Support NeoGAF

[CartoonsNCereal]

you know. of course different opinions are valid. you just have to express your opinion in a fair way. for example saying "this is talking simulator lol. i go here npc talk i go there npc talking wtf is this jhahahahahahajalkjfsl" is not the same as saying "i have no problem with games with a lot of dialogue. i just didn't find cyberpunk interesting"

because the problem here is not that the game is a "conversation simulator" the problem is you didn't like the conversations. the witcher 3 was a conversation simulator too and you liked it.

kinda suspect some of these people haven't really fucked with the witcher 3 like they are saying though. witcher 3 has undeniable acclaim so some peeps are lying and saying "well the witcher 3 was good though!" when they either didn't play it, or have like 30 hrs in it.

because too many of these complaints are pretty much within the design philosophy of the witcher 3.

so either these people were able to see the witcher 3 for what it was because it didn't have guns, cars, and a first person view.

or, *whispers* some of these people didn't really play the witcher 3 and didn't understand what this game was going to prioritize.

 

[Mozzarella]

so suddenly CDPR doesn't know how to write interesting context? it suddenly went away with cyberpunk? lol that's not how talent works buddy.

if the "talking" was compelling in the witcher, then the talking was likely just fine in quests like the one with river where you track a cereal killer manipulating young boys. or many others

and the fact that you keep calling it "the talking" makes me think you are...12 years old.

No, but every person has peak performance, for example Quentin Tarantino peak is Pulp Fiction, now his others works can be good or bad but most people will agree Pulp Fiction was him at his peak. So every writer and director has made some great stuff, some good stuff, some mediocre and some bad stuff. Nobody can stay consistent all the time, quality drops are common.
Now Cyberpunk stories and characters are not bad, but Witcher 3 did it better. Simple.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

Cyberpunk is my GOTY for 2020, but it's OK for people to not agree with you or enjoy different things about games.

nah, I don't care if you have an opinion just don't let it be dumb and undermine things unjustly. especially if you can't draw from different experiences or reference anything else. I basically just asked a fair question and to expand on what you are comparing it to. I'm allowing you to have that opinion, just expand on it.

but I have to "pretend" like the guy didn''t have that to give me, and didn't just scape goat out the convo lol



for example I'll say that...skyrim's quests were poor, somebody could ask "in comparison to what then?"

and I'll say "well for one oblivion and morrowind, it's predecessors had better non procedural quests that allowed for more creative variation, case in point X quest"

thats all, i expanded on my opinion with a better reference as to what was better in the same genre. and most people would probably have to respect that opinion now.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

No, but every person has peak performance, for example Quentin Tarantino peak is Pulp Fiction, now his others works can be good or bad but most people will agree Pulp Fiction was him at his peak. So every writer and director has made some great stuff, some good stuff, some mediocre and some bad stuff. Nobody can stay consistent all the time, quality drops are common.
Now Cyberpunk stories and characters are not bad, but Witcher 3 did it better. Simple.

yeah but like Quentin, his poor efforts are better than than majority of directors better efforts.

and that's even easier to identify in the gaming landscape

I think the same applies here as far quest writing. CDPR writing for quests still has more detail and advance in it than the other open world RPG's on the market...so why would those open world RPGS not get this scrutiny?

oh because we're comparing Quentin to his other works, and not the majority of film. The film is mediocre for a "Quentin film". so we score it based upon that you expect and anticipate more from quentin.

more egregious here, because there are less amazing ambitious games in history than there are great films. so it's even easier to identify comparison.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

what open world rpgs have you played where you liked the enemy ai?

Cyberpunk is *also* a shooter though.

The AI really isn’t very much fun to fight. I guess Halo is the gold standard for this sort of thing, but I’m playing the Master Chief collection and the fights are *so* much more fun on Halo than CP2077.

I do think it’s too bad in Mass Effect Andromeda either. And that is an RPG.

—

I’m playing GTAV as well. And... honestly, I think I like CP2077 more, on the whole. There are many things GTAV does better but... CP2077 *is* and RPG.

 

[harmny]

No, but every person has peak performance, for example Quentin Tarantino peak is Pulp Fiction, now his others works can be good or bad but most people will agree Pulp Fiction was him at his peak. So every writer and director has made some great stuff, some good stuff, some mediocre and some bad stuff. Nobody can stay consistent all the time, quality drops are common.
Now Cyberpunk stories and characters are not bad, but Witcher 3 did it better. Simple.

the witcher 3 did some things better. some things worse. you can prefer one game over the other but both are similar in production value and quality. and it's not a surprise because the same people made both games. i work in the film industry and a lot of people say that tarantino's peak was inglorious basterds because people have different opinions. but in any case. the general consensus is that tarantino films are great and he's talented. that is the opposite of what's happening here because the hyperbole here is nothing like that.

the equivalent would be people discussing once upon a time in hollywood and saying "oh tarantino is done. this movie is a piece of crap everything is mediocre. dialogues. plot. performances. pacing" of course some people can say that. and to those people i would say "what are you talking about? yes it might not be pulp fiction but the movie is still really good compared to other films"

 

[Deleted member 17706]

nah, I don't care if you have an opinion just don't let it be dumb and undermine things unjustly. especially if you can't draw from different experiences or reference anything else. I basically just asked a fair question and to expand on what you are comparing it to. I'm allowing you to have that opinion, just expand on it.

but I have to "pretend" like the guy didn''t have that to give me, and didn't just scape goat out the convo lol



for example I'll say that...skyrim's quests were poor, somebody could ask "in comparison to what then?"

and I'll say "well for one oblivion and morrowind, it's predecessors had better non procedural quests that allowed for more creative variation, case in point X quest"

thats all, i expanded on my opinion with a better reference as to what was better in the same genre. and most people would probably have to respect that opinion now.

No one owes you a goddamn thing. If they didn't enjoy the game and that's all they want to say, then that's fine. You're not in a position to "allow" anything.

I do agree with you that it's puzzling how people could praise The Witcher 3 while hating on Cyberpunk, since they are both very similar in design philosophy. Then again, maybe it's just that some people enjoy the characters more or prefer the setting. It's all very subjective in the end.

Anyway, I just think you should chill it with the aggressive demands about how other people need to behave in their interactions with you on a forum.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

No, but every person has peak performance, for example Quentin Tarantino peak is Pulp Fiction, now his others works can be good or bad but most people will agree Pulp Fiction was him at his peak. So every writer and director has made some great stuff, some good stuff, some mediocre and some bad stuff. Nobody can stay consistent all the time, quality drops are common.
Now Cyberpunk stories and characters are not bad, but Witcher 3 did it better. Simple.

(Django Unchained is a *fantastic* film)

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

No one owes you a goddamn thing. If they didn't enjoy the game and that's all they want to say, then that's fine. You're not in a position to "allow" anything.

I do agree with you that it's puzzling how people could praise The Witcher 3 while hating on Cyberpunk, since they are both very similar in design philosophy. Then again, maybe it's just that some people enjoy the characters more or prefer the setting. It's all very subjective in the end.

Anyway, I just think you should chill it with the aggressive demands about how other people need to behave in their interactions with you on a forum.

then whats the point of a message board? why are we here? might as well be twitter.

you quoting me is essentially expecting a response correct? If he doesn't respond then so be it, i'm not gonna PM him about it.

but that doesn't mean my questions have to end either. Because I still have more questions.


lets be honest, people tend to X out of conversations for the most part when they dont have an immediate rebuttal.

if I make a bait "easy" argument to refute, like say..."the bugs are okay!"

guarantee the guy will respond to that shit. ask him something that basically might lose him the debate? he'll fucking run away, or says "well, thats like...my opinion man" thats what happens. people aint shit, they'll keep going if it's an easy win

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

Anyway, I just think you should chill it with the aggressive demands about how other people need to behave in their interactions with you on a forum.

nobody is demanding anything, I can't make anyone do anything, but you can't control my response either. especially when all I asked was for a reference of comparison.

I didn't realize message boards were now about just posting some opinion, expecting no pushback and logging off.

but then again, we are in the era of social media and "likes" and "negs" instead of quoting the person. so maybe that's what people do expect.

but he responded to me, I respond to him. thats how it goes.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I do agree with you that it's puzzling how people could praise The Witcher 3 while hating on Cyberpunk, since they are both very similar in design philosophy. Then again, maybe it's just that some people enjoy the characters more or prefer the setting. It's all very subjective in the end.

I'd say its exactly because Cyberpunk uses the same design philosophy as W3 that it gets hated on. It's a different genre and style of game so the design should reflect that.

What people could tolerate or not notice in one game will stick out like a sore thumb in another

NPC AI for example. Same limitations as W3, but you're not really going to notice like you would in Cyberpunk since it's a main theme of the game

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

That's Joe for you.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

nobody is demanding anything, I can't make anyone do anything, but you can't control my response either. especially when all I asked was for a reference of comparison.

I didn't realize message boards were now about just posting some opinion, expecting no pushback and logging off.

but then again, we are in the era of social media and "likes" and "negs" instead of quoting the person. so maybe that's what people do expect.

but he responded to me, I respond to him. thats how it goes.

If you toned down your strawmans and passive aggresive responses you'd probably have an easier time finding the discussions you're looking for

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I'd say its exactly because Cyberpunk uses the same design philosophy as W3 that it gets hated on. It's a different genre and style of game so the design should reflect that.

What people could tolerate or not notice in one game will stick out like a sore thumb in another

NPC AI for example. Same limitations as W3, but you're not really going to notice like you would in Cyberpunk

The first person perspective definitely makes the dumb AI (or lack of "intelligence" of any kind) stand out way more. I'll agree with that.

Still, I don't think it's fair to say they didn't update their design to reflect the new genre and perspective. They finally actually have good movement and gameplay. I love The Witcher series, but the movement and combat have never felt good or been particularly satisfying. They absolutely nailed both in Cyberpunk.

They also did a lot of great stuff with the first person perspective, giving a greater sense of immersion to me at least.

And then there's the architecture and structure of the city. An incredible accomplishment by any metric and there's really nothing quite like it in video games.

 

[SLoco]

Another enjoyable review but let's face it, the game's troubles are low hanging fruit for his schtick.
I swear I have played hours and hours of the game on all 3 systems (XSX,PS5, and PC) and maybe ran across 10% of what he is showing.
I wonder if the bulk of the review was scored on the day one patch version.
I freaking love the game but 6/10 is probably a fair score if you access everything wrong with it.

I started playing one month after game came out and i had everything he shown and worse.Every mission was bugged,glitched or some other thing that went wrong,npc's totally broken including world events not spawning even do u could hear them which made city feel dead..Game was broken so after few hours i just restarted as nomad and all sudden game worked better lol.No bugs/glitches in main missions ,npc's now in animation and interacting with each others and world instantly felt more alive and vibrating.I am still getting bugs like- side missions i can't finish,relic malfunctioning screen making my screen blurry so i have to keep replying same mission over and over till it works and lets not forget phone calls you can't hang up 24/7(most notably delamain who keeps calling to remind about his missing cars every time i drive into new area).

I am still playing game enjoying having fun but unlike witcher 3 were i felt ''they finished game and kept adding more and more'' over here i feel they cut lot from main game so it can be added in Multiplayer.Also i kinda feel this was RPG at start then they decided to go for action/gta style,then looter shooter,ubisoft style game with checkpoints to clear and so on,it feels they attempted to appeal to everyone.

I am supporting them to finish game properly but gamers should not be silent and let this go without consequences or next game will be Witcher 76 back in velen and beyond.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

I'd say its exactly because Cyberpunk uses the same design philosophy as W3 that it gets hated on. It's a different genre and style of game so the design should reflect that.

What people could tolerate or not notice in one game will stick out like a sore thumb in another

NPC AI for example. Same limitations as W3, but you're not really going to notice like you would in Cyberpunk

ehhh, I wasn't exactly playing this game in such away that the NPC interactivity mattered that much. but maybe that's me. the only way it would matter is if you are...trying to play the game like you would play fallout or GTA.

but I don't think this really is that different of a genre, it's an open world RPG, as the witcher 3 was.

they intended on bringing the great things that CDPR typically does, to this world.

it's the people fault however, if they automatically correlate it to an out of genre GTA or something simply because they see guns and cars. super simplistic way of articulating the game.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

The first person perspective definitely makes the dumb AI (or lack of "intelligence" of any kind) stand out way more. I'll agree with that.

Still, I don't think it's fair to say they didn't update their design to reflect the new genre and perspective. They finally actually have good movement and gameplay. I love The Witcher series, but the movement and combat have never felt good or been particularly satisfying. They absolutely nailed both in Cyberpunk.

They also did a lot of great stuff with the first person perspective, giving a greater sense of immersion to me at least.

And then there's the architecture and structure of the city. An incredible accomplishment by any metric and there's really nothing quite like it in video games.

No they definitley updated it other ways

I think my example is just a matter of not that they didn't want to do, they just didn't have the time or whatever. Same with V being a pre-defined characte which just doesn't feel like it fits

Definitley agree with the first person though. I'm not sure what it is, maybe the way the camera moves or just the way characters look at you, but it does give you that sense of the immersion that I don't get from other first person games

 

[harmny]

The first person perspective definitely makes the dumb AI (or lack of "intelligence" of any kind) stand out way more. I'll agree with that.

Still, I don't think it's fair to say they didn't update their design to reflect the new genre and perspective. They finally actually have good movement and gameplay. I love The Witcher series, but the movement and combat have never felt good or been particularly satisfying. They absolutely nailed both in Cyberpunk.

They also did a lot of great stuff with the first person perspective, giving a greater sense of immersion to me at least.

And then there's the architecture and structure of the city. An incredible accomplishment by any metric and there's really nothing quite like it in video games.

What makes it stand out even more is the barebones crime system. They never should've let the player kill random NPCs on the street. You are inviting people to compare the game to gta. I understand why they did it but you can't trust gamers to treat your game fairly. Don't give them the chance to criticize it. I have never seen so many people talk about random NPCs. Literally nobody cares about them in other games and they are even dumber.

they treated it as a deterrent. not a complex interaction system. something similar to what AC does. in valhalla you kill more than 2 civilians and boom game over desynchronized because even though you are a viking, a raider and a murderer, eivor didn't kill civilians i guess. well nobody cared.
in cyberpunk if you kill civilians boom here is the police spawning behind you. not because they want you to have fun with that system but because they want you to stop killing civilians because V is not a psycopath. a game over screen like AC would've been better.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

ehhh, I wasn't exactly playing this game in such away that the NPC interactivity mattered that much. but maybe that's me. the only way it would matter is if you are...trying to play the game like you would play fallout or GTA.

but I don't think this really is that different of a genre, it's an open world RPG, as the witcher 3 was.

they intended on bringing the great things that CDPR typically does, to this world.

it's the people fault however, if they automatically correlate it to an out of genre GTA or something simply because they see guns and cars. super simplistic way of articulating the game.

A further example of what I mean where the design philosophies clash in Cyberpunk whereas they don't in W3.

In W3 you're a monster hunter, that's the role you play and what the game tells you, and that gives you a set of rules you assume your character follows, which is why you accept you can't just RP as a bandit robbing peasants.

In contrast to Cyberpunk they do the opposite, they give you the impression that you can be whatever you want to be in the world, a criminal, or a sleezy corpo etc, but in truth you're playing as V, and he has his own goals and views, and the game works against you if you try to go off of that path.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

What makes it stand out even more is the barebones crime system. They never should've let the player kill random NPCs on the street. You are inviting people to compare the game to gta. I understand why they did it but you can't trust gamers to treat your game fairly. Don't give them the chance to criticize it. I have never seen so many people talk about random NPCs. Literally nobody cares about them in other games and they are even dumber.

they treated it as a deterrent. not a complex interaction system. something similar to what AC does. in valhalla you kill more than 2 civilians and boom game over desynchronized because even though you are a viking, a raider and a murderer, eivor didn't kill civilians i guess. well nobody cared.
in cyberpunk if you kill civilians boom here is the police spawning behind you. not because they want you to have fun with that system but because they want you to stop killing civilians because V is not a psycopath. a game over screen like AC would've been better.

Totally agree. The crime and police system (if you can even call it that) is inexcusably bad. It feels like a pre-alpha experimental implementation that somehow made it to the final product. The Valhalla desynchronization system (as ridiculous as it was given the setting) would be an improvement, because at least it would clearly set the rules for what V can and cannot do.

 

[harmny]

No they definitley updated it other ways

I think my example is just a matter of not that they didn't want to do, they just didn't have the time or whatever. Same with V being a pre-defined characte which just doesn't feel like it fits

Definitley agree with the first person though. I'm not sure what it is, maybe the way the camera moves or just the way characters look at you, but it does give you that sense of the immersion that I don't get from other first person games

V being a predefined character is a design choice. you decide that when you decide to have a voiced protagonist. especially in this day an age where production value is so high. you can't have a generic actor doing a flat voice so it fits with most personalities anymore. either you go all the way with a voiced protagonist or you don't have a voiced protagonist and then you have more flexibility in the personality department. and they did that because they already had experience with predefined protagonists. V is very similar to Geralt. that's how they do rpgs.

you may think that cyberpunk is different from the witcher 3 but it's actually the same.
- in the witcher 3 you are geralt with its own personality and you are a monster hunter (basically a mercenary). you can role play inside that role.

- in cyberpunk you are V with its own personality and a mercenary (basically a monster hunter, see?). and you can role play inside that role.

you may have the impression that the game is telling you that you can be whoever you want because you can choose your appearance and your gender or your origin story but that's not really the case. they are just expanding their system but you are still V.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

If you toned down your strawmans and passive aggresive responses you'd probably have an easier time finding the discussions you're looking for

please that conversation went exactly as expected lol I know certain responses are going to get the "im going to run away now" response. i even test people to see if they'll respond to something stupid, but easy to refute. and they do...every single time. so it's not about aggression, if the aggression is predicated upon something easy to refute people still respond lol

and by the way, i KNOW you ain't talkin lmao

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

V being a predefined character is a design choice. you decide that when you decide to have a voiced protagonist. especially in this day an age where production value is so high. you can't have a generic actor doing a flat voice so it fits with most personalities anymore. either you go all the way with a voiced protagonist or you don't have a voiced protagonist and then you have more flexibility in the personality department. and they did that because they already had experience with predefined protagonists. V is very similar to Geralt. that's how they do rpgs.

you may think that cyberpunk is different from the witcher 3 but it's actually the same.
- in the witcher 3 you are geralt with its own personality and you are a monster hunter (basically a mercenary). you can role play inside that role.

- in cyberpunk you are V with its own personality and a mercenary (basically a monster hunter, see?). and you can role play inside that role.

you may have the impression that the game is telling you that you can be whoever you want because you can choose your appearance and your gender or your origin story but that's not really the case. they are just expanding their system but you are still V.

See my response above

No I don't think Cyberpunk and W3 are different. They are the same, and that's the issue

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

please that conversation went exactly as expected lol I know certain responses are going to get the "im going to run away now" response. i even test people to see if they'll respond to something stupid, but easy to refute. and they do...every single time. so it's not about aggression, if the aggression is predicated upon something easy to refute people still respond lol

and by the way, i KNOW you ain't talkin lmao

You just sound like someone who can't start discussions without getting into some shitting contest. Those are the type people tend to avoid havind discussions with, or as you'd call it "run away"

 

[Rentahamster]

My personal score would probably be a 7 or 8 based on Angry Joe's scale, but I only ever played it on a (good) PC, and only after patch 1.05 came out. Joe's right. CDPR should have done better and should have been more honest. Personally I really like the game and have spent many hours on it, but that doesn't mean I can't recognize the game's flaws.

So much time spent complaining about bugs. I get it, but after every other review already doing the same thing it’s hard to get through this one weeks later. I skimmed past a lot of it. Some of the footage he used is even the same YouTube bug clips we’ve seen used over and over in a dozen other reviews. I know he puts a lot more effort into his reviews then most, but this isn’t really a good watch this late.

A lot of the bugs he showed was from his own livestreams. He actually did play the game on both console and PC and he actually did experience a lot of bugs. That's not his fault. That's CDPR's fault, and their responsibility.

 

[Mossybrew]

you may think that cyberpunk is different from the witcher 3 but it's actually the same.
- in the witcher 3 you are geralt with its own personality and you are a monster hunter (basically a mercenary). you can role play inside that role.

- in cyberpunk you are V with its own personality and a mercenary (basically a monster hunter, see?). and you can role play inside that role.

As a basic framework this is true. From here, the devil is in the details. The huge advantage they had using an established character with Geralt really shines through. He's a complex character with multiple motivations, his dedication to Ciri, his relationship with Yennefer, his upbringing and personal code, and just an overall interesting personality that has been developed over the course of many novels. Contrast that with V whose main motivations are .. "I want to make a name for myself in this city" and "I don't want to die cuz this chip in my head" - there's just not much of a character here at all.

 

[lukilladog]

I think it´s obvious that they hired a bunch of poorly prepared and non experienced people on the developing team and skimped big time on QA... while at the same time, lied about the game´s characteristics and performance, strong armed the media to hide the console version´s from public, and signed themselves into a contract with a company (Nvidia) which main purpose is to make the game perform poorly in order to push hardware sales (I wouldn´t be surprised if consoles are running the same shaders written by nvidia engineers). So I can´t disagree with extremely low scores, although personally I think they deserve a zero... for cheating, just like real life students and employees get zeroed when they are caught doing such a thing. 4-6/10 is a complacent score.

 

[SLoco]

- in cyberpunk you are V with its own personality and a mercenary (basically a monster hunter, see?). and you can role play inside that role.

you may have the impression that the game is telling you that you can be whoever you want because you can choose your appearance and your gender or your origin story but that's not really the case. they are just expanding their system but you are still V.

i think it would worked better if V worked for corpo from start without life paths.Corpo he work with is tasked with cleaning streets from criminals as paramilitary unit because real cops cant manage everything.
NCPD missions would feel much better and gigs could have been way bosses are giving secret missions against other corpos and gangs.
Real story then kicks in with jacky and they do shit together for whatever reason V decided(greed,corruption,hypocracy,ideals or whatever).

He could then get heat from other gangs/corpos who would chase him around ,KOS when entering gang turf and if V decided he could do dirty work for them thus lowering heat.Like this honestly i feel like am just clearing checkpoints outside main missions.I mean hes doing all kind of shit all around town and everyone knows him and what he do without consequences.Considering COPS are broken as they just spawn behind you till you die that would be good way to get immersed more into world.

 

[xrnzaaas]

you basically just said that because the game has cool shit, you expect more lmao

because bethesda games have no cool shit, you expect less.

human psychology is a problem.

and what exactly are you trying to do in this game that the police are even that much of a focus for you? they certainly aren't for me, trying to go on GTA rampages or something?

What I meant is that there's a lot of cool stuff in the game, but you're the only one using it. I'd love it if enemies were using advanced weaponry & implants to force the player to be creative instead of picking them off from a distance or from behind cover like in any other game with shooting mechanics.

As for the cops, it's not that difficult to get into trouble. All it takes is accidentally shooting a civilian while trying to kill gang members (in many areas they're in public places) or throwing a grenade which harms innocent bystanders. I had this happen to me during many NCPD calls and I had to move away from the area, because in this game you don't kill the cops and have a moment of peace. More and more reinforcements spawn very quickly (not with a delay like in GTA) and you're basically choosing between dying and running away to lose police stars.

 

[RyRy93]

I think a lot of low scores from reviewers boil down to being disappointed with how the game turned out vs. expectations, not really about the merits of the game. At the same time a review is a personal opinion, so he has the right to score it however he wants.

I think the same, as far as revolutionary open world games go it might be a 6/10 but reviewing this on its own merits on PC as anything less than a 8/10 I struggle to comprehend.

 

[Ricky_Bee]

As a basic framework this is true. From here, the devil is in the details. The huge advantage they had using an established character with Geralt really shines through. He's a complex character with multiple motivations, his dedication to Ciri, his relationship with Yennefer, his upbringing and personal code, and just an overall interesting personality that has been developed over the course of many novels. Contrast that with V whose main motivations are .. "I want to make a name for myself in this city" and "I don't want to die cuz this chip in my head" - there's just not much of a character here at all.

Being a Witcher - a sort of freelance blue collar monster exterminator - is just a very hooky premise. CP2077 is weaker for not having something equivalent.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

You just sound like someone who can't start discussions without getting into some shitting contest. Those are the type people tend to avoid havind discussions with, or as you'd call it "run away"

Yet people still quote my shit all the fucking time lol so im not sure what you're talking about.

And if i respond to something i disagree with, then yeah its going to be a shitting contest. As all these convos are, some are just trying to be more diplomatic about it than others.

But it is running away when i know when a certain point is made, people dissappear.

Everyone disappears when they are asked about what they are comparing it to. Everybody is happy to debate with me until that point comes up.

So its definately more so about the specific point, rather than an over arching theme.

Theres a fucking reason why the majority of people dont want to answer that specific question. And i expect them to run away every fucking time.

To which i jusy say "haha exactly"

You can easily disnantle that statement by coming up with something, but we all know there isnt a sometjing, so the dissappearing act ensues.

So stop trying to pretend these people arent conveniently disappearing when asked what games they are comparing this one to within its genre

 

[Ricky_Bee]

I think the same, as far as revolutionary open world games go it might be a 6/10 but reviewing this on its own merits on PC as anything less than a 8/10 I struggle to comprehend.

It is a very inconsistent game. Bits of it are truly wonderful and others just kind of average.

But there is a lot of it.

I think its a must play. I defy anyone to not get something from it.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

And if i respond to something i disagree with, then yeah its going to be a shitting contest. As all these convos are, some are just trying to be more diplomatic about it than others.

But it is running away when i know when a certain point is made, people dissappear.

Everyone disappears when they are asked about what they are comparing it to. Everybody is happy to debate with me until that point comes up.

So its definately more so about the specific point, rather than an over arching theme.

Theres a fucking reason why the majority of people dont want to answer that specific question. And i expect them to run away every fucking time.

To which i jusy say "haha exactly"

You can easily disnantle that statement by coming up with something, but we all know there isnt a sometjing, so the dissappearing act ensues.

So stop trying to pretend these people arent conveniently disappearing when asked what games they are comparing this one to within its genre

Why not just ask "why" instead of immediatley jumping down people's throat about how shit Skyrim is when you get triggered over x game getting critised?

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

Why not just ask "why" instead of immediatley jumping down people's throat about how shit Skyrim is when you get triggered over x game getting critised?

Why what? Are you still salty i talked shit about that game you liked skyrim lol

Werent we talking about quests? Pretty sure all i asked was what is the open world action rpg he is refrencing that exceeds this one in the writing department in quests. Since he implied they are poor.

Thats a question that actually gets to the core of how the person thinks, and also gives them a moment of reflection to consider whether or not they are being consistent in their scrutiny of this game.

Not sure why that question is a problem for you people. Oh, because it does exactly what i mentioned above, thats why. So now were talking about anything but that lol

Motherfuckers just dont want to """lose"""

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Why what? Are you still salty i talked shit about that game you liked skyrim lol

Werent we talking about quests? Pretty sure all i asked was what is the open world action rpg he is refrencing that exceeds this one in the writing department in quests. Since he implied they are poor.

Thats a question that actually gets to the core of how the person thinks, and also gives them a moment of reflection to consider whether or not they are being consistent in their scrutiny of this game.

Not sure why that question is a problem for you people. Oh, because it does exactly what i mentioned above, thats why. So now were talking about anything but that lol

Motherfuckers just dont want to """lose"""

You brought up Skyrim or bethesda games multiple times in that thread, and you're doing it again in this thread, which I why I brought it up, because you seem to have a wierd complex about it. You push that obsession of Skyrim onto others for whatever reason.

If I think x is mediocre and you challenge me to compare it to other games, is that supposed to make it not mediocre if i can't? Of course not, which is why your question is worthless

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

You brought up Skyrim or bethesda games multiple times in that thread, and you're doing it again in this thread, which I why I brought it up, because you seem to have a wierd complex about it. You push that obsession of Skyrim onto others for whatever reason.

If I think x is mediocre and you challenge me to compare it to other games, is that supposed to make it not mediocre if I can't? Of course not, which is why your question is worthless

Yes, thats the definition of not being mediocre.

It implies that your level of scrutiny is also inconsistent. Your level of scrutiny also implies you carry a "higher standard" when it comes to quests, and standard is usually predicated upon a better experience.

So i simply ask...what was this better experience? Oh highbrow one whos standards are clearly higher than myself? Educate me master.

Oh you cant think of a game within its genre with better quests in combination with everything else its doing? Then looks like its not fucking mediocre, or you simply think all games are meiocre. Which is a fine statement to also make, but nobody is saying that.

And regarding skyrim, i know most of you like that game lol thats why. I usually bring it up to bait people into doing what you did and saying something like "skyrim was a better rpg!"

So basically it gives me more information about the people i may potentially be arguing with. I now know what games you feel are superior, and i have an idea of what you prioritize

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Yes, thats the definition of not being mediocre.

It implies that your level of scrutiny is also inconsistent. Your level of scrutiny also implies you carry a "higher standard" when it comes to quests, and standard is usually predicated upon a better experience.

So i simply ask...what was this better experience? Oh highbrow one whos standards are clearly higher than myself? Educate me master.

Oh you cant think of a game within its genre with better quests in combination with everything else its doing? Then looks like its not fucking mediocre, or you simply think all games are meiocre. Which is a fine statement to also make, but nobody is saying that.

And regarding skyrim, i know most of you like that game lol thats why

No it's just you and how predictable you are with your added criteria that just makes your stance fall flat.

i.e

I'll call the games quests mediocre because of the boring writing and characters and you'll ask me to compare it to other games

I can easily say Dragon Age, or Mass Effect are better because I think the writing and characters are more interesting

But no, you want me to list open world games,

Okay, then there's Divinity Orginal Sin 2

Nope can't be isometric

So i'll say RDR2 or Fallout New Vegas

But no those won't count either, because Cyberpunk has a massive interconnected city compared to Fallout's barren open world, or that Cyberpunk has open ended mission design compared to RDR2 linear mission design

And all we've actually learned in the end, is that Cyberpunk does things other games don't. Do those things make the writing and characters more interesting? Nah. So the original critique still stands.

Pick a different game other than Skyrim, yup its highly rated and we've all put loads of hours into it, but we're not blind to its glaring flaws

 

[harmny]

See my response above

No I don't think Cyberpunk and W3 are different. They are the same, and that's the issue

i personally liked that the game was basically an iteration of the witcher 3 formula because i loved the witcher 3. i judge a game based on what the game is trying to do at its core.

and where you say the game clashes with the design i'll respond to you and the guy below

As a basic framework this is true. From here, the devil is in the details. The huge advantage they had using an established character with Geralt really shines through. He's a complex character with multiple motivations, his dedication to Ciri, his relationship with Yennefer, his upbringing and personal code, and just an overall interesting personality that has been developed over the course of many novels. Contrast that with V whose main motivations are .. "I want to make a name for myself in this city" and "I don't want to die cuz this chip in my head" - there's just not much of a character here at all.

i guess what you are trying to say is if you are going to go with a predefined protagonist you need go all the way. its true cdpr fell somewhere in the middle. like they want you to "make" your own V but at the same time V has their own personality and motivations. or they want you to be a mercenary and focus on quests but they let you kill civilians implementing a barebones crime system that does more harm than good. or they let you drive all these cars but you can't customize them. or put them in a garage.

but while you see all of these things as pitfalls i see them also as a plus. i see those things as an improvement over a more restrictive witcher 3 formula. the core of the game is intact. you can play the game as the narrative driven witcher 3 and it's an great game (subjective of course. if you hate the writing you are not going to like it) but also now cdpr is showing signs of going beyond that.

in the witcher 3 you only had roach. one horse for the entire game.
now you have a lot of cars. it's an improvement. the system could be better yes. but it's still an improvement

in the witcher 3 there was no law system. you couldn't kill civilians
now you can. the implementation is not good. but you can do it and they'll probably fix that because of the backlash.

in the witcher 3 you couldn't change geralt's appearance. just his hairstyle
now you can choose how V looks and their gender. you have 2 voice actors. again it could be better. but it's an improvement.

and those things are not even the core of the game because if we look at the core of the game.
the movement is an improvement
the combat is an improvement
there is no stealth in the witcher 3.
the skill tree is an improvement.
and the origin stories might not be super deep but they do give you different dialogue options or lore and new ways to solve quests and you don't something like that in witcher 3

they improved many things. not perfectly but they did. the message people are giving developers when they bash these things nonstop instead of focusing on the core of the game is "next time don't even try. just cut those features". i've seen countless people saying "yeah i love the story and the combat ist good but the ai is so bad. worse than a ps2 game the game is crap 5/10" and that is really unfair. there is a completely playable narrative driven open world game here. (not counting bugs)

having said that. not liking the writing is subjective. and it's clear that both of you didn't like it so everything else falls apart easier.

 

[Batiman]

He plays on PC no? PC players here seemed to say it was only the console versions that were broken...

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

No it's just you and how predictable you are with your added criteria that just makes your stance fall flat.

i.e

I'll call the games quests mediocre because of the boring writing and characters and you'll ask me to compare it to other games

I can easily say Dragon Age, or Mass Effect are better because I think the writing and characters are more interesting

But no, you want me to list open world games,

So i'll say RDR2 or Fallout New Vegas

But no those won't count either, because Cyberpunk has a massive interconnected city compared to Fallout's barren open world, or that Cyberpunk has open ended mission design compared to RDR2 linear mission design

And all we've actually learned in the end, is that Cyberpunk does things other games don't. Do those things make the writing and characters more interesting? Nah. So the original critique still stands.

Pick a different game other than Skyrim, yup its highly rated and we've all put loads of hours into it, but we're not blind to its glaring flaws

No it's just you and how predictable you are with your added criteria that just makes your stance fall flat.

i.e

I'll call the games quests mediocre because of the boring writing and characters and you'll ask me to compare it to other games

I can easily say Dragon Age, or Mass Effect are better because I think the writing and characters are more interesting

But no, you want me to list open world games,

Okay, then there's Divinity Orginal Sin 2

Nope can't be isometric

So i'll say RDR2 or Fallout New Vegas

But no those won't count either, because Cyberpunk has a massive interconnected city compared to Fallout's barren open world, or that Cyberpunk has open ended mission design compared to RDR2 linear mission design

And all we've actually learned in the end, is that Cyberpunk does things other games don't. Do those things make the writing and characters more interesting? Nah. So the original critique still stands.

Pick a different game other than Skyrim, yup its highly rated and we've all put loads of hours into it, but we're not blind to its glaring flaws

"Predictable" a.k.a. "i know these titles im going to list arent strong enough as a whole for someone not to call me out for my inconsistent scrutiny lol"

So basically, the only game you can compare it to within its genre is...fallout new vegas.

To which the quests are debatedly equal or better imo, and everything else is univerally agreed as shitter in presentation and gameplay. Okay, well atleast we know your gold standard.

Which is interesting, because lets say fallout has better quests by say....1 point. Lets just pretend that true, But say it has worse gameplay, presentation, weapon diversity and loot variety.

Its interesting that the game with only 1 point less in quest quality but exceeds it in every ither category, is a 6/10 game. Doesnt make much sense to me at all. But hey. Inconsistent scrutiny

Weve all played mass effect, not really seeing where that is shitting on cyberpunk quest wise to such a degree that you would call these quests mediocre, ME was great but not that damn great, but hey if you really think that it shits on CP quests so be it i guess

Rdr2, rdr2 had some great missions but also i cant say that every mission was better than say...the one with river and the serial killer or others. Also it had alot missions that resulted in just....shootouts. but hey thats just me, also not an rpg.

But hey atleast we know your...bar? I suppose. Thats all i was looking for, nothing more would need to be said. I got the information i was looking for and i know your tastes

Another bethesda esque title:

Fallout new vegas

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Which is interesting, because lets say fallout has better quests by say....1 point. Lets just pretend that true, But say it has worse gameplay, presentation, weapon diversity and loot variety.

Its interesting that the game with only 1 point less in quest quality but exceeds it in every ither category, is a 6/10 game. Doesnt make much sense to me at all. But hey. Inconsistent scrutiny

Weve all played mass effect, not really seeing where that is shitting on cyberpunk quest wise to such a degree that you would call these quests mediocre, ME was great but not that damn great, but hey if you really think that it shits on CP quests so be it i guess

Rdr2, rdr2 had some great missions but also i cant say that every mission was better than say...the one with river and the serial killer or others. Also it had alot missions that resulted in just....shootouts. but hey thats just me, also not an rpg.

But hey atleast we know your...bar? I suppose. Thats all i was looking for, nothing more would need to be said. I got the information i was looking for and i know your tastes

Fallout new vegas

See, completely predictable

The original critique is about diologue and characters, but you can't help yourself talk about all the other aspects of the game that don't relate to either of those

This is exactly why Mossybrew didn't bother to continue with you. We all see the goal post moving a mile away

 

[Stuart360]

so you're going to act like the panam quests, river quests, main quest content weren't better written than the majority of open world rpg's right now lol okay.

let me guess, skyrim killed it though with it's kill draugrs in caves quests lol

I swear you guys act like games are killing this right now. they fucking aren't lol

You know its fine to like the game, to love the game. Its also fine for people to not feel the same, so yeah enough with the defending and attacking people.
I'd give the game a 7/10. Its a mess but there is a great game under that mess.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

See, completely predictable

The original critique is about diologue and characters, but you can't help yourself talk about all the other aspects of the game that don't relate to either of those

This is exactly why Mossybrew didn't bother to continue with you. We all see the goal post moving a mile away

See, completely predictable

The original critique is about diologue and characters, but you can't help yourself talk about all the other aspects of the game that don't relate to either of those

This is exactly why Mossybrew didn't bother to continue with you. We all see the goal post moving a mile away

I addressed your quest comments, and acknowledged that thats your bar, the other comment was just an additional thought. Is that an issue?

You act as if i completely ignored your comments about the quests lol

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

i personally liked that the game was basically an iteration of the witcher 3 formula because i loved the witcher 3. i judge a game based on what the game is trying to do at its core.

and where you say the game clashes with the design i'll respond to you and the guy below



i guess what you are trying to say is if you are going to go with a predefined protagonist you need go all the way. its true cdpr fell somewhere in the middle. like they want you to "make" your own V but at the same time V has their own personality and motivations. or they want you to be a mercenary and focus on quests but they let you kill civilians implementing a barebones crime system that does more harm than good. or they let you drive all these cars but you can't customize them. or put them in a garage.

but while you see all of these things as pitfalls i see them also as a plus. i see those things as an improvement over a more restrictive witcher 3 formula. the core of the game is intact. you can play the game as the narrative driven witcher 3 and it's an great game (subjective of course. if you hate the writing you are not going to like it) but also now cdpr is showing signs of going beyond that.

in the witcher 3 you only had roach. one horse for the entire game.
now you have a lot of cars. it's an improvement. the system could be better yes. but it's still an improvement

in the witcher 3 there was no law system. you couldn't kill civilians
now you can. the implementation is not good. but you can do it and they'll probably fix that because of the backlash.

in the witcher 3 you couldn't change geralt's appearance. just his hairstyle
now you can choose how V looks and their gender. you have 2 voice actors. again it could be better. but it's an improvement.

and those things are not even the core of the game because if we look at the core of the game.
the movement is an improvement
the combat is an improvement
there is no stealth in the witcher 3.
the skill tree is an improvement.
and the origin stories might not be super deep but they do give you different dialogue options or lore and new ways to solve quests and you don't something like that in witcher 3

they improved many things. not perfectly but they did. the message people are giving developers when they bash these things nonstop instead of focusing on the core of the game is "next time don't even try. just cut those features". i've seen countless people saying "yeah i love the story and the combat ist good but the ai is so bad. worse than a ps2 game the game is crap 5/10" and that is really unfair. there is a completely playable narrative driven open world game here. (not counting bugs)

having said that. not liking the writing is subjective. and it's clear that both of you didn't like it so everything else falls apart easier.

Yeah, that's basically it.

I would probably have found V much more interesting if they did away with his blank slate and lifepaths, give him a real background introduction, i.e the montage with jackie, letting us really get a feel for everything before having shit hit the fan

 

[EDMIX]

I started playing one month after game came out and i had everything he shown and worse.Every mission was bugged,glitched or some other thing that went wrong,npc's totally broken including world events not spawning even do u could hear them which made city feel dead..Game was broken so after few hours i just restarted as nomad and all sudden game worked better lol.No bugs/glitches in main missions ,npc's now in animation and interacting with each others and world instantly felt more alive and vibrating.I am still getting bugs like- side missions i can't finish,relic malfunctioning screen making my screen blurry so i have to keep replying same mission over and over till it works and lets not forget phone calls you can't hang up 24/7(most notably delamain who keeps calling to remind about his missing cars every time i drive into new area).

I am still playing game enjoying having fun but unlike witcher 3 were i felt ''they finished game and kept adding more and more'' over here i feel they cut lot from main game so it can be added in Multiplayer.Also i kinda feel this was RPG at start then they decided to go for action/gta style,then looter shooter,ubisoft style game with checkpoints to clear and so on,it feels they attempted to appeal to everyone.

I am supporting them to finish game properly but gamers should not be silent and let this go without consequences or next game will be Witcher 76 back in velen and beyond.

Agreed as that is how I actually feel. No reason in such a game with such a well made world in terms of layout and design, to then fucking shove all the missions in your phone every 10 seconds having all this fluff and filler load up. It felt rushed and lazy, like they didn't even fucking want to place those missions in the open world. How about let me met those contacts in a bar or club instead after another mission and naturally interact and pick up jobs vs "hey I have a bunch missions for you" random text. The bad AI just kills the game, what is even the point of epic fire fights if you have braindead AI that won't chase you? Won't hack into you controlling your body or something. It just comes across as lazy as shit. I would believe based on this games subject matter that the AI should be some of the deadliest.

Witcher 3 had a messy launch, but outside of that free dlc they kept releasing I didn't feel it had as much cut content as this title here entire systems are cut. I have nothing against them adding in a few things post launch that were unfinished, but cop chases? entire fucking AI systems? The hell is this?

I fully agree with your last point as well. This can't go without consequence as I felt the community (especially journalist) should have called out Witcher 3's launch as they had no issue doing so with AC Unity, maybe we wouldn't even be seeing this type of launch with CP2077 if it wasn't for so many turning a blind eye to all the issues with Witcher 3 that mirrored AC Unity.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I addressed your quest comments, and acknowledged that thats your bar, the other comment was just an additional thought. Is that an issue?

You act as if i completely ignored your comments about the quests lol

You already admitted your purpose here is to try and attack and break down other people's views on the game for some gatchas.

You're only acting like some diplomat now because your flawed premise has been exposed. You're not fooling anyone lol

 

[r e p]

He's so annoying.

 

[CartoonsNCereal]

You know its fine to like the game, to love the game. Its also fine for people to not feel the same, so yeah enough with the defending and attacking people.
I'd give the game a 7/10. Its a mess but there is a great game under that mess.

You already admitted your purpose here is to try and attack and break down other people's views on the game for some gatchas.

You're only acting like some diplomat now because your flawed premise has been exposed. You're not fooling anyone lol

Lol a diplomat? Jeesh maybe that last post was too nice im slippin.

What "premise"?, i already knew that most people like you wouldnt want to highlight that their game of comparison is fucking fallout new vegas lol

Most people are smart enough to avoid that, hence why they run at that point. Thats why i like you, your combative nature overrides all your senses. I expect people to see the trap ahead, but its still a proper question to ask to get a feel for people.

And the premise was to see what your standard was, and i got that. Do i disagree that those quests are shitting on this games, absolutely. But atleast now i know that the scrutiny is inconsistent. You get to expose yourself that way with minimal work on my end

Btw not to be mean to mossybrew, but your siding with a guy who didnt like the game because "too much talking" lol so yeah...im not feeling too insulted nor surprised he couldnt continue.

Probably was too much talking

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Lol a diplomat? Jeesh maybe that last post was too nice im slippin.

What "premise"?, i already knew that most people like you wouldnt want to highlight that their game of comparison is fucking fallout new vegas lol

Most people are smart enough to avoid that, hence why they run at that point. Thats why i like you, your combative nature overrides all your senses. I expect people to see the trap ahead, but its still a proper question to ask to get a feel for people.

And the premise was to see what your standard was, and i got that. Do i disagree that those quests are shitting on this games, absolutely. But atleast now i know that the scrutiny is inconsistent. You get to expose yourself that way with minimal work on my end

Btw not to be mean to mossybrew, but your siding with a guy who didnt like the game because "too much talking" lol so yeah...im not feeling too insulted nor surprised he couldnt continue.

Probably was too much talking

Fallout New Vegas is better than Cyberpunk

The only thing you can get out of that statement is that the person views Fallout in higher regard than Cyberpunk for whatever reason, could be they don't like the Cyberpunk setting, could be they think the characters and diologue is boring. It's not a black and white statement, so what information are you even supposed to be extracting from that?

Oh and yeah, if a person isn't interested in the diologue and just wants to engage in the combat, then yeah "too much talking" is also a valid critique. Were you one of the people who shat on that IGN reviewer who critiqued pokemon for having "too much water"? Wouldn't suprise me given your approach to context