[Spoiler Alert] About the endings

[Bearded Geek]

I think we may have some confusion here.

Classes I took back in the say, it was about Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre. We never covered Schopenhauer, where the whole shaving one's beard with a shotgun is about will to live and Silverhand being Kurt Kobain in disguise as life is about suffereing anyway, comes from. My knowledge of Schopenhauer is cursory. Oh, for fuck sake I was kidding!

I have a bit humorous attitude towards philosophy at times. It went like this, back in the day, while I was interested I also had a life, and it happened that when we were going through Heidegger I had a hangover, so I was not at my best. Then, following Saturday it was about Sartre and one of the experiments was eating rocks, not real ones, it was a thought experiment, critique on Heidegger.... and I weren't all there when we covered Heidegger. One aspect about philosophy is that it can make our minds more flexible and oh boy, did I needed to be something really fucking extra flexible on that day and... perhaps it happened that my humor is sometimes difficult to decipher. The whole joke was that maybe it would be better to go after actual knowledge instead of ending up being trolled by shotgun and Kobain jokes and it's still IMO a bit hilarious that you actually can ponder Schopenhauer's philosophy in context of game.


But really, what endings of game achieve3d, regardless if people like them or hate them is that it enables conversations like this. So we can once again go all about this, if it's the question, what's really worth what?

Threads like this are huge therapy sessions mostly, to vent frustrations. I am now watching the entire (slowly) let's play suggested to me and three things strike me (I am very far from the ending, still beginning of Act II unless she rushes the main plot):

1. The writing really isn't all that revolutionary. On par with Fallout 4, but more talky. Definitely subpar to say AC Odyssey. This game most definitely isn't a masterpiece dialogue and writing wise but seem to be on par with middle of the road RPGs, and so far it seems to have burnt most of it's writing gas in Act I. Which is usually the case for RPGs. Unless you count "Dying, what a novel twist" as masterclass writing... it just ain't.
2. Keanu is a lousy voice actor. Not because he's a bad actor, but because of inexperience OR a voice director that can't let him sound natural.
3. "Johnny" is defintely meant to take the place of Jackie as your companion thru the game, but Jackie was just a much much better character AND had a much better voice actor.
4. The game seems to try (subtly) to push a certain perspective on the player. We'll see how that works out for me, so far every time it has been more overt it has clashed completely against my own views.

Speaking of endings and philosophy I already know about a lot of things I don't have a problem with that others do. Like the "Copy V" controversy. The reason for that is simple; the self is just your synapse pattern. It literally IS 1 and 0 all over your grey mudball in your head. If you copy that perfectly and then write it back, it is an identical person. The soul is irrelevant because nobody and nothing has a soul, it's just infinite galaxies of synapses blipping on and off.
Copy that pattern identically and you are as valid as before the copying. That is my personal view on the matter; renders the whole "is that really V" part obsolete, doesn't it?

Anyway, the game is far less annoying as I thought, but we'll see in act three. And the actual endings of course.

Post automatically merged: Dec 12, 2022

(At the right time, just a scene to watch)

Spoiler

Hey btw speaking of good let's players: Check out Rabidsquirrel on youtube. She's an absolute delight.

 

[Neriyavanli]

Speaking of endings and philosophy I already know about a lot of things I don't have a problem with that others do. Like the "Copy V" controversy. The reason for that is simple; the self is just your synapse pattern. It literally IS 1 and 0 all over your grey mudball in your head. If you copy that perfectly and then write it back, it is an identical person. The soul is irrelevant because nobody and nothing has a soul, it's just infinite galaxies of synapses blipping on and off.
Copy that pattern identically and you are as valid as before the copying. That is my personal view on the matter; renders the whole "is that really V" part obsolete, doesn't it?

It would only be a valid/identical copy physically and in memory a copy/clone of oneself would not and could not be the same as it originally self. There will always be differences for instance humans as we are react in lived experience/trauma two people can experience the same thing in life and turn out completely different from one another. A copy could perfectly tell you word for word something traumatic joyful or other emotional event that happened to their original person and not react or have the same emotions as said original person would have cause for the copy there are no mental barriers for it just the memory and knowledge of how this person would possibly react to the experience.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Hey btw speaking of good let's players: Check out Rabidsquirrel on youtube. She's an absolute delight.

We're a bit off topic, but yes. Sure I will
(I will watch her Mass Effect LE and Outer Worlds playthroughs^^)

Copy that pattern identically and you are as valid as before the copying. That is my personal view on the matter; renders the whole "is that really V" part obsolete, doesn't it?

So you mean that :
If Arasaka create, let's say 50 engrams of V (perfect copies) and put them in 50 different bodies.
V is the 50 people at the same time ? Who is the true V ? The original ? The copies too ? Alls ?

 

[The_Blacks]

Threads like this are huge therapy sessions mostly, to vent frustrations. I am now watching the entire (slowly) let's play suggested to me and three things strike me (I am very far from the ending, still beginning of Act II unless she rushes the main plot):

1. The writing really isn't all that revolutionary. On par with Fallout 4, but more talky. Definitely subpar to say AC Odyssey. This game most definitely isn't a masterpiece dialogue and writing wise but seem to be on par with middle of the road RPGs, and so far it seems to have burnt most of it's writing gas in Act I. Which is usually the case for RPGs. Unless you count "Dying, what a novel twist" as masterclass writing... it just ain't.
2. Keanu is a lousy voice actor. Not because he's a bad actor, but because of inexperience OR a voice director that can't let him sound natural.
3. "Johnny" is defintely meant to take the place of Jackie as your companion thru the game, but Jackie was just a much much better character AND had a much better voice actor.
4. The game seems to try (subtly) to push a certain perspective on the player. We'll see how that works out for me, so far every time it has been more overt it has clashed completely against my own views.

Speaking of endings and philosophy I already know about a lot of things I don't have a problem with that others do. Like the "Copy V" controversy. The reason for that is simple; the self is just your synapse pattern. It literally IS 1 and 0 all over your grey mudball in your head. If you copy that perfectly and then write it back, it is an identical person. The soul is irrelevant because nobody and nothing has a soul, it's just infinite galaxies of synapses blipping on and off.
Copy that pattern identically and you are as valid as before the copying. That is my personal view on the matter; renders the whole "is that really V" part obsolete, doesn't it?

Anyway, the game is far less annoying as I thought, but we'll see in act three. And the actual endings of course.

Post automatically merged: Dec 12, 2022

Hey btw speaking of good let's players: Check out Rabidsquirrel on youtube. She's an absolute delight.

Agree with certain points: for me the writing of this game is inferior to TW games (well, pretty much everything in 2077 is inferior to TW saga, really). I like Keanu Reeves as an actor but I vastly prefer full-time voice actors (or, alternatively, actors who have much more voice acting credits) to flesh and blood actors, I'd say it's a completely different kind of acting. Nope, def not masterclass writing, if it was more like TW or KOTOR 2, then we'd be talking. This, however, is most likely also related to the fact that Sapkowski's world/lore > Pondsmith's.

 

[SigilFey]

But that IS death. Losing yourself IS death.

And here begins every, individual audience member's analysis of the main theme. IS that death? IS it? Or...is it something ELSE? How do we DEFINE our existence?

Etc., etc., etc...

 

[Bearded Geek]

We're a bit off topic, but yes. Sure I will
(I will watch her Mass Effect LE and Outer Worlds playthroughs^^)

So you mean that :
If Arasaka create, let's say 50 engrams of V (perfect copies) and put them in 50 different bodies.
V is the 50 people at the same time ? Who is the true V ? The original ? The copies too ? Alls ?

Well, if the Original (tm) is alive, that person is the Real V (tm). But the others are valid persons, and killing them would be murder.
But in this case the original is overwritten, which makes your question moot. The Only V (tm) is of course the Real V (tm).

It would only be a valid/identical copy physically and in memory a copy/clone of oneself would not and could not be the same as it originally self.

Again, if the original is overwritten, your statement is moot. Same personality, same memories, same starting point... Hence same person.

And here begins every, individual audience member's analysis of the main theme. IS that death? IS it? Or...is it something ELSE? How do we DEFINE our existence?

Etc., etc., etc...

Of course, but my beliefs on the matter are so strong literally cannot wrap my head around defining death any other way.

Post automatically merged: Dec 13, 2022

Agree with certain points: for me the writing of this game is inferior to TW games (well, pretty much everything in 2077 is inferior to TW saga, really). I like Keanu Reeves as an actor but I vastly prefer full-time voice actors (or, alternatively, actors who have much more voice acting credits) to flesh and blood actors, I'd say it's a completely different kind of acting. Nope, def not masterclass writing, if it was more like TW or KOTOR 2, then we'd be talking. This, however, is most likely also related to the fact that Sapkowski's world/lore > Pondsmith's.

It is also two different kinds of writing. Sapokowski wrote a book series, a set world with a set set of characters and a set protagonist etc. Pondsmit wrote a setting and some rules. It's like comparing a home someone has lived in for 20 years wih a home just purchased and is unfurnished. Both are valid, both take talent, but one is empty for you to fill in and the other isn't.

And yes, I too prefer experienced voice actors. Celebs are good on the cover, but usually a disappointment.

 

[The_Blacks]

Well, if the Original (tm) is alive, that person is the Real V (tm). But the others are valid persons, and killing them would be murder.
But in this case the original is overwritten, which makes your question moot. The Only V (tm) is of course the Real V (tm).


Again, if the original is overwritten, your statement is moot. Same personality, same memories, same starting point... Hence same person.


Of course, but my beliefs on the matter are so strong literally cannot wrap my head around defining death any other way.

Post automatically merged: Dec 13, 2022

It is also two different kinds of writing. Sapokowski wrote a book series, a set world with a set set of characters and a set protagonist etc. Pondsmit wrote a setting and some rules. It's like comparing a home someone has lived in for 20 years wih a home just purchased and is unfurnished. Both are valid, both take talent, but one is empty for you to fill in and the other isn't.

And yes, I too prefer experienced voice actors. Celebs are good on the cover, but usually a disappointment.

Celebs that are good voice actors tend to have quite a bit of VA credits, such as Mark Hamill (in his case, his career as a VA is so much more prolific than as a normal actor, so go figure ). To name another example, Charles Dance was superb in GOT and Alien 3, but I though his acting in TW3 wasn't great.

Concerning Sapkowski-Pondsmith, TW has the advantage of being based on a superbly written literary saga, which means that, like u said, that house is in not such dire need to be filled, while Cyberpunk's is empty, so filling it with quality writing from scratch provides a greater challenge.

 

[AvarageEnjoyer]

This, however, is most likely also related to the fact that Sapkowski's world/lore > Pondsmith's.

That's highly debatable.

 

[SigilFey]

Of course, but my beliefs on the matter are so strong literally cannot wrap my head around defining death any other way.

Well, sure. That's a valid interpretation. But this would be the definition of:

"I don't like it."

At that point, it's take it or leave it. The story presented is a tragic arc. Arguing that tragic arcs are somehow poor design won't really accomplish anything. It's like saying that a baker should not make only breads and quiche and should be making sweet things, as well, like cakes and brownies. Things that aren't sweet are inherently worse. You're inherently saying, "A bakery isn't doing it properly if they don't offer sweet foods." Well, this bakery is a bread shop. Or there's quiche. That's not a "neener-neener" as you mention earlier -- it's the menu. It's for people that like bread and quiche.

Pondsmit wrote a setting and some rules. It's like comparing a home someone has lived in for 20 years wih a home just purchased and is unfurnished. Both are valid, both take talent, but one is empty for you to fill in and the other isn't.

It was sort of doomed to this sort of divisiveness from the beginning. I've made the argument before that when creators pick up an existing IP and transpose it to a different medium (like PnP to video game), those changes are automatically going to create a schism in the potential audience, like a battlefield.

On one side of the front, you'll have the people that have engaged with that IP in its original form, and they prefer that.

On the other side of that front, you'll have people that have never engaged with the original and only know the new form.

Then, there's everyone else in the no-man's-land between the two sides. This other group disliked the old IP and prefers the new form. This fourth group likes both. The fifth group also likes both, but for different reasons. Etc. It never ends.

But the key is that there will definitely be that battle front between the original and the new. Guaranteed. Hence, though I find the story line to be excellent, the argument that Cyberpunk has always presented a world that was filled by the players' vision is a strong point. The new, cinematic, narrative approach alienated a huge number of the players that have always held a very different vision of a 30-year-old tabletop game.

 

[Guest 4412420]

As far as I can tell (and a LOT of people have pointed out) it seems the devs preferred option is Temperance (they really seem to push you submitting to Johnny),

I'm a little to answer this, but I didn't get this impression myself.

If anything, I think the Star (Panam's) ending is the one that comes across as the preferred option by the game. Saul and Panam keep reminding you that Aldecaldos repay their debts, don't forget their friends to the point a Telltale games style popup saying "you should remember this" wouldn't be out of place. It's the most feel-good ending that focuses on family, though they were very selective for who gets to be ghosting-free family for V.

With Johnny, he says multiple times that he has no intention to hijack V's body and he doesn't approve if V chooses to go with Alt in Mikoshi. The only thing that could imply some kind of nudging towards Temperance ending is that there's no six months timer for Johnny, but in a high-tech world like Cyberpunk's it would be strange if V's case really was completely hopeless.

 

[Bearded Geek]

Well, sure. That's a valid interpretation. But this would be the definition of:

"I don't like it."

At that point, it's take it or leave it. The story presented is a tragic arc. Arguing that tragic arcs are somehow poor design won't really accomplish anything. It's like saying that a baker should not make only breads and quiche and should be making sweet things, as well, like cakes and brownies. Things that aren't sweet are inherently worse. You're inherently saying, "A bakery isn't doing it properly if they don't offer sweet foods." Well, this bakery is a bread shop. Or there's quiche. That's not a "neener-neener" as you mention earlier -- it's the menu. It's for people that like bread and quiche.


It was sort of doomed to this sort of divisiveness from the beginning. I've made the argument before that when creators pick up an existing IP and transpose it to a different medium (like PnP to video game), those changes are automatically going to create a schism in the potential audience, like a battlefield.

On one side of the front, you'll have the people that have engaged with that IP in its original form, and they prefer that.

On the other side of that front, you'll have people that have never engaged with the original and only know the new form.

Then, there's everyone else in the no-man's-land between the two sides. This other group disliked the old IP and prefers the new form. This fourth group likes both. The fifth group also likes both, but for different reasons. Etc. It never ends.

But the key is that there will definitely be that battle front between the original and the new. Guaranteed. Hence, though I find the story line to be excellent, the argument that Cyberpunk has always presented a world that was filled by the players' vision is a strong point. The new, cinematic, narrative approach alienated a huge number of the players that have always held a very different vision of a 30-year-old tabletop game.

I think you're mixing up some replies here? Your lengthy well written reply (starting with the odd statement "I don't like it"), does not make sense to my quick statement that erasing someone's mind is murder, which in turn was not a comment about the endings as such at all but rather just dismissing the idea that erasing someone from existence could be seen as hopeful?

Erasing a person is murder regardless if it's done by nanites or a shotgun to the brain. The effect on the person is literally the same, hence both are murder of the same degree.

That said, reading your well written reply... all of this could have been avoided with a different marketing campaign:

How about "Guide V in their tragic and ultimately futile hunt for salvation thru the streets and back alleys of Night City"?
This tagline is 100% true to the story, the setting and the source material and everyone buying the game would know exactly what they're getting. Everyone's happy.

Of course that would mean less "cool and badass poses" in the marketing tho.

Post automatically merged: Dec 13, 2022

I'm a little to answer this, but I didn't get this impression myself.

If anything, I think the Star (Panam's) ending is the one that comes across as the preferred option by the game. Saul and Panam keep reminding you that Aldecaldos repay their debts, don't forget their friends to the point a Telltale games style popup saying "you should remember this" wouldn't be out of place. It's the most feel-good ending that focuses on family, though they were very selective for who gets to be ghosting-free family for V.
View attachment 11333479

With Johnny, he says multiple times that he has no intention to hijack V's body and he doesn't approve if V chooses to go with Alt in Mikoshi. The only thing that could imply some kind of nudging towards Temperance ending is that there's no six months timer for Johnny, but in a high-tech world like Cyberpunk's it would be strange if V's case really was completely hopeless.

(Edit, forgot to put this in) I think you might be right and the original idea was pushed by people who simply dislike Johnny to the core.

The point is that we don't get to SEE any assurance of that, and that there will be no assurance of that later either since the DLC will take place before the endings as well afaik. People want to feel reassured, it's the ME3 original ending all over again when BIoware thought players would enjoy guessing the outcome instead of knowing.

(Which also begs the question... why would V partake in the DLC at all if she only has 2 weeks or 6 months to live? Adding more content before a cure has been proven makes very VERY little sense from a story perspective).

 

[LeKill3rFou]

How about "Guide V in their tragic and ultimately futile hunt for salvation thru the streets and back alleys of Night City"?
This tagline is 100% true to the story, the setting and the source material and everyone buying the game would know exactly what they're getting. Everyone's happy.

Like movies, maybe games lack of "tags"... In addition to the "mature / +18 / adult", a tag like "warning : Sad/Tragic/depressing story"

 

[Bearded Geek]

Like movies, maybe games lack of "tags"... In addition to the "mature / +18 / adult", a tag like "warning : Sad/Tragic/depressing story"

Seriously? YES.

I mean "Trigger warning: Depression" would do too. They have the obligation to warm against seizures, why not have the obligation to warm for content that might trigger mental health problems?

(Of course then we have the issue that people conflict "mature" with "dark", just like people conflict "mature" with "tiddies". Both show and absurdly simplistic worldview imho).

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I mean "Trigger warning: Depression" would do too. They have the obligation to warm against seizures, why not have the obligation to warm for content that might trigger mental health problems?

Hum... We're a bit off topic, but it's going a little to far
It reminds me a bit of a "dark" time when some people thought that playing games like GTA could make players violent (there were even "serious" subjects about that on the news on TV in France... What a joke^^).

 

[The_Blacks]

Seriously? YES.

I mean "Trigger warning: Depression" would do too. They have the obligation to warm against seizures, why not have the obligation to warm for content that might trigger mental health problems?

(Of course then we have the issue that people conflict "mature" with "dark", just like people conflict "mature" with "tiddies". Both show and absurdly simplistic worldview imho).

Well I definitely want a Warning: Tiddies in my games, it will offer 100% certainty about the fact I'm getting that content and thus avoid unnecessary pre-purchase Internet research. With CDPR products I am not worried, but the fact other mature-labeled games might not include nipples troubles me

 

[Bearded Geek]

Hum... We're a bit off topic, but it's going a little to far
It reminds me a bit of a "dark" time when some people thought that playing games like GTA could make players violent (there were even "serious" subjects about that on the news on TV in France... What a joke^^).

Not sure about that; there are threads especially early Reddit and Steam forum (as in 2020 / early 2021) has ton of people describing exactly what I felt, just putting the controller down and just not feeling like doing anything at all for hours, or not being able to touch their computer again for days even if just to play another game. I felt like the latter just by getting the endings spoiled to me before I had finished act I.

Edit: I also know that most people playing this seem to play it like GTA V; just running around, shooting people and watching youtube hint videos how t oget the coolest weapons and cars, completely ignoring the ending or the story altogether, having their V pose smiling with a cool bike not getting into the roleplaying at all.

 

[CS554]

Like movies, maybe games lack of "tags"... In addition to the "mature / +18 / adult", a tag like "warning : Sad/Tragic/depressing story"

Hate to post this without a source, but according to latest I heard from related research they don't really work like many people think they work and they are used in a way not intended today.

I get that, but I don't need that. I don't want that. I want what the Cyberpunk reddit spits on and errandously call "power fantasy", aka an escape from what we have in real life:

• Within 20 years millions of people will die or have to become refugees because of climate change that is now unstoppable? Check
• (The Water Wars will be brutal as frakk)? Check
• Megacorporations that refuse workers rights while their owners go to space? Check
• Cybernetics and medicines that could help millions but are too expensive for anyone not privileged to afford? Check
• Oversexualizaton of everything? Check
• Militarized police? Check
• EDIT: And scariest of all; we are in the middle of a mass extinction nobody talks about. In the last 50 years 70% of all species on earth have died out. Just the small ones for now, so we don't care.

Basically Cyberpunk isn't futuristic anymore, it's retrofuturistic just like Fallout but instead of being "retrofuturistic from the 50s" it's "Retrotufuristic from the 80s".
I want to escape from reality, not watch the news. Having no agency while reality sucks? That's Real Life.

(Also tragedies are not entertaining. Period).

Did I ever see V actually die? No. When my game ended, I had a feeling that she might even live surprisingly long. Who knows what will happen in the future. Maybe someone actually did find a way for her to survive. Maybe she saved several people somewhere sacrificing herself in the process and she will live forever in the hearts of those people and their offsprings. Maybe she got hit by a buss next week and she died because of that. We don't know, so the final ending of the story could be whatever we want it to be.

Also @Bearded Geek

Something I haven't shared even I think there was a topic for that. I have never done fan fiction thing, I don't really play lot's of games, my characters are JC Denton's or John Smith's but this game, it just occurred to me a while after my first playthrough and then playing other endings (didn't had Don't Fear the Reaper available though) and it was about the Star ending it went like this, what time my V has left and then what.


SMS to Viktor Vektor

Hey Vik. We are still heading out with the Aldecaldos and I left something behind and hope you would take care of them for me.​

​

There are quite a few cars, couple of bikes too. Some are practical, some are ridiculously expensive. I need you to sell all but two of them.​

​

There's rather fancy old Porsche I wish you would get to Rogue, it's just something I feel belongs to her now. Then, any vehicle you like, keep it or sell it and keep the eddies, but all the rest of them wire eddies you get from them to me.​

​

Panam is a clan leader know and I don't know if it get's any better than this, away from the Night City and I don't know if I'm going to see him or her, but we been talking, maybe there will be more of us. Money will help with things, even if I'm not here. I'm sure you understand.​

​

V​

​

So my V's story is over and for me, it's the perfect ending "Time to grow the fuck up samurai!" but for someone else, it's open opportunity to come up with something else as we don't know.


I came to play game again few more time for other reasons, but I'm not a fan of some additions in 1.5 but it's my most played story driven game ever and I started with the Commodore 64.

The Cyberpunk back in the day, Gibson's the Neuromancer being huge, it was very welcomed as it voiced certain concerns that then enabled connections between people and core message was to think about consequences of what we want, what we believe into, faith in tech was almost religion. In retrospect it was understandable because generation before us had seen propeller plane to come to a jet plane, space rocket, satellites, man on the moon, space shuttle, consumer electronics made life more convenient and was available wider and cheaper, from film reels people went to VHS and everybody could have one, computers, then home computers. No need to worry about the future, tech solves all.

And now we live with the consequences, though at least some people became more aware of ecological issues, issues with giving power to corporations to give us more tech, when reality has always been the same, the main business is to make money. So when it comes inventing problems industry? Arasaka's and Militech struggle in Night City, then selling solutions to survive in the chaos.

It's really something unexpected from a video game, escapism, if it's so good, why do we keep wanting more and more? Did these endings present some kind of window of opportunity.

I'm pretty selfish person, so my V's story is over, but mine isn't. Old, not done, yet. And perhaps it's that demographics on this site are on older side of people who play video games, but I think younger people, just perhaps...

 

[Bearded Geek]

Hate to post this without a source, but according to latest I heard from related research they don't really work like many people think they work and they are used in a way not intended today.




Also @Bearded Geek

Something I haven't shared even I think there was a topic for that. I have never done fan fiction thing, I don't really play lot's of games, my characters are JC Denton's or John Smith's but this game, it just occurred to me a while after my first playthrough and then playing other endings (didn't had Don't Fear the Reaper available though) and it was about the Star ending it went like this, what time my V has left and then what.


SMS to Viktor Vektor

Hey Vik. We are still heading out with the Aldecaldos and I left something behind and hope you would take care of them for me.​

​

There are quite a few cars, couple of bikes too. Some are practical, some are ridiculously expensive. I need you to sell all but two of them.​

​

There's rather fancy old Porsche I wish you would get to Rogue, it's just something I feel belongs to her now. Then, any vehicle you like, keep it or sell it and keep the eddies, but all the rest of them wire eddies you get from them to me.​

​

Panam is a clan leader know and I don't know if it get's any better than this, away from the Night City and I don't know if I'm going to see him or her, but we been talking, maybe there will be more of us. Money will help with things, even if I'm not here. I'm sure you understand.​

​

V​

​

So my V's story is over and for me, it's the perfect ending "Time to grow the fuck up samurai!" but for someone else, it's open opportunity to come up with something else as we don't know.


I came to play game again few more time for other reasons, but I'm not a fan of some additions in 1.5 but it's my most played story driven game ever and I started with the Commodore 64.

The Cyberpunk back in the day, Gibson's the Neuromancer being huge, it was very welcomed as it voiced certain concerns that then enabled connections between people and core message was to think about consequences of what we want, what we believe into, faith in tech was almost religion. In retrospect it was understandable because generation before us had seen propeller plane to come to a jet plane, space rocket, satellites, man on the moon, space shuttle, consumer electronics made life more convenient and was available wider and cheaper, from film reels people went to VHS and everybody could have one, computers, then home computers. No need to worry about the future, tech solves all.

And now we live with the consequences, though at least some people became more aware of ecological issues, issues with giving power to corporations to give us more tech, when reality has always been the same, the main business is to make money. So when it comes inventing problems industry? Arasaka's and Militech struggle in Night City, then selling solutions to survive in the chaos.

It's really something unexpected from a video game, escapism, if it's so good, why do we keep wanting more and more? Did these endings present some kind of window of opportunity.

I'm pretty selfish person, so my V's story is over, but mine isn't. Old, not done, yet. And perhaps it's that demographics on this site are on older side of people who play video games, but I think younger people, just perhaps...

I'm 50+, probably the same age bracket as you, seeing how I did grow up with first the Vic20, then the C64, then the Amiga 500 and then PCs. Never owned a console, btw.

But thing is... I've done all this. I am DONE with all this. And with "this" I mean "figure out the meaning of life and death, the meaning of existence, yada yada". I did that 35 years ago; you either do it as a teenager or you do it on your death bed and I did between 15 and 20. To me this whole discussion, or rather most of the arguments against a happier ending that are not just "Source material!" are from people (not only on this forum! But all over, from Steam to Reddit to Quora) who still feel all these things need more prodding. (Basically "it's only art if it's depressing" or similar comments).

There is nothing in the world that has been explored more than the human nature and the nature of death and rebirth. There are BILLIONS of sides of paper, parchment, papyrus, stone tablets, clay tablets, standing stones and oral traditions about all this.
I am not trying to disrespect those who still feels all this need more prodding, but to me it is all old news, old arguments, and old theories. I have seen them all, embraced very very few, dismissed the vast majority and so what is left here is pointless depression.

I don't need my protagonist to die tragically to let me feel something, or reflect on something.

I have never experienced Cyberpunk 2077 before patch 1.61, so I wouldn't know has been added and not, but for story driven games (whatever exactly that definition is) my favorite is obviously Fallout 4 with 1891 hours, then AC Odyssey with 300+ and the ME trilogy with about as many.

It is telling, as has been pointed out in this thread before, that V actually never get to answer Dex. It is a clever tactic from the writer that you cannot actually answer "I'd rather die old"; you only get to start the argument before Dex ends it despite him being the one asking.
At the same time it's clear V doesn't necessarily agree; she can be mad at Jackie for being a glory hound while she's the mature one but you never get to explore that side of thinking until the very very end of the game. Arguable Sun is the Glory Hound answer, while Star and Temperance are different variations of "Fade Away", one even literally. The Devil... I don't know. And I still argue Path Of Least Resistance is the most defiant and heroic one.

 

[Neriyavanli]

I'm 50+, probably the same age bracket as you, seeing how I did grow up with first the Vic20, then the C64, then the Amiga 500 and then PCs. Never owned a console, btw.

But thing is... I've done all this. I am DONE with all this. And with "this" I mean "figure out the meaning of life and death, the meaning of existence, yada yada". I did that 35 years ago; you either do it as a teenager or you do it on your death bed and I did between 15 and 20. To me this whole discussion, or rather most of the arguments against a happier ending that are not just "Source material!" are from people (not only on this forum! But all over, from Steam to Reddit to Quora) who still feel all these things need more prodding. (Basically "it's only art if it's depressing" or similar comments).

There is nothing in the world that has been explored more than the human nature and the nature of death and rebirth. There are BILLIONS of sides of paper, parchment, papyrus, stone tablets, clay tablets, standing stones and oral traditions about all this.
I am not trying to disrespect those who still feels all this need more prodding, but to me it is all old news, old arguments, and old theories. I have seen them all, embraced very very few, dismissed the vast majority and so what is left here is pointless depression.

I don't need my protagonist to die tragically to let me feel something, or reflect on something.

I have never experienced Cyberpunk 2077 before patch 1.61, so I wouldn't know has been added and not, but for story driven games (whatever exactly that definition is) my favorite is obviously Fallout 4 with 1891 hours, then AC Odyssey with 300+ and the ME trilogy with about as many.

It is telling, as has been pointed out in this thread before, that V actually never get to answer Dex. It is a clever tactic from the writer that you cannot actually answer "I'd rather die old"; you only get to start the argument before Dex ends it despite him being the one asking.
At the same time it's clear V doesn't necessarily agree; she can be mad at Jackie for being a glory hound while she's the mature one but you never get to explore that side of thinking until the very very end of the game. Arguable Sun is the Glory Hound answer, while Star and Temperance are different variations of "Fade Away", one even literally. The Devil... I don't know. And I still argue Path Of Least Resistance is the most defiant and heroic one.

I do not mean to be disrespectful but this read very entitled to me like because you have done all this in your youth others should not get to experience and have these discussions about a game that for a lot of people are new experience. You can enjoy what you like and feel how you feel but don't invalidate those that are new to this conversation or feel differently at the end of the day it is a cyberpunk game and I mean CYBERPUNK these stories are not happy ones or power fantasies it is about looking at the bigger picture and finding your own meaning in the end.

Edit: Also it is ok to not like a game not everything is made for everyone and this might be a this game is not for you moment plus you have already said you don't wanna play cause it is all pointless to you. Cyberpunk 2077 is the first game in the series none of us know anything about the next game, what happens to V or anything else it is just shooting at the dark for now. Also also Sorry if I am being rude/disrespectful

 

[LadyMiseryAli]

at the end of the day it is a cyberpunk game and I mean CYBERPUNK these stories are not happy ones or power fantasies it is about looking at the bigger picture and finding your own meaning in the end.

I think that's a cop-out tbh. It's the answer everyone slings at me when I express my own disappointment in the way the endings were left on cliffhangers. Cyberpunk doesn't automatically have to be a shit ending. There's no rule book on such things that I'm aware of. To have the endings open, and then do fuck-all with them...is a shitty thing to do to a player, especially one that has grown attached to their OC like I and countless others have. You don't dangle hope in front of my face, snatch it up, and then expect me to not be pissed about it.