[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

[II_Ryan_II]

Then you didnt understand cyberpunk genre

Sorry, Nekatinyz, but that has nothing to do with genre. IF - that is really true that V can not survive, no matter what - then this is "bad" writing. I would like to see this for myself ... so far I only read it in the net and I hope that there is more...

But for the arguments sake. Let's really say - that V dies (even if you are in a cyber-space-heaven) and the only option is that Johnny lives on:

I might shoot now far above some heads here, as this is story-telling/narrative stuff of an advanced level that requires stuff you can study. I you study screenplay-writing you learn such stuff.

That narrative is very western and very young. It comes from the reformation. That is why it is western. Other people around the globe did not have that transformation of an ideology (here religion), with a strong lobby (church) in a progressed civlized level (here 400 years ago).
The "Jesus-story/narrative/perception" switched to a hero-story - that goes like this: "You have to suffer even die to do good."
That is a progress from the classical hero-journey, where it does not matter how you "slay the dragon" - because it is about the "dragon" and for the hero only how he levels up in his society.

As this goes about instincts how we as a human species click (on a biological level). This is nature-science. And backed up with psychology, biology, archeology and anthropology. So we know very well where we come from and where we do not have scientific data - we are very positive how that looked like "millions" of years ago.
Anyways...

Martynax hit the nail on the head with his/her assumption - if V ends up dead/in cyber-heaven OR physical.
Because he/she is the main-character of the story or at least advertised even we have her/his three act system story-line (three act in story-telling not what is in-game a III act system) - BUT - as Johnny comes in very early - including an interlude - suddenly HE becomes the main-character of the story.

V becomes the ring in Lord of the Rings for Johnny, while he is Frodo. Just only a Frodo that can die in Mordor.
V for vessel.
It looks like V is the main-character, based on that "Jesus-narrative" who suffers up to dead to do good - but that "good" only exists for Johnny (IF he survives).
Now - Cyberpunk is an RPG. And that poll is the result of that players feel that the contract between the writers/the story-tellers and the players is broken.
AS - you expect that (here) YOU are the main-character of the story. And it turns out: No. You are not.
The main-character is Johnny Silverhand and what happens to Johnny Silverhand who faces the dragon (here the corps).

So far - you can say: What is the problem? So then it is the story of Johnny Silverhand. Isn't it something progessive to NOT follow the classic hero-story? Can't we just be progressive? Isn't that something good? It's new.

The problem comes with the meta-level (the bridge between fiction and reality) - as NOW the message is (as you play V and not Johnny): "It does not matter what you do - it has no impact whatsoever - your life is insignificant.
The maximum outcome you can achieve is to MAYBE - maybe - influence some "un-important" people around you."

You see the church-propaganda of 400 years back in that? "Ora et labora" aka "work and pray" as the "heroes" aka your feudal-master (as barons or priests) are the heroes of the world? As your suffering - as un-important as it is - is good.

That is why even Tolkien let Frodo survive. As if Frodo would not survive - it would have been the story of Aragon or anybody else who would have prospered from his sacrifice.
The same problems you can see in modern movies as well. Here DC vs. Marvel. Marvel writers all follow the classic hero-story that is 5000 years old - and told by humans all around the globe.
DC tells the "Jesus" story by their characters. Lucas with episode I-III ran into exact the same problem with Anakin aka Darth Vader.
That characters are all "They are doing bad, but in their core they are good and they are suffering - they suffer constantly to do good (if they are comic-book-heroes) or for Anakin is just mislead."
Here V suffers as well. You can do side-quests - where your death plays zero role - but your story is: You are a character marked with instant death (that is suffering) on your hero-journey.
The pain that drove Anakin to become Darth Vader or the shadows of the past that hunts Badman and you can not overcome.

And that overcoming is exactly the problem - as this only works for humans on a high civilization level. If you would run like that 2000 years ago - you are a dead person and the guys who can overcome the threats and dangers of nature (as humans are less in control about nature) will survive.

Conan (from Robert E.Howard or John Milius) - overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Geralt (in games) overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Jojimbo/7 Samurai (Kurosawa) the guys overcome their suffering - that is why they are heroes.
The Marvel movie characters - no matter who - overcome their problems to face the "bigger dragons".
Indiana Jones, Rambo all dating-movies characters (from John Wick to Mel Gibson, Bruce Willes, Arnold Schwarzenegger back to Burt Reynolds and beyond - we can go back cross Siegfried to Hamlet till we end up with Odysseus) all - overcome their suffering - to face the dragons at hand.
Johnny in Cyberpunk - overcomes his suffering - that is why HE is the hero of the story.

But V - has no impact onto that whatsoever. You are in Cyberpunk (as the player) only a pars-pro-toto of Johnny's story, your master, your lord, who might grant you a place in cyber-heaven. Good ending for Johnny as he survives on.
Bad ending for Johnny is if the vessel aka V kills him.

If there is serioulsy no way - how V can overcome the dragon (here: the sudden death at hand via chip) - you play in Cyberpunk the story of a guy - who went out to slay the dragon and was eaten, while another guy gets the princess in the end (here survives).
That is why I called that "bad" writing. As thank you very much - we all know that it is very hard to face a dragon (a big problem) - if it would be so easy - we would not tell stories about that.
Now you tell me a story about the guy/girl who failed?
How about maybe the story about the guy/girl that succeeded and not random-Joe or random Jane who is extra (movie term) 2407 in his life?

With genre that has nothing to do. That is like a horror-movie - where the main-protagonist got eaten by the monster - and finally the sherrif shoots it. Who killed the monster? Who is the hero? The sherrif or the girl that got eaten?
Cyberpunk - Johnny Mnemoic - rescues the world. He overcomes the suffering and faces the dragon and succeeds.
That is from 1995.
Mad Max - overcomes his suffering and slays the dragon. Specifically in Fury Road - you have a whole human progression about a guy who is on an animal-level (sub-human) and gets in 1.5 hours - to a uber-human (the hero) that changes the world.

And in no pen&paper RPG on that planet you do adventures where you fail. Somebody else might get more out of your journeys BUT you succeed with solving the problem (aka kill the dragon).
V does not solve the problem.
That is like as if in the Witcher Geralt would not find Ciri, but if you are lucky Yennefer does. (Good ending for Yennefer, but you play Geralt).

In the outcome it is absolutly legit if then people ask: What am I doing here for 40 hours if I can not succeed?
It tells me after 5 min: You are going to fail to slay the dragon. To solve the problem.
What is the point here of following the story specifically the side-quests?

This is why I do have high-hopes that somebody of the writing staff realized this and that there might be a way how V becomes the hero of the story (overcomes the dragon/the problem), because if he/she does not - why am I running around for 80 hours in that city? I am not Johnny Silverhand (the guy who faced a different dragon) and I am in RL already nobody No 99032 and thank you very much, old enough to know that life is hard and unfair for that I do not need a story to highlight this to me.
Humans (even if they might not be 100% aware about it) figuere that out if they are 8 years of age.

If I want to see this virtual, I can watch this in 329093 documentations on Netflix or go into the next- hospital where people fight death on a daily base.
As - again - that is the problem then with the message via the meta-level. As this narrative is the core for a lot of problems we do have on the planet in RL. That is the justification for a lot of people - that do a lot of bad things that cause more harm than doing good.

I give you one rl-example of a guy we wanted for a TV-interview, where I put my neck on the line - to not get that guy in front of a camera. One reason that made me quit - non-fiction TV. It was about HIV-day (you know the red-ribbon) and that guy was HIV positive.
After a short research we found out that he was very active in the club-scene and does not tell that he is HIV-positive.
His attitude was - you get it or do not. That is just luck or bad-luck. Can't change it anway. That is how live is. Bad stuff happens. He did not take any responsibility - that he screws with every life of every date he got. It's their fault then not his.
That attitude - as that guy does not think he is a bad guy - he consideres himself a good-human as well.
(Nobody thinks he or she is bad or a villain.)
Is exactly in line with that message- meta-level. He lives with his suffering and does not face the problem (here taking responsibility aka facing the dragon that comes with sacrifices for him in the real world as that would have an impact for him - as - just be frank - people might change your behaviour towards you if they know you have a deadly disease.).
If I tell that story to random people the most reaction I get is: That guy is a criminal.
So yes. He is right. It is tough. It is unfair for him.
But how deals with this - is easy. Just don't tell and find every excuse why his life-style is justified:
You can't change the situation you are in, you can only deal with it, so play your part.
That last sentence might sound legit - but I argued to our chief-editor: Can we please get a guy on HIV-day in front of a camera who maybe is open about it, faces all consequences of society and faces the dragon on a daily base, with all sacrifices? Because that is a guy, maybe people should look up to?

Bottom-line - it has nothing to with genre. That is about story-telling and that is universal - as our stories are based on how our species clicks based on core-instincts that are natural-laws. That is something you can not change, because we are all humans.
A lot of side-quests are the opposite of this (I got nearly all through and to be fair: Some feel already like you are a side-kick). But this is why (so far) I can not believe that the main-stroy fails here.
BUT - if that should be really the story of Johnny Silverhand and V stands for Johnny's vessel then this is not brillant that is bad-writing, as you told the story of the guy who confronted the dragon and failed no matter what he did.
And if somebody thinks - YEAH! The message is: You are not in control of your life!!!
Congrats - if you ever wondered what the slaves thought who build the pyramids, you found the answer.
You are in control how you deal with the un-controlled parts. So lift blocks - or be the guy - who says: Why do I lift blocks for a pharao? And by that - change the circumstances, bottom line: You are actually in control.
That is 2001 (Kubrick) now - or even CDPR is founded on that.

A Polish company, 10 years after the iron-curtain - raised to the top and changed the circumstances. As suddenly - Yes - it is okay to make games in the Polish language even if there are "only" 60 mil. native-speakers. Suddenly we can do this on planet earth - 30 years ago that was impossible. because there is no money to gain with that. Who changed the circumstances? Who was in control? Who fought the dragon and won? Like in the fictional-stories that are totally unrelated to reality, some say...

tlr;
The chip and releated death are V's dragon. If V does not overcome the dragon: He/she is no hero of Cyberpunk.
And if Johnny can survive (overcome death) - he is the hero. That turns the character-creation, the side-quests and everything else into a gimmik. And the "I want that people remember me" - is V's wish, it is not his/her dragon, that is maybe an additional suffering - to not be a nobody - there he/she is in control and there is no option in game to run a store or take a job to die as a nobody. So the only real confrontation for V is the chip and survival and if (s)he can not survive no matter what... then he/she is the guy who failed to slay the dragon and indirectly renders the game as Johnny's story.
Survival in cyber-space is not bitter-sweet - that is failing. Objective is: Survive as V on planet earth.
And I do seriously hope - that at least one writer realized that - and there is an ending that V can slay the dragon, what might be complicated and most have not seen so far. If I would have been in that writing-stafff I would have put my job on the line for that (for reasons given above - as I think that message matters as I take fiction very seriously).

 

[MandyZGaming]

By the way, I read somewhere that apparently in the 2018 gameplay trailer during a section in V's apartment the radio host states that Johnny died in 2076? Could it be that they decided to change up the whole story to squeeze in more Keanu Reeves after he was fully on board?

Maybe, but then they shouldn´t have given us our own character to build

 

[jellyhurwit]

Just in case I would agree with that, than the best ending we currently have is to just shoot yourself

Why, though? I mean you still get to live a good life for maybe 6 months, maybe more?
You have to fight tooth and nail for what little you can hold onto, but isn't that kind of...NC's whole thing?

 

[neocyril]

By the way, I read somewhere that apparently in the 2018 gameplay trailer during a section in V's apartment the radio host states that Johnny died in 2076? Could it be that they decided to change up the whole story to squeeze in more Keanu Reeves after he was fully on board?

Where did you get the idea that they changed the story so that they can shove Keanu in hmm...

 

[kaz_ds]

Ok, so it's true, I just checked. In the 2018 gameplay trailer where the whole Jackie/Maelstrom mission was shown, the radio host says that "it's been a year since his last ride", referring to Johnny Silverhand, remember -- this is before they even announced he was on board.

Could it be? There might be a chance that they changed up the story and shoved more Silverhand into the mix because they got Keanu. It certainly feels that way. Nothing against the dude, I think he was pretty solid in the game but regardless.

That would explain why it felt so rushed and the story beats were skipped over.

Timestamped for convenience, just read the subtitles if you cannot hear over the narrator.

 

[jellyhurwit]

Maybe, but then they shouldn´t have given us our own character to build

That's the biggest issue with this game. They wanted to make a game about this other character and a totally customizable character and have them both be the protagonist. That's weird narrative design, not to mention I can't imagine what the resource allocation was like.

Post automatically merged: Dec 17, 2020

Ok, so it's true, I just checked. In the 2018 gameplay trailer where the whole Jackie/Maelstrom mission was shown, the radio host says that "it's been a year since his last ride", referring to Johnny Silverhand, remember -- this is before they even announced he was on board.

Could it be? There might be a chance that they changed up the story and shoved more Silverhand into the mix because they got Keanu. It certainly feels that way. Nothing against the dude, I think he was pretty solid in the game but regardless.

Yeah, definitely should've been either a Johnny Silverhand game
OR
a fully customizable character game.

It was way too ambitious, for really anyone, to think you could do both and balance it without cutting a ton of stuff out.

 

[MandyZGaming]

Why, though? I mean you still get to live a good life for maybe 6 months, maybe more?
You have to fight tooth and nail for what little you can hold onto, but isn't that kind of...NC's whole thing?

sure 6 months is a great time span. and seeing that whatever I do is pointless, i would definetly spend that time with the ones i love, rather than running away through the badlands or flying of to space. 6 months with your loved ones is better than nothing, though you will leave them behind very sad

 

[Cloud7]

Sorry, Nekatinyz, but that has nothing to do with genre. IF - that is really true that V can not survive, no matter what - then this is "bad" writing. I would like to see this for myself ... so far I only read it in the net and I hope that there is more...

But for the arguments sake. Let's really say - that V dies (even if you are in a cyber-space-heaven) and the only option is that Johnny lives on:

I might shoot now far above some heads here, as this is story-telling/narrative stuff of an advanced level that requires stuff you can study. I you study screenplay-writing you learn such stuff.

That narrative is very western and very young. It comes from the reformation. That is why it is western. Other people around the globe did not have that transformation of an ideology (here religion), with a strong lobby (church) in a progressed civlized level (here 400 years ago).
The "Jesus-story/narrative/perception" switched to a hero-story - that goes like this: "You have to suffer even die to do good."
That is a progress from the classical hero-journey, where it does not matter how you "slay the dragon" - because it is about the "dragon" and for the hero only how he levels up in his society.

As this goes about instincts how we as a human species click (on a biological level). This is nature-science. And backed up with psychology, biology, archeology and anthropology. So we know very well where we come from and where we do not have scientific data - we are very positive how that looked like "millions" of years ago.
Anyways...

Martynax hit the nail on the head with his/her assumption - if V ends up dead/in cyber-heaven OR physical.
Because he/she is the main-character of the story or at least advertised even we have her/his three act system story-line (three act in story-telling not what is in-game a III act system) - BUT - as Johnny comes in very early - including an interlude - suddenly HE becomes the main-character of the story.

V becomes the ring in Lord of the Rings for Johnny, while he is Frodo. Just only a Frodo that can die in Mordor.
V for vessel.
It looks like V is the main-character, based on that "Jesus-narrative" who suffers up to dead to do good - but that "good" only exists for Johnny (IF he survives).
Now - Cyberpunk is an RPG. And that poll is the result of that players feel that the contract between the writers/the story-tellers and the players is broken.
AS - you expect that (here) YOU are the main-character of the story. And it turns out: No. You are not.
The main-character is Johnny Silverhand and what happens to Johnny Silverhand who faces the dragon (here the corps).

So far - you can say: What is the problem? So then it is the story of Johnny Silverhand. Isn't it something progessive to NOT follow the classic hero-story? Can't we just be progressive? Isn't that something good? It's new.

The problem comes with the meta-level (the bridge between fiction and reality) - as NOW the message is (as you play V and not Johnny): "It does not matter what you do - it has no impact whatsoever - your life is insignificant.
The maximum outcome you can achieve is to MAYBE - maybe - influence some "un-important" people around you."

You see the church-propaganda of 400 years back in that? "Ora et labora" aka "work and pray" as the "heroes" aka your feudal-master (as barons or priests) are the heroes of the world? As your suffering - as un-important as it is - is good.

That is why even Tolkien let Frodo survive. As if Frodo would not survive - it would have been the story of Aragon or anybody else who would have prospered from his sacrifice.
The same problems you can see in modern movies as well. Here DC vs. Marvel. Marvel writers all follow the classic hero-story that is 5000 years old - and told by humans all around the globe.
DC tells the "Jesus" story by their characters. Lucas with episode I-III ran into exact the same problem with Anakin aka Darth Vader.
That characters are all "They are doing bad, but in their core they are good and they are suffering - they suffer constantly to do good (if they are comic-book-heroes) or for Anakin is just mislead."
Here V suffers as well. You can do side-quests - where your death plays zero role - but your story is: You are a character marked with instant death (that is suffering) on your hero-journey.
The pain that drove Anakin to become Darth Vader or the shadows of the past that hunts Badman and you can not overcome.

And that overcoming is exactly the problem - as this only works for humans on a high civilization level. If you would run like that 2000 years ago - you are a dead person and the guys who can overcome the threats and dangers of nature (as humans are less in control about nature) will survive.

Conan (from Robert E.Howard or John Milius) - overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Geralt (in games) overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Jojimbo/7 Samurai (Kurosawa) the guys overcome their suffering - that is why they are heroes.
The Marvel movie characters - no matter who - overcome their problems to face the "bigger dragons".
Indiana Jones, Rambo all dating-movies characters (from John Wick to Mel Gibson, Bruce Willes, Arnold Schwarzenegger back to Burt Reynolds and beyond - we can go back cross Siegfried to Hamlet till we end up with Odysseus) all - overcome their suffering - to face the dragons at hand.
Johnny in Cyberpunk - overcomes his suffering - that is why HE is the hero of the story.

But V - has no impact onto that whatsoever. You are in Cyberpunk (as the player) only a pars-pro-toto of Johnny's story, your master, your lord, who might grant you a place in cyber-heaven. Good ending for Johnny as he survives on.
Bad ending for Johnny is if the vessel aka V kills him.

If there is serioulsy no way - how V can overcome the dragon (here: the sudden death at hand via chip) - you play in Cyberpunk the story of a guy - who went out to slay the dragon and was eaten, while another guy gets the princess in the end (here survives).
That is why I called that "bad" writing. As thank you very much - we all know that it is very hard to face a dragon (a big problem) - if it would be so easy - we would not tell stories about that.
Now you tell me a story about the guy/girl who failed?
How about maybe the story about the guy/girl that succeeded and not random-Joe or random Jane who is extra (movie term) 2407 in his life?

With genre that has nothing to do. That is like a horror-movie - where the main-protagonist got eaten by the monster - and finally the sherrif shoots it. Who killed the monster? Who is the hero? The sherrif or the girl that got eaten?
Cyberpunk - Johnny Mnemoic - rescues the world. He overcomes the suffering and faces the dragon and succeeds.
That is from 1995.
Mad Max - overcomes his suffering and slays the dragon. Specifically in Fury Road - you have a whole human progression about a guy who is on an animal-level (sub-human) and gets in 1.5 hours - to a uber-human (the hero) that changes the world.

And in no pen&paper RPG on that planet you do adventures where you fail. Somebody else might get more out of your journeys BUT you succeed with solving the problem (aka kill the dragon).
V does not solve the problem.
That is like as if in the Witcher Geralt would not find Ciri, but if you are lucky Yennefer does. (Good ending for Yennefer, but you play Geralt).

In the outcome it is absolutly legit if then people ask: What am I doing here for 40 hours if I can not succeed?
It tells me after 5 min: You are going to fail to slay the dragon. To solve the problem.
What is the point here of following the story specifically the side-quests?

This is why I do have high-hopes that somebody of the writing staff realized this and that there might be a way how V becomes the hero of the story (overcomes the dragon/the problem), because if he/she does not - why am I running around for 80 hours in that city? I am not Johnny Silverhand (the guy who faced a different dragon) and I am in RL already nobody No 99032 and thank you very much, old enough to know that life is hard and unfair for that I do not need a story to highlight this to me.
Humans (even if they might not be 100% aware about it) figuere that out if they are 8 years of age.

If I want to see this virtual, I can watch this in 329093 documentations on Netflix or go into the next- hospital where people fight death on a daily base.
As - again - that is the problem then with the message via the meta-level. As this narrative is the core for a lot of problems we do have on the planet in RL. That is the justification for a lot of people - that do a lot of bad things that cause more harm than doing good.

I give you one rl-example of a guy we wanted for a TV-interview, where I put my neck on the line - to not get that guy in front of a camera. One reason that made me quit - non-fiction TV. It was about HIV-day (you know the red-ribbon) and that guy was HIV positive.
After a short research we found out that he was very active in the club-scene and does not tell that he is HIV-positive.
His attitude was - you get it or do not. That is just luck or bad-luck. Can't change it anway. That is how live is. Bad stuff happens. He did not take any responsibility - that he screws with every life of every date he got. It's their fault then not his.
That attitude - as that guy does not think he is a bad guy - he consideres himself a good-human as well.
(Nobody thinks he or she is bad or a villain.)
Is exactly in line with that message- meta-level. He lives with his suffering and does not face the problem (here taking responsibility aka facing the dragon that comes with sacrifices for him in the real world as that would have an impact for him - as - just be frank - people might change your behaviour towards you if they know you have a deadly disease.).
If I tell that story to random people the most reaction I get is: That guy is a criminal.
So yes. He is right. It is tough. It is unfair for him.
But how deals with this - is easy. Just don't tell and find every excuse why his life-style is justified:
You can't change the situation you are in, you can only deal with it, so play your part.
That last sentence might sound legit - but I argued to our chief-editor: Can we please get a guy on HIV-day in front of a camera who maybe is open about it, faces all consequences of society and faces the dragon on a daily base, with all sacrifices? Because that is a guy, maybe people should look up to?

Bottom-line - it has nothing to with genre. That is about story-telling and that is universal - as our stories are based on how our species clicks based on core-instincts that are natural-laws. That is something you can not change, because we are all humans.
A lot of side-quests are the opposite of this (I got nearly all through and to be fair: Some feel already like you are a side-kick). But this is why (so far) I can not believe that the main-stroy fails here.
BUT - if that should be really the story of Johnny Silverhand and V stands for Johnny's vessel then this is not brillant that is bad-writing, as you told the story of the guy who confronted the dragon and failed no matter what he did.
And if somebody thinks - YEAH! The message is: You are not in control of your life!!!
Congrats - if you ever wondered what the slaves thought who build the pyramids, you found the answer.
You are in control how you deal with the un-controlled parts. So lift blocks - or be the guy - who says: Why do I lift blocks for a pharao? And by that - change the circumstances, bottom line: You are actually in control.
That is 2001 (Kubrick) now - or even CDPR is founded on that.

A Polish company, 10 years after the iron-curtain - raised to the top and changed the circumstances. As suddenly - Yes - it is okay to make games in the Polish language even if there are "only" 60 mil. native-speakers. Suddenly we can do this on planet earth - 30 years ago that was impossible. because there is no money to gain with that. Who changed the circumstances? Who was in control? Who fought the dragon and won? Like in the fictional-stories that are totally unrelated to reality, some say...

tlr;
The chip and releated death are V's dragon. If V does not overcome the dragon: He/she is no hero of Cyberpunk.
And if Johnny can survive (overcome death) - he is the hero. That turns the character-creation, the side-quests and everything else into a gimmik. And the "I want that people remember me" - is V's wish, it is not his/her dragon, that is maybe an additional suffering - to not be a nobody - there he/she is in control and there is no option in game to run a store or take a job to die as a nobody. So the only real confrontation for V is the chip and survival and if (s)he can not survive no matter what... then he/she is the guy who failed to slay the dragon and indirectly renders the game as Johnny's story.
Survival in cyber-space is not bitter-sweet - that is failing. Objective is: Survive as V on planet earth.
And I do seriously hope - that at least one writer realized that - and there is an ending that V can slay the dragon, what might be complicated and most have not seen so far. If I would have been in that writing-stafff I would have put my job on the line for that (for reasons given above - as I think that message matters as I take fiction very seriously).

God damn that was some awesome elaboration on wtf is wrong with this story. Well done.

 

[AKANexus]

Eh, not gonna bother with 1 and 2, because you'd have to change this story extensively to justify happy endings.

So on number 3, Misty gives you pills right away to kill yourself for when the pain gets to be too much - she tells you its almost definitely going to happen, and you need a way to end it all if it gets to be too much. Vik constantly tells you you're going to die and there's nothing that can be done. As does everyone else. The only people that really feed you hope are your friends who admit they don't know if there's hope but they love you and want you to win.
But Vik is the only one of your friends that understands what's going on with your brain and he says in no uncertain terms that you're done. And anyone with the technological knowledge to understand what's happening says the same. Even those that are using you don't imply they have a solution, just that they'll try (Alt, Hanako, etc.).

I was actually a little surprised on 3 with how bleak it is. But you'd need more here to justify a happy ending.

Alright, so you mean that only those who say we're going to die are valid points, while everyone who say we might live are just there to make up a trash plot? See how that reasoning fails when you see both sides of the story?

 

[Linkinbnu]

Ok, so it's true, I just checked. In the 2018 gameplay trailer where the whole Jackie/Maelstrom mission was shown, the radio host says that "it's been a year since his last ride", referring to Johnny Silverhand, remember -- this is before they even announced he was on board.

Could it be? There might be a chance that they changed up the story and shoved more Silverhand into the mix because they got Keanu. It certainly feels that way. Nothing against the dude, I think he was pretty solid in the game but regardless.

That would explain why it felt so rushed and the story beats were skipped over.

Timestamped for convenience, just read the subtitles if you cannot hear over the narrator.

I know it's a meme tweet but... you know...

 

[jellyhurwit]

Alright, so you mean that only those who say we're going to die are valid points, while everyone who say we might live are just there to make up a trash plot? See how that reasoning fails when you see both sides of the story?

Well, you have to consider a character's motivations and their knowledge.
Imagine you have brain cancer and your doctor (who also is your close friend) says "this is completely beyond me and I don't know anyone who can help you."

But your hippy-dippy pal who reads Tarot says "you can't give up hope, you could still pull through!" while also slipping you cyanide pills.
And all your friends who know nothing about medicine are like "hey, don't give up, love you pal..."

And then you have all these other people who have an even greater understanding of brain cancer than your doctor, but aren't your pals - and they say "this seems terminal, and I doubt there's anything I can do. But I can try something."

So yeah, who says something really does matter.

 

[Kikinho]

View attachment 11093264

I know it's a meme tweet but... you know...

Lol non of the meme tweets aged well for them.

 

[MandyZGaming]

Well, you have to consider a character's motivations and their knowledge.
Imagine you have brain cancer and your doctor (who also is your close friend) says "this is completely beyond me and I don't know anyone who can help you."

But your hippy-dippy pal who reads Tarot says "you can't give up hope, you could still pull through!" while also slipping you cyanide pills.
And all your friends who know nothing about medicine are like "hey, don't give up, love you pal..."

And then you have all these other people who have an even greater understanding of brain cancer than your doctor, but aren't your pals - and they say "this seems terminal, and I doubt there's anything I can do. But I can try something."

So yeah, who says something really does matter.

wow, you´re pretty cold. i do get it, but you´re cold

 

[neocyril]

In all honesty I don't really hate the whole Johnny(Keanu) plotline. (the guy did a great job bringing Johnny to life)
But looking at that old character creation screen again makes me think of what could've been, the story that we could've gotten.

Just imagine, creating your V with all those options. Going through a story of trying to achieve something, to become a legend that V wants so much and after some time, after making friendships/connections the thing with the chip happens

Pff, kinda sucks lol

 

[Simuxas]

Sorry, Nekatinyz, but that has nothing to do with genre. IF - that is really true that V can not survive, no matter what - then this is "bad" writing. I would like to see this for myself ... so far I only read it in the net and I hope that there is more...

But for the arguments sake. Let's really say - that V dies (even if you are in a cyber-space-heaven) and the only option is that Johnny lives on:

I might shoot now far above some heads here, as this is story-telling/narrative stuff of an advanced level that requires stuff you can study. I you study screenplay-writing you learn such stuff.

That narrative is very western and very young. It comes from the reformation. That is why it is western. Other people around the globe did not have that transformation of an ideology (here religion), with a strong lobby (church) in a progressed civlized level (here 400 years ago).
The "Jesus-story/narrative/perception" switched to a hero-story - that goes like this: "You have to suffer even die to do good."
That is a progress from the classical hero-journey, where it does not matter how you "slay the dragon" - because it is about the "dragon" and for the hero only how he levels up in his society.

As this goes about instincts how we as a human species click (on a biological level). This is nature-science. And backed up with psychology, biology, archeology and anthropology. So we know very well where we come from and where we do not have scientific data - we are very positive how that looked like "millions" of years ago.
Anyways...

Martynax hit the nail on the head with his/her assumption - if V ends up dead/in cyber-heaven OR physical.
Because he/she is the main-character of the story or at least advertised even we have her/his three act system story-line (three act in story-telling not what is in-game a III act system) - BUT - as Johnny comes in very early - including an interlude - suddenly HE becomes the main-character of the story.

V becomes the ring in Lord of the Rings for Johnny, while he is Frodo. Just only a Frodo that can die in Mordor.
V for vessel.
It looks like V is the main-character, based on that "Jesus-narrative" who suffers up to dead to do good - but that "good" only exists for Johnny (IF he survives).
Now - Cyberpunk is an RPG. And that poll is the result of that players feel that the contract between the writers/the story-tellers and the players is broken.
AS - you expect that (here) YOU are the main-character of the story. And it turns out: No. You are not.
The main-character is Johnny Silverhand and what happens to Johnny Silverhand who faces the dragon (here the corps).

So far - you can say: What is the problem? So then it is the story of Johnny Silverhand. Isn't it something progessive to NOT follow the classic hero-story? Can't we just be progressive? Isn't that something good? It's new.

The problem comes with the meta-level (the bridge between fiction and reality) - as NOW the message is (as you play V and not Johnny): "It does not matter what you do - it has no impact whatsoever - your life is insignificant.
The maximum outcome you can achieve is to MAYBE - maybe - influence some "un-important" people around you."

You see the church-propaganda of 400 years back in that? "Ora et labora" aka "work and pray" as the "heroes" aka your feudal-master (as barons or priests) are the heroes of the world? As your suffering - as un-important as it is - is good.

That is why even Tolkien let Frodo survive. As if Frodo would not survive - it would have been the story of Aragon or anybody else who would have prospered from his sacrifice.
The same problems you can see in modern movies as well. Here DC vs. Marvel. Marvel writers all follow the classic hero-story that is 5000 years old - and told by humans all around the globe.
DC tells the "Jesus" story by their characters. Lucas with episode I-III ran into exact the same problem with Anakin aka Darth Vader.
That characters are all "They are doing bad, but in their core they are good and they are suffering - they suffer constantly to do good (if they are comic-book-heroes) or for Anakin is just mislead."
Here V suffers as well. You can do side-quests - where your death plays zero role - but your story is: You are a character marked with instant death (that is suffering) on your hero-journey.
The pain that drove Anakin to become Darth Vader or the shadows of the past that hunts Badman and you can not overcome.

And that overcoming is exactly the problem - as this only works for humans on a high civilization level. If you would run like that 2000 years ago - you are a dead person and the guys who can overcome the threats and dangers of nature (as humans are less in control about nature) will survive.

Conan (from Robert E.Howard or John Milius) - overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Geralt (in games) overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Jojimbo/7 Samurai (Kurosawa) the guys overcome their suffering - that is why they are heroes.
The Marvel movie characters - no matter who - overcome their problems to face the "bigger dragons".
Indiana Jones, Rambo all dating-movies characters (from John Wick to Mel Gibson, Bruce Willes, Arnold Schwarzenegger back to Burt Reynolds and beyond - we can go back cross Siegfried to Hamlet till we end up with Odysseus) all - overcome their suffering - to face the dragons at hand.
Johnny in Cyberpunk - overcomes his suffering - that is why HE is the hero of the story.

But V - has no impact onto that whatsoever. You are in Cyberpunk (as the player) only a pars-pro-toto of Johnny's story, your master, your lord, who might grant you a place in cyber-heaven. Good ending for Johnny as he survives on.
Bad ending for Johnny is if the vessel aka V kills him.

If there is serioulsy no way - how V can overcome the dragon (here: the sudden death at hand via chip) - you play in Cyberpunk the story of a guy - who went out to slay the dragon and was eaten, while another guy gets the princess in the end (here survives).
That is why I called that "bad" writing. As thank you very much - we all know that it is very hard to face a dragon (a big problem) - if it would be so easy - we would not tell stories about that.
Now you tell me a story about the guy/girl who failed?
How about maybe the story about the guy/girl that succeeded and not random-Joe or random Jane who is extra (movie term) 2407 in his life?

With genre that has nothing to do. That is like a horror-movie - where the main-protagonist got eaten by the monster - and finally the sherrif shoots it. Who killed the monster? Who is the hero? The sherrif or the girl that got eaten?
Cyberpunk - Johnny Mnemoic - rescues the world. He overcomes the suffering and faces the dragon and succeeds.
That is from 1995.
Mad Max - overcomes his suffering and slays the dragon. Specifically in Fury Road - you have a whole human progression about a guy who is on an animal-level (sub-human) and gets in 1.5 hours - to a uber-human (the hero) that changes the world.

And in no pen&paper RPG on that planet you do adventures where you fail. Somebody else might get more out of your journeys BUT you succeed with solving the problem (aka kill the dragon).
V does not solve the problem.
That is like as if in the Witcher Geralt would not find Ciri, but if you are lucky Yennefer does. (Good ending for Yennefer, but you play Geralt).

In the outcome it is absolutly legit if then people ask: What am I doing here for 40 hours if I can not succeed?
It tells me after 5 min: You are going to fail to slay the dragon. To solve the problem.
What is the point here of following the story specifically the side-quests?

This is why I do have high-hopes that somebody of the writing staff realized this and that there might be a way how V becomes the hero of the story (overcomes the dragon/the problem), because if he/she does not - why am I running around for 80 hours in that city? I am not Johnny Silverhand (the guy who faced a different dragon) and I am in RL already nobody No 99032 and thank you very much, old enough to know that life is hard and unfair for that I do not need a story to highlight this to me.
Humans (even if they might not be 100% aware about it) figuere that out if they are 8 years of age.

If I want to see this virtual, I can watch this in 329093 documentations on Netflix or go into the next- hospital where people fight death on a daily base.
As - again - that is the problem then with the message via the meta-level. As this narrative is the core for a lot of problems we do have on the planet in RL. That is the justification for a lot of people - that do a lot of bad things that cause more harm than doing good.

I give you one rl-example of a guy we wanted for a TV-interview, where I put my neck on the line - to not get that guy in front of a camera. One reason that made me quit - non-fiction TV. It was about HIV-day (you know the red-ribbon) and that guy was HIV positive.
After a short research we found out that he was very active in the club-scene and does not tell that he is HIV-positive.
His attitude was - you get it or do not. That is just luck or bad-luck. Can't change it anway. That is how live is. Bad stuff happens. He did not take any responsibility - that he screws with every life of every date he got. It's their fault then not his.
That attitude - as that guy does not think he is a bad guy - he consideres himself a good-human as well.
(Nobody thinks he or she is bad or a villain.)
Is exactly in line with that message- meta-level. He lives with his suffering and does not face the problem (here taking responsibility aka facing the dragon that comes with sacrifices for him in the real world as that would have an impact for him - as - just be frank - people might change your behaviour towards you if they know you have a deadly disease.).
If I tell that story to random people the most reaction I get is: That guy is a criminal.
So yes. He is right. It is tough. It is unfair for him.
But how deals with this - is easy. Just don't tell and find every excuse why his life-style is justified:
You can't change the situation you are in, you can only deal with it, so play your part.
That last sentence might sound legit - but I argued to our chief-editor: Can we please get a guy on HIV-day in front of a camera who maybe is open about it, faces all consequences of society and faces the dragon on a daily base, with all sacrifices? Because that is a guy, maybe people should look up to?

Bottom-line - it has nothing to with genre. That is about story-telling and that is universal - as our stories are based on how our species clicks based on core-instincts that are natural-laws. That is something you can not change, because we are all humans.
A lot of side-quests are the opposite of this (I got nearly all through and to be fair: Some feel already like you are a side-kick). But this is why (so far) I can not believe that the main-stroy fails here.
BUT - if that should be really the story of Johnny Silverhand and V stands for Johnny's vessel then this is not brillant that is bad-writing, as you told the story of the guy who confronted the dragon and failed no matter what he did.
And if somebody thinks - YEAH! The message is: You are not in control of your life!!!
Congrats - if you ever wondered what the slaves thought who build the pyramids, you found the answer.
You are in control how you deal with the un-controlled parts. So lift blocks - or be the guy - who says: Why do I lift blocks for a pharao? And by that - change the circumstances, bottom line: You are actually in control.
That is 2001 (Kubrick) now - or even CDPR is founded on that.

A Polish company, 10 years after the iron-curtain - raised to the top and changed the circumstances. As suddenly - Yes - it is okay to make games in the Polish language even if there are "only" 60 mil. native-speakers. Suddenly we can do this on planet earth - 30 years ago that was impossible. because there is no money to gain with that. Who changed the circumstances? Who was in control? Who fought the dragon and won? Like in the fictional-stories that are totally unrelated to reality, some say...

tlr;
The chip and releated death are V's dragon. If V does not overcome the dragon: He/she is no hero of Cyberpunk.
And if Johnny can survive (overcome death) - he is the hero. That turns the character-creation, the side-quests and everything else into a gimmik. And the "I want that people remember me" - is V's wish, it is not his/her dragon, that is maybe an additional suffering - to not be a nobody - there he/she is in control and there is no option in game to run a store or take a job to die as a nobody. So the only real confrontation for V is the chip and survival and if (s)he can not survive no matter what... then he/she is the guy who failed to slay the dragon and indirectly renders the game as Johnny's story.
Survival in cyber-space is not bitter-sweet - that is failing. Objective is: Survive as V on planet earth.
And I do seriously hope - that at least one writer realized that - and there is an ending that V can slay the dragon, what might be complicated and most have not seen so far. If I would have been in that writing-stafff I would have put my job on the line for that (for reasons given above - as I think that message matters as I take fiction very seriously).

Hot damn, that is on point. You should definetly post this on reddit. Hats off to you my good man.

 

[AKANexus]

Sorry, Nekatinyz, but that has nothing to do with genre. IF - that is really true that V can not survive, no matter what - then this is "bad" writing. I would like to see this for myself ... so far I only read it in the net and I hope that there is more...

But for the arguments sake. Let's really say - that V dies (even if you are in a cyber-space-heaven) and the only option is that Johnny lives on:

I might shoot now far above some heads here, as this is story-telling/narrative stuff of an advanced level that requires stuff you can study. I you study screenplay-writing you learn such stuff.

That narrative is very western and very young. It comes from the reformation. That is why it is western. Other people around the globe did not have that transformation of an ideology (here religion), with a strong lobby (church) in a progressed civlized level (here 400 years ago).
The "Jesus-story/narrative/perception" switched to a hero-story - that goes like this: "You have to suffer even die to do good."
That is a progress from the classical hero-journey, where it does not matter how you "slay the dragon" - because it is about the "dragon" and for the hero only how he levels up in his society.

As this goes about instincts how we as a human species click (on a biological level). This is nature-science. And backed up with psychology, biology, archeology and anthropology. So we know very well where we come from and where we do not have scientific data - we are very positive how that looked like "millions" of years ago.
Anyways...

Martynax hit the nail on the head with his/her assumption - if V ends up dead/in cyber-heaven OR physical.
Because he/she is the main-character of the story or at least advertised even we have her/his three act system story-line (three act in story-telling not what is in-game a III act system) - BUT - as Johnny comes in very early - including an interlude - suddenly HE becomes the main-character of the story.

V becomes the ring in Lord of the Rings for Johnny, while he is Frodo. Just only a Frodo that can die in Mordor.
V for vessel.
It looks like V is the main-character, based on that "Jesus-narrative" who suffers up to dead to do good - but that "good" only exists for Johnny (IF he survives).
Now - Cyberpunk is an RPG. And that poll is the result of that players feel that the contract between the writers/the story-tellers and the players is broken.
AS - you expect that (here) YOU are the main-character of the story. And it turns out: No. You are not.
The main-character is Johnny Silverhand and what happens to Johnny Silverhand who faces the dragon (here the corps).

So far - you can say: What is the problem? So then it is the story of Johnny Silverhand. Isn't it something progessive to NOT follow the classic hero-story? Can't we just be progressive? Isn't that something good? It's new.

The problem comes with the meta-level (the bridge between fiction and reality) - as NOW the message is (as you play V and not Johnny): "It does not matter what you do - it has no impact whatsoever - your life is insignificant.
The maximum outcome you can achieve is to MAYBE - maybe - influence some "un-important" people around you."

You see the church-propaganda of 400 years back in that? "Ora et labora" aka "work and pray" as the "heroes" aka your feudal-master (as barons or priests) are the heroes of the world? As your suffering - as un-important as it is - is good.

That is why even Tolkien let Frodo survive. As if Frodo would not survive - it would have been the story of Aragon or anybody else who would have prospered from his sacrifice.
The same problems you can see in modern movies as well. Here DC vs. Marvel. Marvel writers all follow the classic hero-story that is 5000 years old - and told by humans all around the globe.
DC tells the "Jesus" story by their characters. Lucas with episode I-III ran into exact the same problem with Anakin aka Darth Vader.
That characters are all "They are doing bad, but in their core they are good and they are suffering - they suffer constantly to do good (if they are comic-book-heroes) or for Anakin is just mislead."
Here V suffers as well. You can do side-quests - where your death plays zero role - but your story is: You are a character marked with instant death (that is suffering) on your hero-journey.
The pain that drove Anakin to become Darth Vader or the shadows of the past that hunts Badman and you can not overcome.

And that overcoming is exactly the problem - as this only works for humans on a high civilization level. If you would run like that 2000 years ago - you are a dead person and the guys who can overcome the threats and dangers of nature (as humans are less in control about nature) will survive.

Conan (from Robert E.Howard or John Milius) - overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Geralt (in games) overcomes his suffering - that is why he is a hero.
Jojimbo/7 Samurai (Kurosawa) the guys overcome their suffering - that is why they are heroes.
The Marvel movie characters - no matter who - overcome their problems to face the "bigger dragons".
Indiana Jones, Rambo all dating-movies characters (from John Wick to Mel Gibson, Bruce Willes, Arnold Schwarzenegger back to Burt Reynolds and beyond - we can go back cross Siegfried to Hamlet till we end up with Odysseus) all - overcome their suffering - to face the dragons at hand.
Johnny in Cyberpunk - overcomes his suffering - that is why HE is the hero of the story.

But V - has no impact onto that whatsoever. You are in Cyberpunk (as the player) only a pars-pro-toto of Johnny's story, your master, your lord, who might grant you a place in cyber-heaven. Good ending for Johnny as he survives on.
Bad ending for Johnny is if the vessel aka V kills him.

If there is serioulsy no way - how V can overcome the dragon (here: the sudden death at hand via chip) - you play in Cyberpunk the story of a guy - who went out to slay the dragon and was eaten, while another guy gets the princess in the end (here survives).
That is why I called that "bad" writing. As thank you very much - we all know that it is very hard to face a dragon (a big problem) - if it would be so easy - we would not tell stories about that.
Now you tell me a story about the guy/girl who failed?
How about maybe the story about the guy/girl that succeeded and not random-Joe or random Jane who is extra (movie term) 2407 in his life?

With genre that has nothing to do. That is like a horror-movie - where the main-protagonist got eaten by the monster - and finally the sherrif shoots it. Who killed the monster? Who is the hero? The sherrif or the girl that got eaten?
Cyberpunk - Johnny Mnemoic - rescues the world. He overcomes the suffering and faces the dragon and succeeds.
That is from 1995.
Mad Max - overcomes his suffering and slays the dragon. Specifically in Fury Road - you have a whole human progression about a guy who is on an animal-level (sub-human) and gets in 1.5 hours - to a uber-human (the hero) that changes the world.

And in no pen&paper RPG on that planet you do adventures where you fail. Somebody else might get more out of your journeys BUT you succeed with solving the problem (aka kill the dragon).
V does not solve the problem.
That is like as if in the Witcher Geralt would not find Ciri, but if you are lucky Yennefer does. (Good ending for Yennefer, but you play Geralt).

In the outcome it is absolutly legit if then people ask: What am I doing here for 40 hours if I can not succeed?
It tells me after 5 min: You are going to fail to slay the dragon. To solve the problem.
What is the point here of following the story specifically the side-quests?

This is why I do have high-hopes that somebody of the writing staff realized this and that there might be a way how V becomes the hero of the story (overcomes the dragon/the problem), because if he/she does not - why am I running around for 80 hours in that city? I am not Johnny Silverhand (the guy who faced a different dragon) and I am in RL already nobody No 99032 and thank you very much, old enough to know that life is hard and unfair for that I do not need a story to highlight this to me.
Humans (even if they might not be 100% aware about it) figuere that out if they are 8 years of age.

If I want to see this virtual, I can watch this in 329093 documentations on Netflix or go into the next- hospital where people fight death on a daily base.
As - again - that is the problem then with the message via the meta-level. As this narrative is the core for a lot of problems we do have on the planet in RL. That is the justification for a lot of people - that do a lot of bad things that cause more harm than doing good.

I give you one rl-example of a guy we wanted for a TV-interview, where I put my neck on the line - to not get that guy in front of a camera. One reason that made me quit - non-fiction TV. It was about HIV-day (you know the red-ribbon) and that guy was HIV positive.
After a short research we found out that he was very active in the club-scene and does not tell that he is HIV-positive.
His attitude was - you get it or do not. That is just luck or bad-luck. Can't change it anway. That is how live is. Bad stuff happens. He did not take any responsibility - that he screws with every life of every date he got. It's their fault then not his.
That attitude - as that guy does not think he is a bad guy - he consideres himself a good-human as well.
(Nobody thinks he or she is bad or a villain.)
Is exactly in line with that message- meta-level. He lives with his suffering and does not face the problem (here taking responsibility aka facing the dragon that comes with sacrifices for him in the real world as that would have an impact for him - as - just be frank - people might change your behaviour towards you if they know you have a deadly disease.).
If I tell that story to random people the most reaction I get is: That guy is a criminal.
So yes. He is right. It is tough. It is unfair for him.
But how deals with this - is easy. Just don't tell and find every excuse why his life-style is justified:
You can't change the situation you are in, you can only deal with it, so play your part.
That last sentence might sound legit - but I argued to our chief-editor: Can we please get a guy on HIV-day in front of a camera who maybe is open about it, faces all consequences of society and faces the dragon on a daily base, with all sacrifices? Because that is a guy, maybe people should look up to?

Bottom-line - it has nothing to with genre. That is about story-telling and that is universal - as our stories are based on how our species clicks based on core-instincts that are natural-laws. That is something you can not change, because we are all humans.
A lot of side-quests are the opposite of this (I got nearly all through and to be fair: Some feel already like you are a side-kick). But this is why (so far) I can not believe that the main-stroy fails here.
BUT - if that should be really the story of Johnny Silverhand and V stands for Johnny's vessel then this is not brillant that is bad-writing, as you told the story of the guy who confronted the dragon and failed no matter what he did.
And if somebody thinks - YEAH! The message is: You are not in control of your life!!!
Congrats - if you ever wondered what the slaves thought who build the pyramids, you found the answer.
You are in control how you deal with the un-controlled parts. So lift blocks - or be the guy - who says: Why do I lift blocks for a pharao? And by that - change the circumstances, bottom line: You are actually in control.
That is 2001 (Kubrick) now - or even CDPR is founded on that.

A Polish company, 10 years after the iron-curtain - raised to the top and changed the circumstances. As suddenly - Yes - it is okay to make games in the Polish language even if there are "only" 60 mil. native-speakers. Suddenly we can do this on planet earth - 30 years ago that was impossible. because there is no money to gain with that. Who changed the circumstances? Who was in control? Who fought the dragon and won? Like in the fictional-stories that are totally unrelated to reality, some say...

tlr;
The chip and releated death are V's dragon. If V does not overcome the dragon: He/she is no hero of Cyberpunk.
And if Johnny can survive (overcome death) - he is the hero. That turns the character-creation, the side-quests and everything else into a gimmik. And the "I want that people remember me" - is V's wish, it is not his/her dragon, that is maybe an additional suffering - to not be a nobody - there he/she is in control and there is no option in game to run a store or take a job to die as a nobody. So the only real confrontation for V is the chip and survival and if (s)he can not survive no matter what... then he/she is the guy who failed to slay the dragon and indirectly renders the game as Johnny's story.
Survival in cyber-space is not bitter-sweet - that is failing. Objective is: Survive as V on planet earth.
And I do seriously hope - that at least one writer realized that - and there is an ending that V can slay the dragon, what might be complicated and most have not seen so far. If I would have been in that writing-stafff I would have put my job on the line for that (for reasons given above - as I think that message matters as I take fiction very seriously).

Dude, have you majored in literature? Because that has been one of the most well explained arguments I've seen here.....

 

[jellyhurwit]

wow, you´re pretty cold. i do get it, but you´re cold

Just saying. We all want our friends to win, but like...if I was V, I wouldn't hold the platitudes against them, but like I'd trust my doctor more than my best friend (who knows f all about medicine) to tell me if I'm going to die from progressive brain damage.

 

[Martynxas]

I see people finally starting to see, that Johnny is more of the protagonist then V.

 

[MandyZGaming]

Just saying. We all want our friends to win, but like...if I was V, I wouldn't hold the platitudes against them, but like I'd trust my doctor more than my best friend to tell me if I'm going to die from progressive brain damage.

you need to be cold enough to be able to do so. I for myself could not, because I´m very emotional.

 

[papplaus]

As for the possible (apparent?) 2076/2023 retcon: It required serious suspense of disbelief to even take the entire 2023 parts (Atlantis, Arasaka bombing) seriously. That's 3 (...barely 2) years from now, in a world that is much more reminiscent of 2077 than 2020, with a Soulkiller prototype, Johnny's silver hand, etc.

Dunno how much of that stems from the original Cyberpunk lore, but 2053 or whatever would have been _much_ more credible.