[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

[dragonslayerg]

The marketing for the game made you think this is a 'from rags to riches' story.
But it turns out its actually a 'you try to fight cancer and then you die' story.
Sorry but if I wanted that kind of story I could just visit the nearest hospital, not wait 7 years and pay 60$.

 

[EuphoricM]

Think you might be interested in the endings poll/discussion from this thread if you haven't seen it

Yep, come join us. We are a therapy group of sorts

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2021

I think the endings really fit the cyberpunk genre as well. When you die from Soulkiller, are you really dead or does the engram give you eternal life (which is what Saburo Arasaka seems to have been obsessed with)? Will V have enough determination to live to switch to a different body from his dying original one?

I mostly agree with you but this I don't understand, even when it has been echoed by other posters before. What is it that you see in the endings that fits the cyberpunk genre in particular?. I mean, I can see how to connect the dots when speaking about the cyberspace ending, but not the other ones. This is besides that I don't think there's one fitting "theme" for every cyberpunk universe, let alone that I celebrate trying different things and approaches not conventionally accepted in genres in the name of experimenting.

 

[CannedPlayer]

In most cases, people have the wrong idea about happy endings.

1 - A guy drives to the supermarket, buys a pizza, drives back home, parks the car, heats the pizza and eats while watching superbowl. (HAPPY ENDING)

2 - A guy drives to the supermarket, crashes near and gets his car blown up because terrorists were attacking the supermarket, then in the middle of the confusion the guy gets back home with his arm and leg hurt by a bullet, tired, in shock, and he crawls back home without his car, his pizza, and having to go to a hospital in the next hours... but he ended the night ALIVE ( IS THIS HAPPY ENDING? )

That´s what happens in many games where the protagonist loses money, reputation, family members, his house, his car, and reaches the end of the game ALIVE, but completely screwed up... MAFIA 1 if im not mistaken.

Is this a happy ending? NO, unless you count the sole fact of being alive as the biggest prize ever. Life is not only BEING ALIVE, but the many facts that surround your existence.

The case of CYBERPUNK 77 they wanted to make sure it would end in the dark, as you can expect a cyberpunk fantasy to end at least with a bittersweet taste in the best possible results. It simply looks like the audience is always waiting for any kind of drawback, so it feels like something will go wrong and you expect it to happen.

As it was CLEARLY SAID by Alt, the soul killer works as intended, killing the soul while constructing the victim´s engram (psyche + memories). But the person as you know (flesh and soul), loses the soul, and by then the person itself.

So we end up with V alive in only one of all endinds, the Arasaka > Going back to earth. If you want V back with his soul, like a humanbeing as you know, that´s the only alternative, sadly it has the bittersweetness as being the ending that should never happen because you see how Saburo is such an unscrupulous overlord in its own essence.

Also you know how arasaka family doesnt have any other values than the search for power, as they cant care less to the board members, anybody under their influence and the family itself when they have no problems on going over themselves. Father, son and daughter are just great pretenders in many ways, but that´s just what they are.

So V gets his 6 months of suffering, while the arasakas spread their domain, even with the daughter offering you the dirty works you´re already used to, with a very generous payment.

Just USE THE GAME... not only play it, but USE IT for your own gaming pleasures. Watch all endings and dont give a shit about its endings.

Havent you reach 70% of silvercrap´s friendship? FEAST YOUR REVOLT and use the nexus mod to hack the savefile and BYPASS JOHNNY BY BRUTE FORCE.

And just wait for the NOW free future dlcs. The story about the mayor is MUCH MORE CYBERPUNK than the whole johhny´s arch. But well... we got what we got.

Just USE AND ABUSE THE GAME.

 

[InsaneRinze]

I would prefer if the ending is like, V's has another chance to transfer into another body and only V has the exception because none of them knew about what the relic could've, should've done. And it continues after the one person heist.

Which will make it the one true ending, where there is a chance to have that opportunity and suddenly we were left cliffhanging.

It kinda sucks to not understand what was the point of looking at V's face before it ends.

 

[CTPhipps]

V has six months to live.

Except they live longer than six months in Nomad and Legend. Panam finds a cure and Mr. Blue Eyes offers one.

Didn't you pay attention to Misty?

 

[Mushashi7]

If and if and if.... And they say in the game that blah blah blah....

God, I stopped watching movies 16 years ago because I was tired of all the bad endings. I turned to RPG games instead because I could use my influence on a series of events and make things good. In RPG games I was able to have the story turn out the way I liked - or at least have a good ending.

I don't care how many technicalities can be referred from the game it self. I want the option to have a good ending where MY V survives somehow.

I create my character like I want it to lok. In this way I can identify my self with it. I bond with my character.

Then I struggle against bandits, corrupt politicians and what-do-I-know.
I use loads of TIME in reaching the point where I am powerful enough to defeat my enemies as I see fit.
I spend lots of time deciding what to do next because I know this game will be a game of chess with multiple outcomes.
I spend hours with reloading if I did a bad choice or move because this is important to MY character.
I spend hours by checking the in-game menus to level up, sort out and clean up.
I am being push around in a huge map where the longest distance always is chosen.
and blah blah blah, and so on.

Why on earth should I do all this just to end up with bad endings?

I am most certainly NOT interested in doing all this just to be confronted with no good ending. It somehow just eliminates the whole point in playing the game to be honest.

Regarding the all over experience: Yes the game is a blast in effects, atmospheres, characters, NPC, ideas, directing, sounds and graphics. This game belongs in the very top of all games according to this. And I can hardly understand even a glimpse of how much effort a lot of people have have used on this game. They spend years to make it perfect in every way they could. Thus it was also long awaited since the announcement of it. We all sat tipping our toes and waited for Cyberpunk 2077 for years.

But all this somehow creates an even larger frustration when I realize I can't use my vits and concentration to have the story end good. All I did in the game has become irrelevant.
I am a role player and as such I try to do the things I feel are the right ones and also gets me a feeling of satisfaction as well.

I just did a sneak peak towards the possible endings today. Just to make sure I hadn't done something wrong or forgotten something. I don't know if this was either a good or a bad thing? Because now I know I won't enjoy if I play the rest of the game past the 'point of no return'. No, now I'm sure I will have a bad experience. And it makes me both sad, frustrated and mad. There just isn't any point in playing the game towards the point where MY V will die!

 

[Pandaman102]

Mass Effect 3 did it. How could they think the audience has changed since then?

Unfair comparison there, complaints about ME3's ending being sad were in the minority when the game first dropped. The overwhelming majority were complaints about the ending being virtually identical clips shown through three different color filters, the availability of which were determined purely by the War Score; people who played all three games and made all the "best" choices got an identical ending to people who just raised their War Score by grinding the multiplayer.

By contrast, as much as you dislike CP2077's endings being sad across the board, fact is it didn't commit those same mistakes that ME3 was roasted over. Your decisions through the course of the game affects the availability of final choices, which leads to four distinct epilogues.

That being said, I do agree the "six months to live" thing is unnecessary, the player's already going to be challenged by whether or not they consider V to actually have survived after being hit by Soulkiller 2.0. It would present an interesting dilemma where the only ending where V definitively survives is to take Hanako's offer, then reject the Save Your Soul offer (and frame the offer as a reward for saving Arasaka rather than the only way to avoid a slow, painful death); all the other endings would effectively be to gamble on losing your soul rather than selling it to survive.

 

[Armedain824]

After playing two times through, now, (both with the Panam endings, once with Judy and once with Panam, herself), I was given to believe that the "6 months to live" was "open for discussion", or rather that after leaving NC, there was always a possibility that a "cure" could be found.
After THAT, though, Judy's VM, at the end, is FAR more "Happy ending" than Panam's is.

Judy - Hey, just happy to be with you but wanted to say it in a recording, even though you're living happily with me, anyway.

Panam - So, I had to go on my own, without you, to do Nomad clan leader things and I won't make it back to see you, tonight. I'll make it up to you, but I'm glad I have you...

Sorry, even if you only got to level 30+ you're still pretty bada** IMHO and I don't see why Panam isn't bringing you along WITH her on her Nomad runs...

ANYWAY....
Sadly, MY problem is dangit, I love Keanu Reaves and all but Johnny Silverhand is the biggest PITA whiner...
I was actually disappointed that Johnny wasn't some LIVING legend that helps you get back against whatever enemy puts you in a tight spot. Instead he IS the tight spot! If he hadn't gone and maniacally attacked Arasaka in the first place, we could have just been stealing something ELSE from Yorinobu and just had HIM gunning for us, wanting to nix us so we can't reveal the truth and then get back whatever we stole from him...
By the end of my second playthrough where I had done ALL of the gigs and ALL of the NCPD missions and ALL of the Cyberpsychos, I was so ready to kick Johnny to the curb I couldn't [C] to skip his dialogue fast enough, most times. (Yes, PC player. )
I think THAT, most of all, was the most disappointing part of this game. I mean, I'm not asking for him to be an angel or an outright b***ard, but geez! How about be more of someone I don't want to kick out and, instead, have to be all "nice" to him, just so I can get a different ending.

I honestly like the atmosphere, the mechanics (mostly) and the game, itself, but if we have another CP2077 game I'd:
1. Want to have my own name, but the script can call me anything they want.
2. Have relationships that have more than 4 things to talk about post-romance in their list and
3. Have said romance join me on my missions if I wanted them to.

(I honestly didn't expect to type that much but I feel somewhat better now, thanks! )

 

[Mushashi7]

Unfair comparison there, complaints about ME3's ending being sad were in the minority when the game first dropped. The overwhelming majority were complaints about the ending being virtually identical clips shown through three different color filters, the availability of which were determined purely by the War Score; people who played all three games and made all the "best" choices got an identical ending to people who just raised their War Score by grinding the multiplayer.

By contrast, as much as you dislike CP2077's endings being sad across the board, fact is it didn't commit those same mistakes that ME3 was roasted over. Your decisions through the course of the game affects the availability of final choices, which leads to four distinct epilogues.

That being said, I do agree the "six months to live" thing is unnecessary, the player's already going to be challenged by whether or not they consider V to actually have survived after being hit by Soulkiller 2.0. It would present an interesting dilemma where the only ending where V definitively survives is to take Hanako's offer, then reject the Save Your Soul offer (and frame the offer as a reward for saving Arasaka rather than the only way to avoid a slow, painful death); all the other endings would effectively be to gamble on losing your soul rather than selling it to survive.

Well, maybe you remember the reaction when Ubisoft released their "Legacy of the First Blade" DLC?
In this case the players were promised the freedom of choice. The freedom of choice is actually the central core of RPG. Ubisoft didn't deliver.
Now, I don't use this example in equality to Cyberpunk 2077 because there was no promise of any kind in this direction. I'm merely pointing out what a basic RPG player wants and expects: The freedom of choice and consequences.
Add to this that most people like a story told well, and preferable with a happy ending as well.

When I use my money I'd like to have something that gives me a good feeling. Otherwise I'd dear say I've wasted my money. In this case I've invested both money, time and feelings in this game. And right now you are prepared to tell me I've been raped? Too bad for you, better luck next time, dude?
Well, that's just not how things work for me. I don't play the lottery either.

Is Cyberpunk an RPG then? Do you have the freedom to end the game in both a good and a bad way? No, you don't.
There are actually only bad ones to chose from if you have to be honest about it, right?
If you tell me I have options to get a good ending I will claim you being manipulative towards me because you ask me to debate under the circumstances that raised this debate in the first place. You can't debate with someone trying to create a self-fulfilling theory.

I'm a simple person living a normal life. I play games because I like to be able to direct events towards something acceptable and good. This is the sole and pure reason I play RPG games. I don't play games to shoot and kill anymore. I'm too old for this and have played so many games I honestly think I've 'killed enough' for this life.
I bought Cyberpunk believing I would spend time on challenges that could bring me towards the feeling of being a catalysator that pushed things in the right direction. I was denied this satisfaction. And it actually p*sses me off!

My main point is actually that you DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY CHOICE! You can choose between six bad endings. period!


[EDIT]

I just want to make this last comment on this 'bad ending thing'.

I read a lot of the comments in this thread, pros and cons. Of course there will be different views because we are all ...different.

I have been playing this game for 246 hours by now. I started six different games from scratch. All of them stopped right before 'the point of no return'. But with the current knowledge of the ending options I just lost every initiative to finish the game. I don't see the point in ending up where I have to experience a sad end with no option to change it. This is not how I want to spend my time.

I can only hope CDPR will release a DLC giving me the option to change this. But for now I'm closing the game.

Damn! My expectations were so high regarding this game.

Thank you to everyone in this thread for your inputs.

 

[I_Willenbrock_I]

Not really, but it is implied she/he has a limited time to live




Yes



You already paid for it based on what you wrote down here. Well yea, not every story is a happy ending. Not every story needs to have one.



Its tough, maybe its karma for spoilering your own game for you. I mean why?



Ye that would fix the game for sure, def. no other issues with it.


Shepard "dying" was not the problem with Mass effect 3's ending.



Do not play the game then. Plenty of other games out there with a feel good vibe and positive ending, where the good guys always triumph



You mean the crunch time their devs. had to endure that kind of politics? Or is it the great marketing ploy that turned out to be an utter hoax to trick people into buying a game that was allegedly only released when it was ready and delayed multiple times to "iron out" the last bugs; nvm that the game is such a buggy mess that is unfinished and flatout broken in some parts to a point that its constantly crashing.. those kind of company politics?


Thats good for you! I have no idea what that has to do with anything. Dukem nukem and quake are all solid games with a happy positive ending, im sure of it.



Oh people will not forget this game do not worry. But its not because the story is "sad".. or wether it was created in a good way



Good for you



lol

Implied? IMPLIED?

It's absolutely made clear that V will die period. Terminal illness.
It is implied that there is a vague chance to get a miracle healing but that's it.

The most insulting thing is that the plot cancer is based on ignoring the universes lore and retcons.

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2021

Did you ever see Blade Runner? Deckard doesn't clean up the city, stop the pollution, reform the LAPD, stop Tyrell. He just flees into an uncertain future with Rachel. Same goes for Neuromancer. Same goes for most hardboiled fiction and film noirs cyberpunk derives from. Same goes for the cyberpunk RPG the game is based on.

And V can always join Alt beyond the Blackwall. That and Johnny getting the body to start over and start a real revolution is probably the most cyberpunk ending.

It would probably be the most cyberpunk ending if Johnny would really do it.

In the end, it's just two characters acting out of character.

 

[enkee23]

alt says directly without any chance for a dubious thought, SOUL KILLER DOES WHAT IT INTENDS TO... it kills the person and builds an engram of the person itself (psyche + memories).
from the moment V plugs himself and enter the pool, HE´S DEAD. PERIOD.
all other things that happen after this, original V (meaning the soul of V) resides no more in the body.
the only ending where V is truly alive is ARASAKA > BACK TO EARTH.

alt means soulkiller kills soul
that main personal question of the game - does player believe or not
logical conclusions don't work with cuberpunk technomagic
arasaka uses soulkiller to separate engrams and surgery to cut the biochip

 

[I_Willenbrock_I]

Except they live longer than six months in Nomad and Legend. Panam finds a cure and Mr. Blue Eyes offers one.

Didn't you pay attention to Misty?

Your headcanon is not what the game shows us.

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

All I can say right now is that headcannon is my saving grace. That and spending as much time in lockdown Watson doing gigs, klepping cars. Driving like shit and accidentally shooting an officer I mistook for a scav, lol.
Even the lore behind the gangs there is neat.
Btw, have been reading up on a lot of shards. Quite funny stories there. Would've been cool if many of the background lore for the gangs was interactable. Even join them.

Just staying out of Johnny's part and the final part of the game does wonders.

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2021

So, once again it becomes clear that the amount of detail in the beginning was neatly working its way up. (Could've done with some alterations with regards of possibilities, but oh well)

But act 1, with what it provides even still before the hassle of Relic Death...
Nice.

Once again such shame how rushed the MQ is during it. Being truly free to do what you want, play how you want without Relic Death and Johnny WiseAss is a good time indeed.

 

[JohanLindh]

This page (749) is epic. It sums up the previous 748 pages very well.

Did you ever see Blade Runner? Deckard doesn't clean up the city, stop the pollution, reform the LAPD, stop Tyrell. He just flees into an uncertain future with Rachel. Same goes for Neuromancer. Same goes for most hardboiled fiction and film noirs cyberpunk derives from. Same goes for the cyberpunk RPG the game is based on.

And V can always join Alt beyond the Blackwall. That and Johnny getting the body to start over and start a real revolution is probably the most cyberpunk ending.

This.

I keep seeing this kind of response and it's honestly stupid. This is not a movie. A movie with a sad ending is about someone else. It goes for maybe two hours. You have no say in what happens in a movie. It's just somebody else's story and it's over shortly after it begins.

In CP YOU are the protagonist. You play for potentially 50-100 hours or more. You are lead to believe you have choice. You are given the tools to become really attached to your character and to feel like you have some control over your destiny. ALL of the marketing insisted that this game is what you make it. Whether you win or lose, the outcome depends on you.

Some games are artistic ideas with sad outcomes, and that's ok, but they don't generally trick you into thinking you've signed up for one kind of experience and then bait-and-switch to another kind of experience.

This.

Hey!

The whole idea with this game was to confront you with the dilemmas contained in the technology we are facing today: AI (artificial intelligence), artificial human beings and eternal life via this because we are able to change form into less vulnerable ones, and where all this is leading us.

Oh my god, I read all the science fiction released from the forties up to now. There's nothing new there for me - although i sincerely think it's a good thing to confront the younger generations with all this since they are the ones who can (perhaps) influence it.

I also think CDPR hit the nail on the head with bringing up the corporations as they definitely will be a major element in all this.

Apart from that I still want the option for a good ending. I don't think a good ending will prevent me from evaluating the ethics in the subject?

This.

I wanted to start a new thread, but I cant - so I'll just write it here.
The story of Cyberpunk does not make sense from the point of view of a computer game (in my opinion), but before about it...

I am a CDPR psychophane. I have a collector's edition, I have a dedicated console, posters on the wall, I even bought the RTX 3080 to play on ultra. Like a real Pole, I have been playing the Witcher series for over 10 years. As well as other great games from our backyard - SuperHot, This War of Mine, FrostPunk etc. A computer game is something different than a movie or a book, the story being told is not closed. The Witcher doesn't have the best mechanics, but the way a story is written allows you to recreate the Geralt's path without feeling pointless.

Once upon a time, CDPR called Cyberpunk an "RPG". Now, it's just a lootershooter.
No matter what you do, no matter how you try - your hero will die. You can't save the city, you can't save Johnny (well he died 50 years ago), you can't even save yourself.

I will choose Panam, my soul will be destroyed with the soulkiller and my body dies six months later, I will choose Rogue, same. I will choose Arasaka, I will die shortly after.
And now we're just getting into the replayability. Because I don't talking about bugs right now. I played both Xbox One X and PC for the price of a good car. There are bugs - as in any computer program. But why should I play again when I know that the more I try, the further I go in the story, the closer I get to death. I have the same feeling in real life, I don't need it in the game.

"No less than in The Witcher 3" - what is it? Mid-game expansion that will extend my path to death Or after the events from the base game - but how do you see it then - we keep playing with a copy of dead V's brain? Or the new V, then what was the first for? Why all this effort?

Bugs can be fixed, mechanics can be restored, the cut content can be pasted back... But the feeling that I have no point in striving for my hero if he is facing death in glory or death and oblivion.

I go back to playing The Witcher and hanging pictures in Corvo Bianco, with the thought that it was worth it. And when I want to shoot, I will play the WarZone.

CDPR doesn't have to change the whole game. It is enough when we are in Mikoshi to allow the chip to be reprogrammed. For example, requiring intelligence and technology to work with Alt to remove Johnny, or to remove code that breaks our brain and continue with Johnny. Or continue to die, then we will have 13 endings.

(The game is beautiful, the animations and characters are wonderful, I like the fight, implants, clothes and story but now I can't forget that in the end it's just a depression generator.)

This.

"Thank you Mario, but the princess is in another castle." That's it, that's the ending.

But it's not a satisfying or deep ending. V's goal from the moment they wake up at Vik's is to live. No matter what V does, they are no closer to surviving and one of the endings is actually justifying suicide over trying any further. Why is straight up suicide a legitimate ending choice, but any kind of hopeful ending would be, what? Unrealistic? I'm not playing a video game to be told that life sucks and killing yourself is the easiest way out, and there's no hope for the future.

I'd love to hear that V returns in a sequel, however they manage to write their way out of the hole, but I definitely would not buy a future CP2077 title where V is just gone and nobody knows what happened to them. CP2077 is entertaining, but knowing that a character whom I've grown to care about over many hours of story can just be thrown away like that isn't my idea of fun.

personally, whether an ending is happy or not doesn't concern me as much as it does others, however, i'd typically like a to see both options in a story, or even the choice of sacrificing a victory for survival or vice versa, i'd love some amount of nuance to the whole affair. though what i find most important is an ending that actually makes some kind of sense, and not a bunch of tacked on nonsense that no one actually put any thought into. i can't stand these endings, not because they're sad, or not victories, but because even when i turn my brain off and try to just enjoy the ride the sheer stupidity in the ending somehow turns my brain back on and ruins everything.

---edit)
if you're looking for an example: the whole "engram being rejected by V's body because the DNA in V's body is no longer V's but johnny's." not only does this not make any sense at all, it actually contradicts what is not only canon, but established within the game itself. an engram is completely digital, it's just information, it's not even physical, let alone biological, an engram has no dna to conflict with.

in 5 minutes i came up with a basic replacement for the dna bs: so, remove the dna nonsense as it's just on the verge of insanity. now, the issue is that the biochip is damaged, and now degrading since pacifica (alt doesn't know this at the time as the chip is still functioning when we meet alt), by the time we get to soulkiller the chip's read/write functions are compromised, meaning if V tried to reinsert his/her engram into their body it would get corrupted, and for a time (6 months maybe) they would be able to function, however; as the errors compile V becomes less and less operational, untill the engram completely fails.

if this was one of the endings i'd be fine with it. (though still maybe not the others if they're still crap)

---edit again) the only thing you'd have to change is adding something like "alt surgically removed you using soulkiller, instead of pulling both you and johnny", or perhaps johnny wasn't integrated into your brain and still existed primarily on the biochip, or soulkiller didn't grab johnny as he's already an engram.

This.

The marketing for the game made you think this is a 'from rags to riches' story.
But it turns out its actually a 'you try to fight cancer and then you die' story.
Sorry but if I wanted that kind of story I could just visit the nearest hospital, not wait 7 years and pay 60$.

This.

Unfair comparison there, complaints about ME3's ending being sad were in the minority when the game first dropped. The overwhelming majority were complaints about the ending being virtually identical clips shown through three different color filters, the availability of which were determined purely by the War Score; people who played all three games and made all the "best" choices got an identical ending to people who just raised their War Score by grinding the multiplayer.

By contrast, as much as you dislike CP2077's endings being sad across the board, fact is it didn't commit those same mistakes that ME3 was roasted over. Your decisions through the course of the game affects the availability of final choices, which leads to four distinct epilogues.

That being said, I do agree the "six months to live" thing is unnecessary, the player's already going to be challenged by whether or not they consider V to actually have survived after being hit by Soulkiller 2.0. It would present an interesting dilemma where the only ending where V definitively survives is to take Hanako's offer, then reject the Save Your Soul offer (and frame the offer as a reward for saving Arasaka rather than the only way to avoid a slow, painful death); all the other endings would effectively be to gamble on losing your soul rather than selling it to survive.

It is so close to ME:3 as possible without being a copy. For all we know, the protagonist dies. Except in this case we weren't f*ck*d over with buying a DLC to get the happy happy ending. Nor did we have to go online to save humanity.

If, or, but does not count. It's what's at face value when the credits roll that does.

In part, and in honesty, me feeling let down stems from my expectations not being met. "The Witcher" is on my top ten games list together with "Baldurs gate", "System shock", "Bioshock", "DA:O" and "The Witcer 3". I've bought it two times (hardcopy and GOG) and played it well over 1000 hours, and in part, something like that was what I expected.

A game redefining the CRPG genre (I have no doubt hey can still do it).

In Johnny's voice:
"No. Fuck. CDPR needs to "No man's sky" this shit."

Rant mode:
I want a game that reflects my choices.
I want a game where my actions matter.
I want a game where certain death, if it's the only option, is clearly stated from the start (no need to play it then?).

Let's hope these 8 million pre-orders has given the company enough funds to complete the game the way it was presented. The game is a bl**dy amazing as it is. After 250+ hours of gameplay I still walk around NC discovering new things to marvel at!

Now, I'll go play Shadowun...

 

[Pandaman102]

Well, maybe you remember the reaction when Ubisoft released their "Legacy of the First Blade" DLC?
In this case the players were promised the freedom of choice. The freedom of choice is actually the central core of RPG. Ubisoft didn't deliver.
Now, I don't use this example in equality to Cyberpunk 2077 because there was no promise of any kind in this direction. I'm merely pointing out what a basic RPG player wants and expects: The freedom of choice and consequences.
Add to this that most people like a story told well, and preferable with a happy ending as well.

When I use my money I'd like to have something that gives me a good feeling. Otherwise I'd dear say I've wasted my money. In this case I've invested both money, time and feelings in this game. And right now you are prepared to tell me I've been raped? Too bad for you, better luck next time, dude?
Well, that's just not how things work for me. I don't play the lottery either.

Is Cyberpunk an RPG then? Do you have the freedom to end the game in both a good and a bad way? No, you don't.
There are actually only bad ones to chose from if you have to be honest about it, right?
If you tell me I have options to get a good ending I will claim you being manipulative towards me because you ask me to debate under the circumstances that raised this debate in the first place. You can't debate with someone trying to create a self-fulfilling theory.

I'm a simple person living a normal life. I play games because I like to be able to direct events towards something acceptable and good. This is the sole and pure reason I play RPG games. I don't play games to shoot and kill anymore. I'm too old for this and have played so many games I honestly think I've 'killed enough' for this life.
I bought Cyberpunk believing I would spend time on challenges that could bring me towards the feeling of being a catalysator that pushed things in the right direction. I was denied this satisfaction. And it actually p*sses me off!

My main point is actually that you DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY CHOICE! You can choose between six bad endings. period!

I wasn't disagreeing with you about whether or not CP2077 needs a happier ending (if anything, my opinion that the "six months to live" thing being unnecessary is supportive of your position in that regard), I was disagreeing with your suggestion the majority of criticism towards ME3's ending was about the ending being sad and thus the lesson to be learned from the backlash was not to write sad endings.

I get how you feel, I felt (and still feel) the same way about how badly Bioware handled ME3, but it's just the wrong example to use.

 

[Barsenthor]

Except they live longer than six months in Nomad and Legend. Panam finds a cure and Mr. Blue Eyes offers one.

Didn't you pay attention to Misty?

You can not make a Misty character any thing more then con-artist without changing the genre of the game to sci-fantasy.
We could very well get to Tyrael like entity coming in the end and saying that he will guide and protect us.

Misty and tarot cards are even problem by themselves.

You could say that this is your subconscious is doing this, that some AI stands behind Misty or Misty is a part of Blue Eye People cabal, but saying that tarot cards have any meaning of their own in the hard-sci cyberpunk setting is ludicrous.

Ofc as a writer you can write anything, but if this will make sense and audience will buy is completely other thing.
Writing fiction, even being GM is actually a hard work, that requires making story that is inline with the lore and makes sense as a whole.

 

[cyths]

If the writing and the rest of the game would'nt look like some half-finished techdemo i would buy Misty's tarot as a part of the story. But in the current state it's just a side note. Could be more, could be less.

/e
typo

 

[Pandaman102]

It is so close to ME:3 as possible without being a copy. For all we know, the protagonist dies. Except in this case we weren't f*ck*d over with buying a DLC to get the happy happy ending. Nor did we have to go online to save humanity.

If, or, but does not count. It's what's at face value when the credits roll that does.

The only similarity is in how both Shepard and V are fated to die; the difference is the former had two previous games with the developers lauding the importance of player agency, saying how the story was a collaboration between the players and developers, promising hundreds of endings and no "bespoke door 1, 2, 3" endings, then delivering an RGB ending and crying about how it's always been their choice alone and people should "respect their artistic vision"; the latter had eight years of hype (which is a mistake, certainly), but didn't promise that V would have an option to survive or simply play the same cutscene with three different colors regardless of what choices you made.

To be clear, I'm not saying it's wrong to dislike the endings, given the choice I'd also like to see a happier one, but I'm just arguing there's a huge difference an unexpected ending we don't like and an unexpected ending that goes against every marketing material and direction of two previous games, then having the developers shit on you while telling you to smile.

 

[nadsh]

Wanted to add a few things since this thread went back to the "sad endings fit the genre" and "other game protagonists die" argument:

- Despite the title of the poll, no one here wants a stereotypical "riding into the sunset without casualties" happy ending, just the possibility to have at least an ending among many in which V survives without a ticking clock. This would be a neutral ending at best, the journey was heartbreaking enough to make it bittersweet without even considering the possible implications of Soulkiller.

- No, "no matter what you do, you're fucked" is not the core message of the genre. Cyberpunk is above all about resistance in the face of adversity. Doesn't mean that plans can't go sour, but it certainly doesn't imply mandatory failure.

- V's only goal was survival for the entire game past Act 2, before failing anticlimatically during the last 5 minutes of Act 3. No dreams of redemption, no dying for a cause, not living your remaining time to the fullest. Just survival. Inevitable failure turns the main quest into a goose chase.
Whatever additional meaning you add "the journey is more important than the destination", "at least V dies surrounded by loved ones" completely depends on optional content, V's outlook on things and how much importance you give to LIs (and only Panam/Judy at that).
After playing a satisfying story up until the end of Act 3 with my character that didn't fit that bill ("the destination is the only thing that counts, Johnny" and no LIs), that's not the message I got from the story, and neither do I want to stick to that railroaded path, which I find completely unappealing, to give V some sort of closure.

- This is an RPG but V's choices barely influence the final outcome. The other games that killed off the protagonists mentioned here weren't RPGs. RDR1-2 and Mafia were linear games with a set protagonist who had a very specific path and story to tell. V isn't a set protagonist with a fixed personality.
I'd have loved specific conditions like 70% with Johnny AND secret ending unlocked allowing V and Johnny to remain in the same body, or not using the pills leading to less damage to V's brain.

I have no issues with SK and believe Misty's tarots, this doesn't change my opinion of the endings. They were narratively unsatisfying for the majority of players that didn't revolve their V's journey around Panam/leaving Night City.

Edit: wording

 

[kiki5375]

I don't believe a happy ending is always required and I commend CDPR for taking this approach.

If you follow the story and dialogue closely it is implied that V has been dead ever since he got shot by Dex. Everything else has been just a lease on life and you've been half-passenger, half-driver in your own body. The endings just reinforce this since in most of them you are killed via Soulkiller.

I think the endings really fit the cyberpunk genre as well. When you die from Soulkiller, are you really dead or does the engram give you eternal life (which is what Saburo Arasaka seems to have been obsessed with)? Will V have enough determination to live to switch to a different body from his dying original one?

The thing is...

If you are told you are going to die, are you really going to care about a new car, finding what happened to Evelyn, starting a romance, doing pointless missions for Panam....NOPE...V might as well headed to the beach and sipped on wine until death came. It really makes doing anything else pointless as another poster said in another thread.