[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

+

Do you want more RPGs with happy endings?


  • Total voters
    1,647
I love that this is always the route it goes down.

"The game is GRIMDARK it's not supposed to have super happy endings where you get to live you wildest fantasies!"
"Ok, what ending did you get?"
"Oh I romanced the incredibly loyal chick who's great with cars and has a fat ass and we, almost as literally as possible, rode off into the sunset."
"..."
This is a brilliant example of that perspective I was talking about. For me, it is sad, because I am giving up on the very thing that originally drove V. However, this might be a character arc which he changed his motivations, and decides his relationship with Panam is more. There are many ways that Cyberpunk 2077 can play out, and a happy ending for you, might not be a happy ending for another, but that does not mean there are no happy endings. It might just be that you closed your mind to those other perspectives, which would give you something to enjoy more, if you allowed it to.

Excellent point, Buckadoz.
 
You have to displace yourself enough to see from their perspective, or you will just feel at odds, no matter what they give you.

Agree. But customizing your character and first person make it more challenging: should we perceive it as a role-play (you are in 2077 and make choices and suffer the consequences; only there are just 2 choices to make in the last 60-90 min that are the most important, the result of your journey) or make choices and slightly change a predetermined story about a set character.

Short: am I V or am I not?
 
No one is asking for this. All pro-happy endings people want is for V to live without a 6 months timer hanging over their heads. I don't think most people want or expect V's survival to come without a cost.


It's great that you took away something positive from the endings. But a lot of us didn't. Making the best out of the time you're given is a good message and it would have worked well if V wasn't so desperate to survive.

Yeah 100% this i'd be perfectly happy option to with very negative consequences for pursuiing personal survival. Universal plot cancer death handed down from above not so much, doubly so when the end also rips the control of V away and railroads their character in ways they wouldn't want.
 
This is a brilliant example of that perspective I was talking about. For me, it is sad, because I am giving up on the very thing that originally drove V. However, this might be a character arc which he changed his motivations, and decides his relationship with Panam is more. There are many ways that Cyberpunk 2077 can play out, and a happy ending for you, might not be a happy ending for another, but that does not mean there are no happy endings. It might just be that you closed your mind to those other perspectives, which would give you something to enjoy more, if you allowed it to.

Excellent point, Buckadoz.
Ok, but as an RPG, it should be more accommodating than "simply don't play V the way you did". Every time someone comes in here saying something like

This is a one sided question. Some of us see some of these endings as happy endings. I for one, do, and I am certain that I am not alone in this. Not everything has to end with a house and white picket fence. This game is more than just an illusion of happiness, which never plays out as you imagine in your head. Life is far different.

And go on to say basically all you have to do is play a male, romance Panam, and like the dust eaters, it just has huge "fuck you, got mine" energy.
 
Agree. But customizing your character and first person make it more challenging: should we perceive it as a role-play (you are in 2077 and make choices and suffer the consequences; only there are just 2 choices to make in the last 60-90 min that are the most important, the result of your journey) or make choices and slightly change a predetermined story about a set character.

Short: am I V or am I not?

You are V, in as much as you are Geralt in The Witcher, in as much as you are the protagonist in Bioshock, in as much you are Commander Sheppard in Mass Effect, in as much as you are Baal's child in Baldur's Gate, in as much as you are a Vault Dweller in Fallout.

The problem is, those games are all more linear than Cyberpunk, in that they have a definitive end, even though some took a long time to get there. You do not have a definitive end here, so, no closure.

I think this is what it comes down to. I am okay with no closure, as this is a new story, and I am expected (hopefully) that more is to come and it is not finished. Look at it as the beginning to V's story that we get to live. From that aspect, I think these endings are not so depressing or even happy, as much as teasers of what is to come.
 
This is a brilliant example of that perspective I was talking about. For me, it is sad, because I am giving up on the very thing that originally drove V. However, this might be a character arc which he changed his motivations, and decides his relationship with Panam is more.

Why do you think this? The nomads have tons of resources at their disposal, probably as much or more than MBE. The only difference is you are going about surviving with friends instead of alone.

Regardless of which ending you think is happy, V has an equal chance to survive in the Star and the Sun IMO.
 
Ok, but as an RPG, it should be more accommodating than "simply don't play V the way you did". Every time someone comes in here saying something like



And go on to say basically all you have to do is play a male, romance Panam, and like the dust eaters, it just has huge "fuck you, got mine" energy.
This is nothing of what I just said. This is twisting my words to try to have an emotional point. As far as I know, none of us have cybernetics, and not all of us are capable of doing what he does. So, in your same stance, V should have that removed, because it is not relatable. When it comes to romancing, I rather these things not be in games. I find them awkward and mostly just wastes resources and time that can be put into something more interesting for the game. However, this game was not just made for my likes and dislikes.

In short, no, nothing as you are trying to say in some strange hateful way. You are not only misquoting me but twisting my words and it still is not a counter to the point that I made.
Post automatically merged:

Why do you think this? The nomads have tons of resources at their disposal, probably as much or more than MBE. The only difference is you are going about surviving with friends instead of alone.

Regardless of which ending you think is happy, V has an equal chance to survive in the Star and the Sun IMO.
I base this on the shards and messages about their food and ability to get more being short in supply, as is their options for tech equipment for their ripper to service those with cyber parts. This is all in the game.
 
I base this on the shards and messages about their food and ability to get more being short in supply, as is their options for tech equipment for their ripper to service those with cyber parts. This is all in the game.

Pre Star, you are right, the Aldecaldos are struggling, this is part of the reason they agree to raid Arasaka. In the lead up to the raid, Bobby or one of the other vets says this. This is why Saul is considering working with Biotechnica for 25% of the usual rate too.

Post Star ending though, that is not the case at all. Mitch literally says they have enough tech to build an aircraft carrier, and the nomads have some serious contacts if you look into the expanded cyberpunk lore. If you choose to ignore the lore, there are still strong hints V lives in the Star as well. The Arasaka raid completely saves the Aldecaldos.

In the Sun yes, they don't have the resources to help you, which is why it doesnt make sense for V to leave with Panam here.
 
[...]
I base this on the shards and messages about their food and ability to get more being short in supply, as is their options for tech equipment for their ripper to service those with cyber parts. This is all in the game.

You have to take into account that the Star ending changes some things, maybe only short or mid term, but it surely does. The shards and dialogues you are referring to were before the nomads got hold on Arasaka loot. They were in a desperate situation then for sure.

Edit: Think Naglafar2183 just posted about the same.
 
Pre Star, you are right, the Aldecaldos are struggling, this is part of the reason they agree to raid Arasaka. In the lead up to the raid, Bobby or one of the other vets says this. This is why Saul is considering working with Biotechnica for 25% of the usual rate too.

Post Star ending though, that is not the case at all. Mitch literally says they have enough tech to build an aircraft carrier, and the nomads have some serious contacts if you look into the expanded cyberpunk lore. If you choose to ignore the lore, there are still strong hints V lives in the Star as well. The Arasaka raid completely saves the Aldecaldos.

In the Sun yes, they don't have the resources to help you, which is why it doesnt make sense for V to leave with Panam here.
Depending on choices, parts can become plenty, but not food, unless they sell the parts, which is also a discussion that you can overhear in their camp. Your statement about Nomads is correct, but not all nomads in general. You cannot assume the Aldecaldos have every nomads contacts. Just as the Bakkers were dissolved into Snake Nation, which was essentially dissolved into a corpo minion, but I did not find anything definitive on that.

Taking all information into account, they are moving to find something sustainable, as they will wither if they stay there, without jobs and resources. Panam explains this in a conversation with her, when you try to get her to stay.
 
Depending on choices, parts can become plenty, but not food, unless they sell the parts, which is also a discussion that you can overhear in their camp. Your statement about Nomads is correct, but not all nomads in general. You cannot assume the Aldecaldos have every nomads contacts. Just as the Bakkers were dissolved into Snake Nation, which was essentially dissolved into a corpo minion, but I did not find anything definitive on that.

Taking all information into account, they are moving to find something sustainable, as they will wither if they stay there, without jobs and resources. Panam explains this in a conversation with her, when you try to get her to stay.

Unbenannt.JPG
In the holo in the Star/Secret ending credits, where this nomad family hasn't had it's grip onto Arasaka loot, she says that the family is growing, which I would take as a sign of at least stable resources. And of course she says that there is work to do. The shift in leadership from Saul to Saul&Panam might have made the difference, even without Arasaka tech.

Edit: Yes, I guess most nomads are looking for something sustainable, maybe to become statics. But at the same time most of them know or feel that becoming static would mean to go the way of the Bakkers and to become some kind of corpo minions, as you would say, themselves and with that get into the danger of losing everything a nomad stands for and become more and more consumed by the lifestyle of City people.
 
Last edited:
Depending on choices, parts can become plenty, but not food, unless they sell the parts, which is also a discussion that you can overhear in their camp. Your statement about Nomads is correct, but not all nomads in general. You cannot assume the Aldecaldos have every nomads contacts. Just as the Bakkers were dissolved into Snake Nation, which was essentially dissolved into a corpo minion, but I did not find anything definitive on that.

Taking all information into account, they are moving to find something sustainable, as they will wither if they stay there, without jobs and resources. Panam explains this in a conversation with her, when you try to get her to stay.

I guess we agree to disagree here, based on Panam's dialogue before getting in her truck, her contacts have gotten her people out of some serious shit, so she must know at least someone important. Also, they could easily trade the parts for food, or use them steal food, the game doesn't really go into what was stolen though so this is up to the player to decide.

The Bakkers actually dissolved becasue they didn't have anyone challenging their leader from within the clan - there is a shard in the Aldecaldos camp that explains it. I think this is why the Saul/Panam clash is so important, nomad clans need to take risks to survive, the Bakkers didn't and fell apart. The same thing would have happened to the Aldecaldos too if V hadn't showed up.

And Snake Nation didn't dissolve, they are all of the clanless nomads loosely allied, they are the largest and most powerful of the seven nations. They have some pretty serious shit, and are the top tier logistics network in the NUSA. I think you are selling the Nomads awfully short, and placing an awful lot of faith in Mr. Blue Eyes to interpret the endings as you did.

Which is fine of course, everyone has their head canon for what their V would do, it is an RPG after all.
 
View attachment 11187358In the holo in the Star/Secret ending credits, where this nomad family hasn't had it's grip onto Arasaka loot, she says that the family is growing, which I would take as a sign of at least stable resources. Andof course she says that there is work to do. The shift in leadership from Saul to Saul&Panam might have made the difference, even without Arasaka tech.
This is an excellent point. Panam is a risk taker, and with that comes rewards. Saul played it too safe, which was why the family was in dire straights. Life without risk is very unrewarding. The combined leadership might have been all that they needed. In such, I could very well be wrong in presuming their struggle to continue, depending on V's choices with those interactions.

This ties in with the ending that V goes on the space mission, where she says the family could not survive without her. Basically a version of that message, in a different ending.
Post automatically merged:

I guess we agree to disagree here, based on Panam's dialogue before getting in truck, her contacts have gotten her people out of some serious shit, so she must know at least someone important. Also, they could easily trade the parts for food, or use them steal food, the game doesn't really go into what was stolen though so this is up to the player to decide.

And Snake Nation didn't dissolve, they are all of the clanless nomads loosely allied, they are the largest and most powerful of the seven nations. They have some pretty serious shit, and are the top tier logistics network in the NUSA. I think you are selling the Nomads awfully short, and placing an awful lot of faith in Mr. Blue Eyes to interpret the endings as you did.

Which is fine of course, everyone has their head canon for what their V would do, it is an RPG after all.
Indeed. It is all perspective. Just as I view V going off with Panam as a sad ending, and many thing it is a happy one. Panam states multiple times that she has plans that could save V. I consider V to already have died. Once again, just my take on it, perspective. I see Mr Blue Eyes as the mouth piece for the AI beyond the wall. I see him as a representative for something far more powerful, not him alone.
 
This is an excellent point. Panam is a risk taker, and with that comes rewards. Saul played it too safe, which was why the family was in dire straights. Life without risk is very unrewarding. The combined leadership might have been all that they needed. In such, I could very well be wrong in presuming their struggle to continue, depending on V's choices with those interactions.

This ties in with the ending that V goes on the space mission, where she says the family could not survive without her. Basically a version of that message, in a different ending.
Post automatically merged:


Indeed. It is all perspective. Just as I view V going off with Panam as a sad ending, and many thing it is a happy one. Panam states multiple times that she has plans that could save V. I consider V to already have died. Once again, just my take on it, perspective. I see Mr Blue Eyes as the mouth piece for the AI beyond the wall. I see him as a representative for something far more powerful, not him alone.

Very much agree on the first part, very much disagree with the second. But I don't want to discuss that "is V already dead" thing again ;), but there are some insightful, sometimes fierceful, sometimes boring discussions about that already in this thread.
 
This is an excellent point. Panam is a risk taker, and with that comes rewards. Saul played it too safe, which was why the family was in dire straights. Life without risk is very unrewarding. The combined leadership might have been all that they needed. In such, I could very well be wrong in presuming their struggle to continue, depending on V's choices with those interactions.

I edited my last post, but I will put it here too since it directly relates to this, the game basically tells the player that new leadership/different perspectives is what the Aldecaldos need -

The Bakkers actually dissolved becasue they didn't have anyone challenging their leader from within the clan - there is a shard in the Aldecaldos camp that explains it. I think this is why the Saul/Panam clash is so important, nomad clans need to take risks to survive, the Bakkers didn't and fell apart. The same thing would have happened to the Aldecaldos too if V hadn't showed up.

There isn't a ton of stuff in game about this - but this shard goes into it more: https://cyberpunk.fandom.com/wiki/The_Fall_of_the_Bakkers

As far as Mr Blue eyes being a mouthpiece for the AI beyond the wall, there is nothing to support that except the bit at the end of the Peralaz quest line is there? I would love some more serious AI/cyberpsace plotlines in the game but there wasn't much.
 
Very much agree on the first part, very much disagree with the second. But I don't want to discuss that "is V already dead" thing again ;), but there are some insightful, sometimes fierceful, sometimes boring discussions about that already in this thread.
Reminds me of the long discussion of Star Trek transporters. Do they make a copy of you that goes on living your life, or are they really transporting your soul as well. There is no way to answer it definitively, that I know of.
 
I have to say, while I generally agree with the whole "death is inevitable, what matters is how you live your life" sentiment, I find it pretty jarring in the context of twenty something V dying of a terminal illness in six months after weeks of struggle and loss.

This isn't someone dying for a cause or "living life to the fullest" (like the final cards in the Sun state, yet V sounds more depressed than ever), it's someone slowly fading and trying to make something out of those last few months because they have no other choice. To me V felt like someone who just starting to live.
 
I edited my last post, but I will put it here too since it directly relates to this, the game basically tells the player that new leadership/different perspectives is what the Aldecaldos need -

The Bakkers actually dissolved becasue they didn't have anyone challenging their leader from within the clan - there is a shard in the Aldecaldos camp that explains it. I think this is why the Saul/Panam clash is so important, nomad clans need to take risks to survive, the Bakkers didn't and fell apart. The same thing would have happened to the Aldecaldos too if V hadn't showed up.

There isn't a ton of stuff in game about this - but this shard goes into it more: https://cyberpunk.fandom.com/wiki/The_Fall_of_the_Bakkers
I absolutely love the shards in this game. They are like a more extensive version of the books found in Baldur's Gate I and II.
Post automatically merged:

I have to say, while I generally agree with the whole "death is inevitable, what matters is how you live your life" sentiment, I find it pretty jarring in the context of twenty something V dying of a terminal illness in six months after weeks of struggle and loss.

This isn't someone dying for a cause or "living life to the fullest" (like the final cards in the Sun state, yet V sounds more depressed than ever), it's someone slowly fading and trying to make something out of those last few months because they have no other choice. To me V felt like someone who just starting to live.
This is true, based on how you play your character. Certain dialogue options give different outcomes, where this is V doing what he always dreamed of, and he could not have gotten there without the Relic and Johnny Silverhand in his head. In one play through, V was devastated and depressed, and desperate to boot. In another, he embraced it, was living it up, and in the end even said, it was all possible because of the chip. He was grateful of it. These are the two major play points of V, despite 8 variant endings that I found.
 
You are V, in as much as you are Geralt in The Witcher, in as much as you are the protagonist in Bioshock, in as much you are Commander Sheppard in Mass Effect, in as much as you are Baal's child in Baldur's Gate, in as much as you are a Vault Dweller in Fallout.

The problem is, those games are all more linear than Cyberpunk, in that they have a definitive end, even though some took a long time to get there. You do not have a definitive end here, so, no closure.

I think this is what it comes down to. I am okay with no closure, as this is a new story, and I am expected (hopefully) that more is to come and it is not finished. Look at it as the beginning to V's story that we get to live. From that aspect, I think these endings are not so depressing or even happy, as much as teasers of what is to come.

That's interesting, cause I've just started Witcher 3 :D (hope this smiley face won't jinx it).

Getting a very different impression though comparing to CP2077. I'm much more out of the story, "travelling behind Geralt, watching and advising" so to say. CP2077 -- definitely "in the story" thanks to customization and 1st person perspective. Identifying with V - yes, with Geralt or most "set" characters - no.

CP is very linear I would say (in how Arasaka-Nomads-Johnny don't ever cross or block one another), but yes, the "line" has no ending. You play for 100 hours to know if V will survive, and guess what, you won't know. A bummer!
 
I have to say, while I generally agree with the whole "death is inevitable, what matters is how you live your life" sentiment, I find it pretty jarring in the context of twenty something V dying of a terminal illness in six months after weeks of struggle and loss.

This isn't someone dying for a cause or "living life to the fullest" (like the final cards in the Sun state, yet V sounds more depressed than ever), it's someone slowly fading and trying to make something out of those last few months because they have no other choice. To me V felt like someone who just starting to live.

I played that epilogue two times, first after Star-path (Rogue) and second after Don't fear the Reaper. First time I saw V in a space suit with a gun in his hand and thought "wow, he is on a legendary mission to find a cure for his issue". The second time I saw V in a space suit with a gun in his hand and thought "oh no, he is on a legendary suicide mission and wants to go out in a bang to get a drink named after him in the Afterlife". It depended on maybe the mood In played the game in and the dialogue options I took.

Edit: By the way, the Sun/Secret ending is the only of the endings where V (you, the player) can intentionally choose to pick up his chain with the bullet or not. In Star ending, he has it first and throws it away later, Temperance ending has it Johnny to put it into V's grave-shelf, in the Devil ending V either clings to it or throws it away, but without player's direct decision.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom