[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

[sacred_darling]

Has nothing to do with "Realism". How many people die in the game especially by the player's hands or those who they helped? Would you classify their lives as ending Happily?

You're exactly confusing realism and fiction here. From the realism POV, it all sucks cause lots of people died -- true. From the fiction POV, those NPC deaths are supposed to add meaning to MC's arc, yet this arc is flushed down in the end.

Just from a perspective of the game it rarely has a happy ending, even the setting makes this well-known from the prologue. (Suggesting it is more common ending in NC to have a bad ending than it is in our current world.)

This thread isn't to complain about the lack of a happy ending. It's just that the endings that we have make the rising to falling action pointless. I'd say they are not even pure 'endings' -- they're a 1-hour "climax + falling action + poor resolution" attached to a 10-25 hour exposition+rising action.

And speaking about bittersweet endings, there is one million possibilities listed by all the users on 700 pages earlier.

 

[Guest 4531988]

Definition of dystopia.

"Definition of Dystopia. Dystopia is a world in which everything is imperfect, and everything goes terribly wrong. Dystopian literature shows us a nightmarish image about what might happen to the world in the near future."

A dystopia describes a setting in a piece of fiction. It does say nothing about what or what not has happen to the character, only about the world the character lives in.

Contradiction bolded. Everything includes Characters. (It doesn't have to, but it typically does)

 

[nadsh]

I agree about the Story's flaws in many areas, but the endings are far more correct with the type of setting. I completely understand the desire/want for a it ends as it started ending. It's always a safe move to give the easy ending that doesn't lead to hard questions that most of us prefer to avoid.

I keep seeing these "hard questions" thrown around, what are they? Do you think no one here realizes their own mortality or never faced death?

Any philosophical topic about engrams, mortality, transcendence and souls had already been addressed by the time the plot cancer came along. And salvation by suicide is not salvation at all.

 

[Crusher93]

I agree about the Story's flaws in many areas, but the endings are far more correct with the type of setting. I completely understand the desire/want for a it ends as it started ending. It's always a safe move to give the easy ending that doesn't lead to hard questions that most of us prefer to avoid.

Well it would be even more correct with the setting if V and Jackie were both killed in the Heist(cause really they go in the konpeki plaza like to their own backyard) but then the story woudnt go on. There has to be a line to signalise where the story makes sense and the setting is still in place. This line is completly blurred, gone in CP77.

EDIT:
Correction: actually V dies in the Heist, but a bit later, because of Dex's bullet xD forgot about that.

 

[sacred_darling]

Definition of dystopia.

"Definition of Dystopia. Dystopia is a world in which everything is imperfect, and everything goes terribly wrong. Dystopian literature shows us a nightmarish image about what might happen to the world in the near future."

A dystopia describes a setting in a piece of fiction. It does say nothing about what or what not has happen to the character, only about the world the character lives in.

Contradiction bolded. Everything includes Characters. (It doesn't have to, but it typically does)

It's not a contradiction. What is "everything"? Why should it include characters?

 

[Guest 4531988]

1. Interesting definition of saving oneself there.
2. Why even choose any of those options, then? Again the writer needs to take player motivation into account when designing options. Meaning if that's the clear choice there - i as player wouldn't choose either of those; possibly suicide. But even then, just sitting there looking at the city is nice. Curling up (lying sideways) in bed while spending the last eddies - sounds better than anything really...
3. Again it's gun or 5 seconds later through Soulkiller; no 6 months - if you apply this "dystopia" lense.

1: We are trying to avoid realism talk, but people fight all the time to get any extra time they can. Terminal Cancer patients, I'm sure there is those in the world that would face similar issues.

2: That is completely a legit argument. That's is what it is suppose to do, make you ask yourself What's the point.

3: There are people that their name/legacy is more important than their life. Johnny's an example of this. It isn't about their life, but being known for something for all of time. Most would think this is a bit narcissistic.

 

[tRYSIS3]

It's always a safe move to give the easy ending that doesn't lead to hard questions that most of us prefer to avoid.

This is a videogame, not a philosophy book, lmao

 

[I_Willenbrock_I]

Contradiction bolded. Everything includes Characters. (It doesn't have to, but it typically does)

Nope. Because you have chosen to overread the reference. The world.

"Definition of Dystopia. Dystopia is a world in which everything is imperfect, and everything goes terribly wrong. Dystopian literature shows us a nightmarish image about what might happen to the world in the near future."

The world is imperfect and went down the drain.

A dystopia is the setting for the story to take part in and its the antithesis to utopia.

Learn to read.

 

[sacred_darling]

This is a videogame, not a philosophy book, lmao

Well, it's desperately trying to touch on some philosophical points, but the final result looks like some finest French wine mixed 20:80 with tap water

 

[Guest 4531988]

Well it would be even more correct with the setting if V and Jackie were both killed in the Heist(cause really they go in the konpeki plaza like to their own backyard) but then the story woudnt go on. There has to be a line to signalise where the story makes sense and the setting is still in place. This line is completly blurred, gone in CP77.

EDIT:
Correction: actually V dies in the Heist, but a bit later, because of Dex's bullet xD forgot about that.

There is an argument to be made that V did die there, and is the data left on a drive that is being overwritten for a new Operating System. A dirty install if you will. Vic does kinda hint at this if you ask him about the details vaguely.

 

[nadsh]

Don't see why clinical death is a big deal, lots of people in the world should be seen as walking dead already with that outlook.

 

[I_Willenbrock_I]

It touches too many questions and only asks them on the very surface.
It does not question or challenge those questions. It just puts them in the room to be looked at. Looked at but not to be touched.

Blade Runner asked the question, if synthetic life is less valuable. Deckard boss is described as a person who would shamelessly use the n-word in our time. To him and Deckard at the beginning, replicants are worth a bullet to the head.
Deckard does his job and retires all the replicants but it gets harder the more he learns about them and Rachel.
His dark and cynical personality gets challenged and so is the observer.

In the end, when Roy saves his life, he can see into Roy's soul and realise what life ist. His adamant position was challenged and changed and the answer the observer built up durk g the movie is also challenged.

Post automatically merged: Jan 19, 2021

Don't see why clinical death is a big deal, lots of people in the world should be seen as walking dead already with that outlook.

Indeed I met lots of people who died on the operating table or somewhere else. CPR 4tw.

 

[tRYSIS3]

Well, it's desperately trying to touch on some philosophical points, but the final result looks like some finest French wine mixed 20:80 with tap water

The game was literally advertised as being about guns, sex, and cars. BuT tHerE iS mOrE tO It

 

[Guest 4531988]

Nope. Because you have chosen to overread the reference. The world.

"Definition of Dystopia. Dystopia is a world in which everything is imperfect, and everything goes terribly wrong. Dystopian literature shows us a nightmarish image about what might happen to the world in the near future."

The world is imperfect and went down the drain.

A dystopia is the setting for the story to take part in and its the antithesis to utopia.

Learn to read.

Overread then to Learn to read.....

You wanted a happy ending, it didn't happen.

"an imagined state or society in which there is great suffering or injustice, typically one that is totalitarian or post-apocalyptic. " is what oxford lists, and even then this type of ending isn't surprising...

 

[Witzzard]

1: We are trying to avoid realism talk, but people fight all the time to get any extra time they can. Terminal Cancer patients, I'm sure there is those in the world that would face similar issues.

2: That is completely a legit argument. That's is what it is suppose to do, make you ask yourself What's the point.

3: There are people that their name/legacy is more important than their life. Johnny's an example of this. It isn't about their life, but being known for something for all of time. Most would think this is a bit narcissistic.

The thing is, i've argued before that CP2077 might want to make it about inevitability of death - which has nothing to do with Dystopian in itself.
But the actual question, even for a self preserving/fight for survival, is that you as player are given very limited options to go along with it.
Or to put it differently - The moment Alt tells you, that you won't survive with Soulkiller - only a smallish amount would go ahead with that and rather search for other options - not really possible here (well maybe Arasaka). You've literally Hellman and Alt tell you (the two singular specialist on Engrams presented in the game) tell you, there's no way to survive. So why not go ahead with Hellmans "Sweden Hospice" idea?
Right, because the authors won't allow to go the way most people in reality go after a certain point - so while your reading of the situationm certainly is possible - it still becomes or rather begins to feel contrived and looks like rather weak storytelling for a game.

 

[Crusher93]

There is an argument to be made that V did die there, and is the data left on a drive that is being overwritten for a new Operating System. A dirty install if you will. Vic does kinda hint at this if you ask him about the details vaguely.

Yeah, I thought about it yesterday, that the whole story in CP77 is more about Johnny's redemption rather than V's rags to riches story. Because basically V's dead right after The Heist and his body lives only because of the chip and overwritting process(possibly) and that makes the whole "save myself" story obsolete and the ending choices does not matter because V's already gone. That is ofcourse debatable and ONCE AGAIN open to interpretation which makes the whole story even more messed up...

This whole game is like a statue dedicated to original 2020 tabletop game and it's fans and players - something like MGS4 was a statue dedicated to the fans and story.

But the point is: this is a game. It's supposed to be rewarding. For new players, that dont know the lore of 2020, too. Im supposed to get the princess at the end and have somekind of feeling, There was none of it when I saw the credits roll.

My feeling when I end it? "ufff.... finally". There was no "oh this is a cool story I feel like after reading a good book" no, it was weariness, tiredness and it wasnt because of the bugs.
This story just isnt good enough. Wasnt fleshed out enough for me to like it and actually invest myself in it. It was like a movie with a bad-thriller ending with a cliffhanger that makes you question what's the point in all of it? Depressing almost.
If that was the goal of the writers then I guess they succeded

 

[Guest 4531988]

It touches too many questions and only asks them on the very surface.
It does not question or challenge those questions. It just puts them in the room to be looked at. Looked at but not to be touched.

Blade Runner asked the question, if synthetic life is less valuable. Deckard boss is described as a person who would shamelessly use the n-word in our time. To him and Deckard at the beginning, replicants are worth a bullet to the head.
Deckard does his job and retires all the replicants but it gets harder the more he learns about them and Rachel.
His dark and cynical personality gets challenged and so is the observer.

In the end, when Roy saves his life, he can see into Roy's soul and realise what life ist. His adamant position was challenged and changed and the answer the observer built up durk g the movie is also challenged.

Post automatically merged: Jan 19, 2021

Indeed I met lots of people who died on the operating table or somewhere else. CPR 4tw.

I agree is just asks the questions, and could of went deeper but didn't.

 

[I_Willenbrock_I]

Overread then to Learn to read.....

You wanted a happy ending, it didn't happen.

"an imagined state or society in which there is great suffering or injustice, typically one that is totalitarian or post-apocalyptic. " is what oxford lists, and even then this type of ending isn't surprising...

If you would have read my posts, (what you clearly did not) , you would know what I would have wanted.

 

[Crusher93]

Don't see why clinical death is a big deal, lots of people in the world should be seen as walking dead already with that outlook.

Its not a big deal in real life. But if you use the same kind of trick as a writer in the story, it becomes boring and makes you question the whole story. It wasnt just one time. Depending on your choices in the game: it could be 3 times excluding the ending and philosophical debate there.

 

[VoodooMacVee]

[...] Vic telling you, you're going to die, Misty telling you, you'll need to accept it, while taking their "maybe there's something out there"- as your usual adressing a terminally ill and trying to give false hope - definately looking like a story about coming to terms and questioning existance.
[...]

While I mostly agree with your post, there is the matter above that I want to address.

In my opinion, hope is never false. Most of the time, in a bad situation, you only have the choice between hope and fear. Hope can be disappointed, sure, but also fulfilled. Fear, however, can only be fulfilled.
I say, I prefer living with hope. It's much easier this way than living in fear for an undefined period of time. You suffer for a while when your hope gets busted, that's true, but with fear you suffer until it's fulfilled and afterwards you suffer even more.

Ahem, that was off topic again, but I somehow felt the urge to share my so called wisdom here...