I sort of get it, intuitively speaking, but I am hoping someone can write down an answer that clarifies a lot of the subtleties. My go-to example is the interval $(-1, 0) \cup (0, 1)$, and the sequence $(1/(n+1))_{n = 1}^{\infty}$. It is a Cauchy sequence, but not convergent because even when given a very small $\epsilon$, any candidate value for convergence $L$ will get far enough away from $L$ so that $|L - 1/(1 + n)| > \epsilon$.
Okay, but if I consider the usual proof on the reals for the fact that a Cauchy sequence is convergent, I notice that it relies on the Bolzano-Weierstrass (B-W) guaranteeing the existence of a convergent subsequence within a bounded sequence---this gives us a specific value which we can say the Cauchy sequence must converge to.
Every Cauchy sequence is bounded, even in a generalized metric space. Every bounded sequence, in a generalized metric space also contains convergent subsequences, as per B-W. Shouldn't that be enough to latch onto a point of convergence? I am missing some crucial subtlety here...