-
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.
Is Cyberpunk much better than Starfield?
- Thread starter BootsLoader
- Start date
Slicker than your average
Banned
It's a loading screen.
But you're quoting damage control post.
Seems people don't understand you can compare games even if they aren't in the same genre. There's 100s of games better than starfield both triple A and smaller games.
Last edited:
Lets not forget the fact Neon in Starfield is designed in such a piss poor way you hit a short loading screen basically every 30 seconds going through doors.
Riky
$MSFT
The only silly thing is dismissing parts of the game to suit your narrative, the things you mention are just variations of the basic gameplay, unlike Starfield which offers a totally different experience to the main quest.
Can really see that shitty washed out filter for starfield here. Why the fuck does Bethesda do that? Multiple Bethesda have awful color filters.I mean, yeah. With all it's flaws CP2077 is a visual masterpiece fueled by the crazy amount of art, design adn production design work.
Starfield is just boring, lazy and generic in every respect except maybe for guns. (I use my own screenshots for reference)
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
Similar, but worlds apart.
Cyberpunk could be fixed with patches, you can't fix what is wrong at the base level of Starfield. It's just not possible...
Mods might. Yet to be seen.
Negotiator101
Member
Starfield is better IMO, the AI is better the shooting mechanics are better which surprised me. Far more things to do and better mission's. It's the in thing currently to shit on Starfield but when I first bought Cyberpunk many years ago I played it for about 12hrs and gave up, I since went back and put another 15hrs more and gave up. I'm currently over 50hrs on Starfield and loving it, that sums up the two games for me anyway.
But i'm not dismissing anything. I'm just saying you are overblowing these things and making it sound deeper than it is. Call me crazy but I don't consider changing my spaceship some deep thing that will give different players different experiences, as you put it.
Its also extremely funny you are now talking about "different experience to the main quest" when Cyberpunk is infinitely more vast in that respect, as far as outcomes, sidequests leaking into the main mission, choices effecting your ending, etc. While Starfield is
Wow now you are Starborn! Look over there, thats you making your choice in the Crimson Fleet mission. And look over there, thats you choosing to kill Ron Hope even though that choice ultimately meant jackshit to the story and game
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
Dumb comparison. They're such different games.
But way to start a war. Nice job lol
But way to start a war. Nice job lol
Topher
Gold Member
Cyberpunk 2077 Pros
-Story
-Characters
-Writing
-Graphics
-It has a damn map
-Overall world design; one massive city vs. several small disjointed area.
Starfield Pros
-Quest lines; faction quests are very enjoyable
-World building; ships and outposts
-Variety of worlds, scenery
-Gunplay
-Ship combat
-Overall game time; 140 hours and there is still more for me to do
Both games are enjoyable in their own way. Much of the differences, I think, are personal preference. I like the grittier, more grounded feel of Cyberpunk 2077 than Starfield. But
Riky
is not wrong in saying Starfield has more in it to actually do. Having said that, I think if I made a list of cons then Starfield's would be longer.
Regardless, I think both are great games.
-Story
-Characters
-Writing
-Graphics
-It has a damn map
-Overall world design; one massive city vs. several small disjointed area.
Starfield Pros
-Quest lines; faction quests are very enjoyable
-World building; ships and outposts
-Variety of worlds, scenery
-Gunplay
-Ship combat
-Overall game time; 140 hours and there is still more for me to do
Both games are enjoyable in their own way. Much of the differences, I think, are personal preference. I like the grittier, more grounded feel of Cyberpunk 2077 than Starfield. But
Riky
is not wrong in saying Starfield has more in it to actually do. Having said that, I think if I made a list of cons then Starfield's would be longer.Regardless, I think both are great games.
Of course there are differences but they definitely are similar. Cyberpunk was by far the first comparative game that came to mind playing Starfield.
Riky
$MSFT
Negotiator101
Member
An actual sensible post instead of basically overlooking everything that Starfield does well.Cyberpunk 2077 Pros
-Story
-Characters
-Writing
-Graphics
-It has a damn map
-Overall world design; one massive city vs. several small disjointed area.
Starfield Pros
-Quest lines; faction quests are very enjoyable
-World building; ships and outposts
-Variety of worlds, scenery
-Gunplay
-Ship combat
-Overall game time; 140 hours and there is still more for me to do
Both games are enjoyable in their own way. Much of the differences, I think, are personal preference. I like the grittier, more grounded feel of Cyberpunk 2077 than Starfield. But
Regardless, I think both are great games.
fart town usa
Gold Member
Is the 2.0 release free and do you know if you should start a fresh playthrough?
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
Cyberpunk 2077 Pros
-Story
-Characters
-Writing
-Graphics
-It has a damn map
-Overall world design; one massive city vs. several small disjointed area.
Starfield Pros
-Quest lines; faction quests are very enjoyable
-World building; ships and outposts
-Variety of worlds, scenery
-Gunplay
-Ship combat
-Overall game time; 140 hours and there is still more for me to do
Both games are enjoyable in their own way. Much of the differences, I think, are personal preference. I like the grittier, more grounded feel of Cyberpunk 2077 than Starfield. But
Regardless, I think both are great games.
So are you saying CP2077 has worse gunplay/gameplay loop than starfield ?
I couldn’t disagree more if that’s the case. Cp2077 on hard mode or harder is a true treat to engage with now . The first boss in phantom liberty is especially bad ass to fight.
Jack Videogames
Gold Member
I'm playing both back to back and truthfully... Starfield isn't bad. It's quite good, even. But CP77 2.0 plays in a different league. Now that the different bugs and quibbles have been ironed, it's a candidate for GOTY for me.
Reconsider what? Cool, you can make outposts. Again, its not deep. Its just something you can do. Starfield is more shallow in every single way. The writing, the way dialogue branches into the story, the gameplay. Add to that the nonstop loading screens, the redundant travel, arguably not a single cool character.
But ok man, keep thinking the game is deep cause you can turn it into space minecraft
ByWatterson
Member
It's not even kind of a close call.
Topher
Gold Member
I figured I get some pushback on that and maybe it is just me, but I enjoyed the gunplay a bit more in Starfield. Now that may be on me and maybe I'm not getting the right guns in CP or I need to figure out how to upgrade, but I went into one mission and literally emptied 5 or 6 magazines into a guy, including many headshots, and he kept coming. Far too much sponge for my tastes. Maybe my opinion will change later, but that's where I am right now.
kvltus lvlzvs
Banned
This thread has made me appreciate cp2077 more than I did previously. I have a tendancy to gloss over visuals in games, but I think I will go back and give it another shot, because there clearly was a LOT of work put into visual detail in it. I played it a bit but lost interest as I was really mostly interested in it for the RPG elements, and, well, we all know how that went - but I think I threw the baby out with the bathwater and didnt appreciate its visuals for what they were when I played the game.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
People don't often talk about the fact that Cyberpunk really wasn't that buggy on PC at launch, like no more than any Bethesda or CDPR game ever was. I played like 70 hours on PC and never encountered anything game breaking, even if I got the occasional physics or pathfinding jank.
The console ports were criminally bad and poisoned the discourse -- justifiably so. But I don't think the game would have been discussed as a disappointment in the same way if it launched on PC and next gen instead.
The other problem was that they overpromised and underdelivered on some things, and there were these tertiary aspects of the game that were held together with duct tape -- stuff like barely functioning police system, non-existent car and NPC AI, and lack of meaningful driving gameplay of any kind other than getting from point A to B, cut abilities, etc. All the stuff they addressed in 2.0. And a few things they still haven't like factions, destructible environments, and meaningful story branching.
But even with that said I don't think we would have had a serious backlash without the fact that they hyped this game up on last gen consoles and delivered a game that could barely even run.
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
For you sure, for me the only similarity I see is that they're both open worlds. And even then Starfield isnt really open at all. And I think if 2.0 and Phantom werent out this wouldnt even be a conversation right now lol
First comparative games coming to mind for me playing Starfield were Fallout and Oblivion
Comparative game that isn't made by Bethesda* lolFor you sure, for me the only similarity I see is that they're both open worlds. And even then Starfield isnt really open at all. And I think if 2.0 and Phantom werent out this wouldnt even be a conversation right now lol
First comparative games coming to mind for me playing Starfield were Fallout and Oblivion
Topher
Gold Member
Great post. Agree 100%. And I'm going to sing CDPR's praises in sticking with the game and fixing a lot of shit that was just broke. I'm now at 50 hours overall after quitting on the game the first time and it is much more enjoyable to play. I hope Bethesda gives Starfield the same support and doesn't rely on mods like they have in the past.
Markio128
Member
I played around 10 hours of Starfield before concluding that my time would be better spent playing better games. Starfield may have loads of content, not disputing that, but it’s all cobbled together by loading screens and menus, so it loses the seamless immersion that Cyberpunk has.
During those 10 hours, I didn’t experience one compelling well designed mission or incredible area.
GymWolf
Gold Member
But starfield without basic stuff like a brightness slider or a full screen option, broken or downright absent hdr AND that is getting completely revamped by modders, from space traveling, to enemy and companions ai, to upscaling tech to basic UI and QoL stuff AND with game breaking bugs is not in early access becaaaaause??l+To be fair. Cyberpunk 2077 was in Early Access for 3 years
CDPR just forgot to tell anybody
Last edited:
The console port problems (for next gen, at least) were overblown too though. I had some crashes, and it was weird that the world was so lifeless, but on PS5 the game played perfectly fine at launch
Team Andromeda
Member
Don't tell us you own the consoles too and like SONY and Microsoft equally.
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
Scan start of fights to hack an enemy with say overheat, use a smart gun to watch bullets fly and lock onto an enemy into the air, then enable your mantis blades to jump and air dash or zip around /lunge to enemies as you dismember them with finishers. Turn enemies into chunks with shotguns.
Don’t get me wrong I like starfield to shoot stuff, but the AI is cannon fodder, and way too many guns just felt the same to shoot.
Keep in mind too in the context of cyberpunk people being “bullet sponges” slightly makes sense due to the modifications to their bodies. However, gameplay wise, you can rip enemies apart in multiple ways if you build into it.
Topher
Gold Member
Fair points. Granted, I haven't put any points into melee. I'm primarily going stealth with this build. I do enjoy the quickhacks quite a lot.
Tomeru
Member
A galaxy. Holy shit.
It's a video game. It's on a ssd. Not an actual galaxy. Where people play todd's version of the game, other play the actual available version. You can puff your enjoynment however you like (even with imaginary concepts), it makes things feel potentially better.
It also makes damage control seem logical.
hinch7
Member
It is. The update is for everyone regardless if you bought the DLC. The game gives you a choice whether to start afresh or jump straight into Phantom Liberty. There's a certain point in the game that the DLC unlocks and you can play it so its up to you. For continuity reasons and maybe to refresh your memory on the story, might be an idea to replay anyways. Especially with all the fixes and improvements they added to the base game,.
Salty Popsicle
Banned
Cyberpunk is a bit too lite on the RPG side of things for me to even compare the two experiences. Even CD Projekt Red themselves seemed to consider the game more of an action/adventure title than anything else.
Although Cyberpunk 2077 was hit with many complaints when it launched, one of the strongest ones was that it lacked many of the RPG elements that were promised or hinted at during its development. Disappointing gameplay features like lifepaths combined with the lack of customisation options causing many players to claim that Cyberpunk was more of a first-person shooter than an RPG. CD Projekt Red seemed to agree with this claim, slowly scrubbing out the word "RPG" from the game's marketing. Instead, it started to use the words "open-world adventure", including on the game's Steam page. The page previously read, "Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure story set in the dark future of Night City — a dangerous megalopolis obsessed with power, glamor, and ceaseless body modification."
Although Cyberpunk 2077 was hit with many complaints when it launched, one of the strongest ones was that it lacked many of the RPG elements that were promised or hinted at during its development. Disappointing gameplay features like lifepaths combined with the lack of customisation options causing many players to claim that Cyberpunk was more of a first-person shooter than an RPG. CD Projekt Red seemed to agree with this claim, slowly scrubbing out the word "RPG" from the game's marketing. Instead, it started to use the words "open-world adventure", including on the game's Steam page. The page previously read, "Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure story set in the dark future of Night City — a dangerous megalopolis obsessed with power, glamor, and ceaseless body modification."
GymWolf
Gold Member
Not sure if gunplay and world building are better than cyberpunk tbh.
Starfield is original and cyberpunk already had everything written by the creator, but being original doesn't always traduce in better, i can argue that night city is order of magnitudes more interesting than new atlantis, both art design and lore wise.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I like both a lot
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Not for me. I played the Series X version and didn't have all the issues people had when it first released, but my issue was I never really got into the game. The story and characters didn't really pull me in except Johnny Silverhands. Keanu Reeves was great in his role. The voice acting in Starfield isn't nearly as good as Keanu but the game itself is much more addicting than CP2077 was for me.
graywolf323
Member
Topher
Gold Member
But that article is about how CDPR considers the game to be more of an RPG now than before. Your quote doesn't get to the gist of the story:
"It seems that CD Projekt Red feels like it has done enough to go back to calling Cyberpunk 2077 an RPG again as, following the current-gen update, it's changed the descriptors for the game on Steam to focus in its roleplaying features. As spotted by VRickenYT on the Cyberpunk subreddit, the Cyberpunk Steam page now reads, "Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure RPG set in the dark future of Night City — a dangerous megalopolis obsessed with power, glamor, and ceaseless body modification.""
Yes
Salty Popsicle
Banned
In other words, only after 3 years of major updates does CD Projekt believe it deserves to be referred to as an RPG? Yeah, not something I'd be proud of.But that article is about how CDPR considers the game to be more of an RPG now than before. Your quote doesn't get to the gist of the story:
"It seems that CD Projekt Red feels like it has done enough to go back to calling Cyberpunk 2077 an RPG again as, following the current-gen update, it's changed the descriptors for the game on Steam to focus in its roleplaying features. As spotted by VRickenYT on the Cyberpunk subreddit, the Cyberpunk Steam page now reads, "Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure RPG set in the dark future of Night City — a dangerous megalopolis obsessed with power, glamor, and ceaseless body modification.""
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
Create a character? Check.But that article is about how CDPR considers the game to be more of an RPG now than before. Your quote doesn't get to the gist of the story:
"It seems that CD Projekt Red feels like it has done enough to go back to calling Cyberpunk 2077 an RPG again as, following the current-gen update, it's changed the descriptors for the game on Steam to focus in its roleplaying features. As spotted by VRickenYT on the Cyberpunk subreddit, the Cyberpunk Steam page now reads, "Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure RPG set in the dark future of Night City — a dangerous megalopolis obsessed with power, glamor, and ceaseless body modification.""
Loot system with rarity of gear? Check.
Multiple skill trees? Check.
Story with branching decisions? Check.
Side quests with stories & choice? Check.
I mean what else would help people see it is a rpg ? Absolutely is.
twilo99
Member
Starfield gives out the feeling that it will never end, which can be a good or a bad thing depending on what you are looking for.. a more scripted gameplay has its own appeal
PixelatedBeast
Member
Funny enough when Cyberpunk released, it too had a prolonged honeymoon stage before enough comparrison videos released to show how many old games had better physics, AI and open world activites. At that point there was no more denying. Even after the big update for Cyberpunk, its still just doing the bare minimum for open world building when old games like GTA lll has had a police patrol and chase system since the ps2.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
No....in other words, you misrepresented the entire story.
What exactly makes Starfield more RPG though? Considering the depth of outcomes based on dialogue choices and actions is vastly slimmer in Starfield, not sure why you're trying to make such a strong argument out of this.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Personal preferences aside, and we can all enjoy lesser games, but Cyberpunk and Starfield aren’t on the same level. Bethesda is stuck in their dated ways.
Topher
Gold Member
Agree 100%. This nonsense that Cyberpunk is a lesser RPG than Starfield is bullshit.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll