• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Cyberpunk 2077 Better than Witcher 3

Kupfer

Member
I had my problems with The Witcher 3 and I had my Problems with CP2077, but at least I finished CP2077 and saw the credits while I'm still halfway through my 3rd attempt beating The Witcher 3. At some point I'm always getting bored and stop playing. I thought the next gen upgrade will make me play Witcher 3 again, but well, still waiting.
 

usp84

Member
I really liked CP 2077 and i played it day 1(on PC) without whatever improvements they have made since then.

BUT the Witcher 3 is a best game of the generation kind of game.

To be honest i don't think CDPR will ever recreate what made that game so magical and a masterpiece.
 

Bernardougf

Gold Member
3MYMK2i.jpg
 
The actual gameplay in Cyberpunk is obviously better than The Witcher 3, but everything else about Cyberpunk (the characters, the story, the sidequests, the uh "worldfeel" or immersion or whatever) mostly is way worse. It really depends what kind of game you want. I like both.

It does sour me a lot on Cyberpunk though how little they really explore the world. The sidequest with the political candidate was cool and the game should have had more little stories like that instead of shit like the worst sidequest of all time where you swim in the water and listen to a woman talking about nothing much for what feels like half an hour (Judy stans are clinically braindead btw)

They need to hurry up and get Witcher 3 next-gen out so I can have more fresh opinions on that game... Shoulda just let the Sabre Interactive Russian studio finish it off imo... Now they're doing it in house so it'll probably be a buggy piece of shit lol
 
Last edited:

STARSBarry

Gold Member
Launch was a disaster everyone on the planet agrees. This is about the content of the game post new gen version.

CDPR improved massively over the Witcher 3. The storytelling was just as good with better animations. The plot was properly sophisticated to match the Sci-Fi setting. The script was professional and made Keanu Reeves seem like a decent actor. The endings were meaningfully different. The music was perfectly melded, evocative tunes matching the proper moments. The City was colorful, beautiful with diverse settings. the The gameplay wasn't Doom or Eden Ring but was one of the best in a mainstream guns&cars open world game. Much better and compelling than Farcry or GTA.

Confidant CDPR will make a big rebound. Can't wait for their next game.

dee.jpg
 

yamaci17

Member
characters and story felt very organic with Cyberpunk, more down to earth
witcher 3 has more fantasy elements, cyberpunk story is more beliveable (that kind of tech stuff will probably became something of a reality in very distant future). maybe you like that kind of stuff more so its understandable. i wouldnt put one above other however, i like them both equally. they're both great stories. though i would also say dialogues have improved over W3. w3 have more lows than cyberpunk so more attention was given to it
the core difference i guess with people that some did not like keanu's performance, while some did. i liked it, i enjoyed it whenever he appeared and made a snarky remark. some may not like that. i respect all opinions. i simply liked his presence throughout the game, and ity became more meaningful for me when thought alongside with the plot. of course he will try to make remarks, put yourself in his boots, try to sympatheize, you will understand. even us normal humans do this when we visit a country we lived 20 years ago. you will always make weird remarks about "this joint was used to be like this, that stuff was used to be like that" etc. it was organic to me

although biggest complaint i had was about peralez questline. it didn't have a proper closure. we should've even interacted with Holt. maybe have more branching storylines regarding this. i had so much hype and fun when playing the quest. then it adruptly ended. we didn't even see holt winning in a quest or anything. learned it from TV show/news. dunno, i felt like there could've been more stuff to do about them.
 
Last edited:

Justin9mm

Member
The best thing CP2077 did was open the door for a AAA dev to hopefully come along and take the idea which was too ambitious for CDPR and make a proper AAA Cyberpunk style game. There was some really cool futuristic shit and ideas that we hadn't seen in other games and it just makes me want to see more of that but not with CDPR.

As I've said before their ambition out weighed their talent. I liked the game because of the setting and the lore. But the game as an overall package was a little bit of a let down. Bugs aside it was still a little rough around the edges.

I respect their effort even though it ultimately fell short of expectations.
 

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
The cyberpunk hate lasted for a minute it’s hangover story was “being buggy” at launch and it was saved by patches which is the normal and not surprising in 2020s.
 

RavageX

Member
Some of you do too much drugs and just like to make things up. The voice acting was mostly poor and money could be saved by just using a good voice actor instead of a celebrity.

Open world is definitely not good. Red dead, GTA as it beat worlds over. Peds seem lively, not repeats of the same ones that do absolutely nothing.

Side Mission structure is poor too, and feels half assed.
 
Last edited:

Tomeru

Member
While I agree that in terms of options GTA and RDR are probably the best in the genre, I think the execution is lame and they are some of the worst feeling games moment to moment I played (granted not much).

I disliked W3 mainly because I didnt like playing a balerino with a sword.

CP2077 has the best city in a video game imo, and while the gameplay is nothing new or earth shaterring, its still heads more fun than the other games mentioned. The story is one the (if noth the) best scifi/cp stories in a video game Ive had the pleasure of experiencing, the characters are fucking great, the quests are cool, and the endings are amazing.

Its a great fucking game.
 

Roni

Gold Member
Sure but there's another 20 more in W3.
20 more? There was not 20 more. 6, 7? Sure.

6 or 7 extra quests with some backstory isn't much considering they were working with fantasy and had a streak of 2 other fantasy games before that. Cyberpunk was a fresh start in genre. They'll continue to develop themselves and build on top of what they have, just like before.

The next cyberpunk will be even better, Witcher 4 will be even better. They'll continue to push themselves. But it should be undeniable that working with the density of a city is much more intensive than working with the vast nothingness of a stretch of rural Europe.
 
Last edited:

Mozzarella

Member
I see many people saying Cyberpunk gameplay is better and i dont understand how so.
It's probably the people who prefer more options and quantity than quality which is valid way after all.
Cyberpunk does offer more weapons and playstyle but they are more shallow than Witcher.

For example: In Cyberpunk you have X encounter, to interact with the game you can either fight your way in, or sneak and use stealth or hack them. 3 majorly different ways to tackle your encounter.
The thing here is that: fighting your way in is the only one way that is decent enough imo and thats largely because of the good gunplay, you have good bunch of fun weapons to use which is indeed superior to the swordplay in Witcher 3 where you are stuck with 2 swords that barely evolve with movesets.
Aside from that the stealth in the game is barebones and totally underwhelming, the A.I is awful and the stealth mechanics are extremely shallow and amount to takedowns only, you can't even use stealth tools like in Splinter Cell or Metal Gear.
The hacking is just as barebones, the way to play your hacking is also extremely shallow, you click TAB and choose the hack from a menu and thats it, you watch the NPC do something.
For a game that claimed to give the player engaging different playstlye it sure as hell failed imo, because only firing guns was somewhat fun, and i say somewhat because good gunplay alone barely carried it, the enemies cover and shoot are are not interesting, their A.I is that of the equivalent to Drowners, and their weapons/abilities are nothing to write home about either.
Because of their lackluster variety and how they all play the same way, Witcher 3 actually is more fun to me, because you have a huge number of different enemies and many of them have something new, such as using Aard to knock down a flying monster, or using Yrden to attack specters, or using the Yrden trap against a centipede, or baiting the black spiders and avoiding their web attack, or using fire and chain bombing those monsters who explode, and many more which made fighting them more fresh.
In contrast the Cyberpunk gangs i fight are always acting the same and doing the same things.

Another point i want to show is the Boss Fights, in Cyberpunk i have only fought 1 decent boss and thats Oda.
Adam Smasher was even worse than Wild Hunt bosses, let that sink in.
And any Cyberpsycho on the loose was more or less the same, in Witcher we had a lot more interesting boss fights, like that Witch for example, or Caretaker or Toad and many more. all of which can be fought using different means bombs, signs or generic slash attacks.

The use of potions, bombs and witcher tools felt more satisfying to me despite them not being essential to use which is a minor design flaw but they were there and added the right depth to the gameplay. And ofcourse i cant forget Gwent, a fun minigame.

Cyberpunk offers stats that help alter your gameplay, like you can use your strength stat to open doors but thats hardly necessary when the same stat called engineering could also open doors and all of that is just a click of a button, i wish we could have had more uses to these skills than simply clicking on a door or a dialogue choice for something that barely mattered.

I dont want to sound like im dunking on Cyberpunk here, but when i compare them the only things i would agree that are better in Cyberpunk are simply: 1- Controls are more responsive and fluid. 2- Gunplay in Cyberpunk is better than Swordplay in Witcher
Aside from that i would give the nod to Witcher and balance wise Cyberpunk is a mess. Witcher doesnt claim to give you more classes than Witcher, it gives you one class which is of a Witcher and did a decent job at it. Variety and playstyle wise its good, lacking a bit on stealth and traps but overall good, but mechanically it was mediocre.
Cyberpunk claims to give you more playstyles but only one of them is decent and thats due to gunplay and more options not because mechanically its good, and the others are so shallow you cant even compare them to any game that does it.
Even Skyrim and Fallout stealth and gameplay system which people tend to criticize offer more depth than Cyberpunk.

Imo Cyberpunk greatest issue after performance and open world is its gameplay because the writing was good and the level design was good.
 
Last edited:

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
How can you say that though?

Cops can't even do simple pathing orders and chase you in Cyberpunk.

The AI is some of the most shallow ever and cops just spawn behind you.

You're making blanket statements you can't back up with anything but "I like this thing more" and you are ignoring how static the open world is.

 

Guilty_AI

Member
How can you say that though?

Cops can't even do simple pathing orders and chase you in Cyberpunk.

The AI is some of the most shallow ever and cops just spawn behind you.

You're making blanket statements you can't back up with anything but "I like this thing more" and you are ignoring how static the open world is.


we went through this shit already







The best part is that a lot of these isn't even cyberpunk being exceptional. Its just cyberpunk doing the basic while GTA does a terribly bad job.
 
Last edited:

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
we went through this shit already







The best part is that a lot of these isn't even cyberpunk being exceptional. Its just cyberpunk doing the basic while GTA does a terribly bad job.

Those videos are something out of a propaganda reel all right.

Focusing on trivial details of the game.

Cyberpunk is not even as good an open world as the original GTA.
 

Roni

Gold Member
I see many people saying Cyberpunk gameplay is better and i dont understand how so.
It's probably the people who prefer more options and quantity than quality which is valid way after all.
Cyberpunk does offer more weapons and playstyle but they are more shallow than Witcher.

For example: In Cyberpunk you have X encounter, to interact with the game you can either fight your way in, or sneak and use stealth or hack them. 3 majorly different ways to tackle your encounter.
The thing here is that: fighting your way in is the only one way that is decent enough imo and thats largely because of the good gunplay, you have good bunch of fun weapons to use which is indeed superior to the swordplay in Witcher 3 where you are stuck with 2 swords that barely evolve with movesets.
Aside from that the stealth in the game is barebones and totally underwhelming, the A.I is awful and the stealth mechanics are extremely shallow and amount to takedowns only, you can't even use stealth tools like in Splinter Cell or Metal Gear.
The hacking is just as barebones, the way to play your hacking is also extremely shallow, you click TAB and choose the hack from a menu and thats it, you watch the NPC do something.
For a game that claimed to give the player engaging different playstlye it sure as hell failed imo, because only firing guns was somewhat fun, and i say somewhat because good gunplay alone barely carried it, the enemies cover and shoot are are not interesting, their A.I is that of the equivalent to Drowners, and their weapons/abilities are nothing to write home about either.
Because of their lackluster variety and how they all play the same way, Witcher 3 actually is more fun to me, because you have a huge number of different enemies and many of them have something new, such as using Aard to knock down a flying monster, or using Yrden to attack specters, or using the Yrden trap against a centipede, or baiting the black spiders and avoiding their web attack, or using fire and chain bombing those monsters who explode, and many more which made fighting them more fresh.
In contrast the Cyberpunk gangs i fight are always acting the same and doing the same things.

Another point i want to show is the Boss Fights, in Cyberpunk i have only fought 1 decent boss and thats Oda.
Adam Smasher was even worse than Wild Hunt bosses, let that sink in.
And any Cyberpsycho on the loose was more or less the same, in Witcher we had a lot more interesting boss fights, like that Witch for example, or Caretaker or Toad and many more. all of which can be fought using different means bombs, signs or generic slash attacks.

The use of potions, bombs and witcher tools felt more satisfying to me despite them not being essential to use which is a minor design flaw but they were there and added the right depth to the gameplay. And ofcourse i cant forget Gwent, a fun minigame.

Cyberpunk offers stats that help alter your gameplay, like you can use your strength stat to open doors but thats hardly necessary when the same stat called engineering could also open doors and all of that is just a click of a button, i wish we could have had more uses to these skills than simply clicking on a door or a dialogue choice for something that barely mattered.

I dont want to sound like im dunking on Cyberpunk here, but when i compare them the only things i would agree that are better in Cyberpunk are simply: 1- Controls are more responsive and fluid. 2- Gunplay in Cyberpunk is better than Swordplay in Witcher
Aside from that i would give the nod to Witcher and balance wise Cyberpunk is a mess. Witcher doesnt claim to give you more classes than Witcher, it gives you one class which is of a Witcher and did a decent job at it. Variety and playstyle wise its good, lacking a bit on stealth and traps but overall good, but mechanically it was mediocre.
Cyberpunk claims to give you more playstyles but only one of them is decent and thats due to gunplay and more options not because mechanically its good, and the others are so shallow you cant even compare them to any game that does it.
Even Skyrim and Fallout stealth and gameplay system which people tend to criticize offer more depth than Cyberpunk.

Imo Cyberpunk greatest issue after performance and open world is its gameplay because the writing was good and the level design was good.
That's a simplistic view of the design and its nuance. The challenge is packaging a modular experience one can go through not only in different order, but also different length and approach.

It's unfair to expect melee combat on par with a Soulslike. Melee is a small percentage of Cyberpunk but of much more importance for that particular Soulslike. And this is true for any other gameplay system.

The whole idea is offering a single story that can be played by a wide variation of characters. Those characters are comprised of parts that can be combined in a geometric progression.

If you want a game like that built in the same time as a Soulslike, them's the breaks.
 

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

1ekw86.jpg


Imagine calling FUNCTIONAL VENDORS, INTERIORS AND STEALTH trivial details while propping up water splashes as a meaningful feature.
The vast majority of buildings in Cyberpunk are not explorable, the combat is horrendous, and the game misses the most basic things like having NPC's that don't blip out of existence as soon as you turn around. They don't interact with each other either.

For instance,

- in GTA a cop car chases you get out of your car, shoot it out with them, people on the street might get involved and start shooting at you or the cops, explosion, ambulance comes, steal it, go hijack a plane at the airport.

- in Cyberpunk the car doesn't chase you and none of this happens.

There is no tangible AI in Cyberpunk so there are AI systems working off of each other to create the randomness that makes open worlds fun.

giphy.gif
 

Guilty_AI

Member
The vast majority of buildings in Cyberpunk are not explorable,
Still far more explorable buildings than GTA

the combat is horrendous,
If CP combat is horrendous, GTA combat is utter trash.

and the game misses the most basic things like having NPC's that don't blip out of existence as soon as you turn around.
Who cares.

They don't interact with each other either.
They do.

For instance,

- in GTA a cop car chases you get out of your car, shoot it out with them, people on the street might get involved and start shooting at you or the cops, explosion, ambulance comes, steal it, go hijack a plane at the airport.
Yet the open world lacks any meaningful activities, no functional stealth, 90% of the game events are scripted.

- in Cyberpunk the car doesn't chase you and none of this happens.
But you can enter multiple buildings, find loot, shoot it out with the enemies inside (or stealth around them), etc.

There is no tangible AI in Cyberpunk so there are AI systems working off of each other to create the randomness that makes open worlds fun.
Cyberpunk AI flanks you, throws grenades at you, work alongside each other with different enemy types to take you down and even get scared of you when you kill most of their unit.

GTA AI stands around shooting at you, occasionally taking cover, they don't even throw grenades

A bird's checkmate is worth as much as its poop.
 
Last edited:

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
Still far more explorable buildings than GTA





Who cares.
That's the whole thing about CyberPunk as a open world,

the whole world doesn't interact with itself.


At least GTA gets the living world right. Cyberpunk is dead and the combat is pretty crap too.

But who cares!
 

Guilty_AI

Member
That's the whole thing about CyberPunk as a open world,

the whole world doesn't interact with itself.
It does, i threw enemy gangs against each other in fact.

At least GTA gets the living world right.
GTA world crumbles apart as soon as you try to interact with it.

Cyberpunk is dead and the combat is pretty crap too.
Again, if CP combat is crap, GTA combat is utter trash. Have you seen the videos i posted? The game has DIFFERENT PHYSICS FOR GUNS depending on whether your on first person or third. There are basic elements that about every shooter out there does, like how bullet count or recoil works, that GTA still manages to fuck up somehow. Enemies instantly detect your position even if your far away, hidden inside a bush, with a silencer, they'll see you through buildings even

But who cares! Who cares about proper game design! Long live shrinking horseballs! Every game going forward should forsake fun and start spending their budget on pooping dogs with high res turds!
 
Last edited:

Kagero

Member
I personally love cyber punk due to its setting and gender. I can’t say if it is better than the Witcher because I too have never finished the Witcher due to not liking the medevil setting. All I can say is perhaps one is severely underrated.
 

Hayabusa83

Banned
I was excited to play this game after the big patch. First two hours were okay. Pretty cool gun models. Nice car models as well. I go do a mission, I get out of my car, and boom it disappears. Haven't played it since. I don't know if I downloaded the wrong update file, but the city is largely devoid of NPCs.
 

SJRB

Gold Member
"Is Cyberpunk better than GTAV" is such a goofy discussion. They are both fundamentally different games in so many ways.
 

Braag

Member
Still far more explorable buildings than GTA


If CP combat is horrendous, GTA combat is utter trash.


Who cares.


They do.


Yet the open world lacks any meaningful activities, no functional stealth, 90% of the game events are scripted.


But you can enter multiple buildings, find loot, shoot it out with the enemies inside (or stealth around them), etc.


Cyberpunk AI flanks you, throws grenades at you, work alongside each other with different enemy types to take you down and even get scared of you when you kill most of their unit.

GTA AI stands around shooting at you, occasionally taking cover, they don't even throw grenades


A bird's checkmate is worth as much as its poop.
Dude, you are arguing with GigaBowser about a CDPR game. Let it go lol. That guy has to be on someone's payroll for shitposting so much about them. No way in hell a normal healthy human being spends so much time hating and arguing about something they hate so much on an internet forum..

I understand this is NeoGaf and that is what most people come here to do
 

The Cockatrice

Gold Member
Focusing on trivial details of the game.

You play Cyberpunk to mess with the cops? Thats the dumbest thing ever. That is it. Thats the only thing haters got against CP. That the cops dont do shit, completely forgetting the fact that CP2077 is an immersive sim where you can play almost completely non-lethal, or maybe u just want to punch everyone or how about a ninja? You can complete missions in multiple ways but OH MY GOD THE COPS ARE USELESS WORST GAME EVER.
 
They're both pretty "meh". Cyberpunk is far less polished as far as the number of bugs in concerned, but at least I've managed to finish it. Bugs in Cyberpunk didn't bother me too much, I just disliked it because it's a quintessential soulless open-world junk. But Witcher isn't that much better. It's only good because it's based around an already established lore and can appeal to the gamers who "play for the story", which isn't all that difficult considering how low the standards are for writing in video games.
 

Saber

Gold Member
You play Cyberpunk to mess with the cops? Thats the dumbest thing ever. That is it. Thats the only thing haters got against CP. That the cops dont do shit, completely forgetting the fact that CP2077 is an immersive sim where you can play almost completely non-lethal, or maybe u just want to punch everyone or how about a ninja? You can complete missions in multiple ways but OH MY GOD THE COPS ARE USELESS WORST GAME EVER.

You can do this on Deus Ex HR, thats really nothing of a big deal.
If you use netrunner build in conjuction with stealth like I did, then thats a different idea.
 

khakimzhan

Member
You play Cyberpunk to mess with the cops? Thats the dumbest thing ever. That is it. Thats the only thing haters got against CP. That the cops dont do shit, completely forgetting the fact that CP2077 is an immersive sim where you can play almost completely non-lethal, or maybe u just want to punch everyone or how about a ninja? You can complete missions in multiple ways but OH MY GOD THE COPS ARE USELESS WORST GAME EVER.
That’s exactly what irritated me the most about CP2077 haters, freaking cops… I have never ever had a problem with that matter, I am not playing cop-chaser-simulator. The last thing a cared about is the fact that cops won’t chase me. Why in a world that would matter?
 

Shut0wen

Member
Gameplay wise definitely not, even W3 gameplay is stale cyberpunks is awful , literally any typical polish fps game, though dialog and animations are still pretty good though 6/10 game
 

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
You play Cyberpunk to mess with the cops? Thats the dumbest thing ever. That is it. Thats the only thing haters got against CP. That the cops dont do shit, completely forgetting the fact that CP2077 is an immersive sim where you can play almost completely non-lethal, or maybe u just want to punch everyone or how about a ninja? You can complete missions in multiple ways but OH MY GOD THE COPS ARE USELESS WORST GAME EVER.
If CDPR is going to include shootouts in an open world they should make them good.

Not shallow, immersion breaking and terrible.

So many excuses for Cyberpunk

-Who cares about the cops?
- Who cares about the NPC AI?
-Who cares about the world not being interactive?
- Who cares about the traffic and driving?
- Who cares about the clunky combat?

People are willing to compromise all of these things instead of say that they need to be worked on?

It's baffling to me.
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Member
I stopped at "it make reeves a decent actor".

His voice performance was somehow both boring and annoying.

But yeah of course the game has some aspects better than w3, but overall nah, w3 is the better game.
 
let's just agree that Keanu sucked
For the first few hours of the game, I agreed with you about Keanu's performance. His rocker-boy persona just seemed really forced and unbelievable as a whole. But after completing the game and getting close to the end of my second playthrough, I've grown to like or at least not dislike his performance as a terrorist/misunderstood hippie rocker. There is more nuance to his VO and motivations as a character the more you complete side-quests.
 
For the first few hours of the game, I agreed with you about Keanu's performance. His rocker-boy persona just seemed really forced and unbelievable as a whole. But after completing the game and getting close to the end of my second playthrough, I've grown to like or at least not dislike his performance as a terrorist/misunderstood hippie rocker. There is more nuance to his VO and motivations as a character the more you complete side-quests.

He talks... so... slowly

Really just feels like he's reading off a script most of the time and not doing a particularly good job of it
 
Last edited:

Guilty_AI

Member
There is more nuance to his VO and motivations as a character the more you complete side-quests.
True, even during his introduction sequence:

"Hot damn - done and gone"
"My husband died in that tower.
But there are fates worse than death..."
[silence]
"I, didn't want him to die."


I see lots of people complaining how johnny's character is unlikeable and obnoxious, saying he's just this edgy rockerboy persona, but this small sequence already paints a very different picture of the kind of person he is. Its that kind of "criticism" that makes me realize how much people just don't pay attention to stories in general.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom