes their own set of ending choices.
For explain a little bit the endings and why CDPR probably did that, you can read an interesting post by Rawls on another thread.
Especially the end (with the context explained just before) :
Regardless of V's choices, the It definitely has a story to tell. "Star" is realizing that the whole story the corporations are selling about the rat race and "becoming someone" is a lie being fed to the masses to keep the powerful wealthy. It's opting out of the rat race in exchange for a community and contentment. The "glory" ending sees V trying to continue to make it within that world, which shows grit, but seems unlikely to be successful in the long run for much more than raising some hell and making a name for oneself. The "devil" ending sees V trust the corporation - which does have the greatest chance at achieving some semblance of digitized immortality ... but at what cost ethically and metaphysically? The "Temperance" ending is somewhat like "Star," V again realizes that the allure is a lie, but in this one, gives her body to Johnny to do what he would with it and she opts out into Cyberspace with Alt. However that's a lonelier path than the Star by a wide margin.
In a game where narration is the center point, in a dystopian world like Night City, CDPR offers the "choices" that remain oriented with their way of showing the world. “I choose what I want” wouldn't work at all.
For explain a little bit the endings and why CDPR probably did that, you can read an interesting post by Rawls on another thread.
Especially the end (with the context explained just before) :
In a game where narration is the center point, in a dystopian world like Night City, CDPR offers the "choices" that remain oriented with their way of showing the world. “I choose what I want” wouldn't work at all.
I don't think it offers the choices that are oriented with the world.
I think its some massively simplistic visions of we'll a 'freedom', a 'blaze of glory', 'Submission', 'walkaway', 'give up' endings someone has come up with and that they've put the minimum thought into how to implement and make fit a choice based narrative.
I don't think it offers the choices that are oriented with the world.
I think its some massively simplistic visions of we'll a 'freedom', a 'blaze of glory', 'Submission', 'walkaway', 'give up' endings someone has come up with and that they've put the minimum thought into how to implement and make fit a choice based narrative.
I mean, you can break down any branching plot into it's major paths with each path represented by a couple words. The Witcher 3 has the "tragic" ending, the "witcher" ending and the "empress" ending. That doesn't mean any of them is simplistic, even if they do fit into a broad branch. Same can be said of almost any aRPG out there. Because each of the paths has to be hard coded as a varying dialogues / questlines.
EDIT: [Cyberpunk has:
(1) the "Star/nomad" ending where V rejects the allure of Night City but still beats the system momentarily for a chance at contentment;
(2) the "glory/streetkid" ending where V takes it to the man and for a moment wins;
(3) the "devil/corpo" ending where V chooses survival and a chance at immortality, at the cost of returning to the status quo for Arasaka;
(4) the "temperance/Johnny" ending where V again rejects the allure of life, but this time sacrifices her body for Johnny (whether because of her connection to him, being influenced by him, or her belief that his ideals are better pursued by him), and chooses to stay behind with Alt;
(5) the suicide ending, where V opts out in the face of impossible odds.
Each of those works very well with the world and story. That's impressive. They also leave V in need of the same thing in all ends except for the suicide one - a cure for her body or a new body. That potentially sets up a sequel pretty well with a singular motivation for V to follow despite wildly different starting spots. It also works as a one-off if they decide to go in a different direction.]
I can't think of a modern aRPG that offers more width and depth specifically on its themes, or offers as significantly varied outcomes each of which feels authentic to the themes in the game. Some of the isometric RPGs probably offer more variance, but they're a different kind of game.
I mean, you can break down any branching plot into it's major paths with each path represented by a couple words. The Witcher 3 has the "tragic" ending, the "witcher" ending and the "empress" ending. That doesn't mean any of them is simplistic, even if they do fit into a broad branch. Same can be said of almost any aRPG out there. Because each of the paths has to be hard coded as a varying dialogues / questlines.
I can't think of a modern aRPG that offers more width and depth specifically on its themes, or offers as significantly varied outcomes each of which feels authentic to the themes in the game. Some of the isometric RPGs probably offer more variance, but they're a different kind of game.
Yes but the witcher doesn't have just those three endings. Those are Cir's endings. There's layers underneath dependent on choices you've made.
It's not like if i romance Triss, agree i'm leaving with Triss. The game doesn't because i made the choices that led Ciri to become empress give me a simplistic set Empress ending minus Triss. So yeah i consider it highly simplistic that a random choice of who to sacrifice/risk on a rooftop doesn't just decide the fate of an NPC like Ciri/Johnny but overwrites the bulk of character choices that came before.
It's not like if i romance Triss, agree i'm leaving with Triss. The game doesn't because i made the choices that led Ciri to become empress give me a simplistic set Empress ending minus Triss. So yeah i consider it highly simplistic that a random choice of who to sacrifice/risk on a rooftop doesn't just decide the fate of an NPC like Ciri/Johnny but overwrites the bulk of character choices that came before.
Just like if you romance Judy and go with the Nomads, it's a different ending than romancing Judy and staying in Night City. All those little messages that get sent to V during the credits are just like the sidequest slides at the end of TW3. It's just integrated into the credits. The fact that varying choices interplay with each other to determine what happens (e.g. romancing Judy is not automatically mean she stays with V forever) is less simplistic than TW3.
EDIT: Also, the choice on the rooftop didn't feel random at all. It's informed by everything you've done up to that point.
Just like if you romance Judy and go with the Nomads, it's a different ending than romancing Judy and staying in Night City. All those little messages that get sent to V during the credits are just like the sidequest slides at the end of TW3. It's just integrated into the credits.
No if you've agreed to leave with Judy the game decides you aren't allowed to leave with judy because its all boiled down to a simplistic mission choice where you didn't think sacrificing some Nomads was right should lead to overwriting that choice and breaking up and staying.
No if you've agreed to leave with Judy the game decides you aren't allowed to leave with judy because its all boiled down to a simplistic mission choice where you didn't think sacrificing some Nomads was right should lead to overwriting that choice and breaking up and staying.
The two choices play with one another. That's more complicated than "My character likes x NPC, therefore x NPC stays with my character." The NPCs also have autonomy in the story. That's less simple. EDIT: And Judy tells V she wants to get out of the city ... so it makes sense that she won't stay if V picks teaming up with Rogue and the glory ending.
The two choices play with one another. That's more complicated than "My character likes x NPC, therefore x NPC stays with my character." The NPCs also have autonomy in the story. That's less simple.
No they don't. Johnny can just leave town. Why is he allowed autonomy but not you're not allowed it over your own character. You whole you can't leave town with x NPC because you didn't click the simplistic box to kill some nomads is simplistic garbage.
