A good majority of primary/original source material for cyberpunk (IE, the books that really created the genre) absolutely covered this shit.
It's Hollywood specifically that glossed over it a lot. Partly due to time constraints, and maybe partly because it was too "deep" for them and their assumed audiences.
Look up William Gibson, arguably one of the main founders of the entire genre.
To be honest, it's not exactly easy to make a case where mega corporations won't abuse the massive power that they accumulate. I do agree though that the way leftist writers often portray corporations at a cartoonish level of villainous, with very little depth, nuance, or seriousness.
The mistake leftists tend to make is in assuming that capitalism is the problem and that total communism is the solution. They also fail to take note of how the left wing is just as much (if not more-so) in bed with large and wealthy entities exerting power and influence however they please.
Remember the original Deus Ex and how you could literally join the Illuminati rather than do the preachy good guy bullshit?
No? Deus Ex had one of the shittiest "choose your ending" endings of any game I recall, topped only by HR's literal "push the button for the ending you want" ending which I assume must have been riffing the first game.
Or do you mean the middle of the game where you meet Everett? Because the story is all on rails by that point. You don't get to "choose" to join, and there's no gameplay where you play as a badass secret illuminati agent. You're working for him while also working for the good guys.
Deus Ex is an entirely linear story after UNATCO. The developers were going to add an optional "Choose to stay with UNATCO" branching path but ran out of time.
Ah, okay, I understand now. I honestly wasn't looking at it as much from a gaming lens as a general narrative one.
I agree with you though. When we're talking about anything that strongly claims to an RPG, there should be a lot more latitude and freedom, allowing the player to dictate how they decide their character does things. And far, far less moralistic narrative pushing.
I can't even fathom how godawful tabletop RPG's must be with woke campaigns/groups. Like it's one thing to hear the kind of stupid shit WotC is pulling, but I doubt I could stomach even 15 minutes of that kind of shit during an actual game session.
no choice but to go into the digital ghost prison to save himself
Or you can not do that, and that's the end of the game so who knows what happens but based on the credits messages it's presumed he does some work for Hanako before he dies. Loyal corporate dog to the end.
No, I'm simply telling you that you're factually wrong. I don't care about your opinion of the endings. (though it's amusing you would "hate play" a game all the way to the end) You can use the soulkiller machine or you can walk away. That's the Devil ending. If we're sharing opinions I'd say you got the ending you deserve.
A good majority of primary/original source material for cyberpunk (IE, the books that really created the genre) absolutely covered this shit.
It's Hollywood specifically that glossed over it a lot. Partly due to time constraints, and maybe partly because it was too "deep" for them and their assumed audiences.
Look up William Gibson, arguably one of the main founders of the entire genre.
To be honest, it's not exactly easy to make a case where mega corporations won't abuse the massive power that they accumulate. I do agree though that the way leftist writers often portray corporations at a cartoonish level of villainous, with very little depth, nuance, or seriousness.
The mistake leftists tend to make is in assuming that capitalism is the problem and that total communism is the solution. They also fail to take note of how the left wing is just as much (if not more-so) in bed with large and wealthy entities exerting power and influence however they please.
No? Deus Ex had one of the shittiest "choose your ending" endings of any game I recall, topped only by HR's literal "push the button for the ending you want" ending which I assume must have been riffing the first game.
Or do you mean the middle of the game where you meet Everett? Because the story is all on rails by that point. You don't get to "choose" to join, and there's no gameplay where you play as a badass secret illuminati agent. You're working for him while also working for the good guys.
Deus Ex is an entirely linear story after UNATCO. The developers were going to add an optional "Choose to stay with UNATCO" branching path but ran out of time.
Ah, okay, I understand now. I honestly wasn't looking at it as much from a gaming lens as a general narrative one.
I agree with you though. When we're talking about anything that strongly claims to an RPG, there should be a lot more latitude and freedom, allowing the player to dictate how they decide their character does things. And far, far less moralistic narrative pushing.
I can't even fathom how godawful tabletop RPG's must be with woke campaigns/groups. Like it's one thing to hear the kind of stupid shit WotC is pulling, but I doubt I could stomach even 15 minutes of that kind of shit during an actual game session.
Or you can not do that, and that's the end of the game so who knows what happens but based on the credits messages it's presumed he does some work for Hanako before he dies. Loyal corporate dog to the end.
No, I'm simply telling you that you're factually wrong. I don't care about your opinion of the endings. (though it's amusing you would "hate play" a game all the way to the end) You can use the soulkiller machine or you can walk away. That's the Devil ending. If we're sharing opinions I'd say you got the ending you deserve.