what the fuck is cyberpunk

Dialogue can be skipped with C. There is also this weird decision to be able to move when talking. Several times I stopped a conversation because I noticed a tin can and had to go pick it up.

DISAPOINTING!

No real option of choices, not really an rpg look like a GTA clone.

Impressive immersion but that s all even Deux EX is a better role playing game than this. Fallout 4 compared to this game is more of a rpg than Cyberpunk !

The first hour is really great but then when you start to think about it no choice of actions, every dialogue branches get to the same outcome.

I am of course only 6 hours in but god I am bored to death it s like an interactive story not a make your own story.

Witcher 3 didn't have that many choices too. Honestly what choice did we really have? Which of the witches to bang and whether Nilfgaard gets a capable successor to the throne.

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

Witcher 3 didn't have that many choices too. Honestly what choice did we really have? Which of the witches to bang and whether Nilfgaard gets a capable successor to the throne.

Good point

The bugs, console performance and AI are pretty disappointing so far. I still enjoy it, but it could have been a lot more polished. Do i dare to say it needed another delay?

"

Bowazon92 wrote:

The bugs, console performance and AI are pretty disappointing so far. I still enjoy it, but it could have been a lot more polished. Do i dare to say it needed another delay?

Erm no. People would gather around CD Projekt Red studio with pitchforks if there is another delay.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Some of them made themselves physically ill from lack of sleep due to how little time they had to get through it -- energy drink marathons and the like. Partners tearfully begging them to take a break. Dramatic? Sure -- but entirely believable.

jfc we're like three generations removed from 17 year old boys shipping off to mainland Europe and the South Pacific (edit: and Eastern Front/Northern Africa/Italy) shooting each other in the face - when they could find the time to between artillery and aerial bombardment - and now our peak drama is with tears welling up in her eyes, 'John, PLEASE, put down the controller - think of the children. Just kidding, they have cats, not children, but still.

This isn't a shot at you of course - I'm glad you posted this. Flirting with the absurd is healthy I think.

On topic I like the way these last 10 posts have trended, good points about Skyrim/Witcher/CP2k77.

"

xMustard wrote:

...i absolutely despise movie "games" like the last of us where there is little gameplay. it isn't engaging. its boring.
cyberpunk looks to be exactly that as well. ...

I agree.

There is a place for "interactive story" games where the player "looks like" they're helping to craft the story. Engagement, if the story is actually good, can be pretty high.

But, most video-game stories suck. Bad. Most are f'ing stoopid and characters often act nonsensically because that's the only way to create a dramatic situation the player then must "fix" by engaging in combat...

"We're all gonna die!"

"No we are not! I am going to set the lifeboat on fire and that will save us! Because... reasons! REASONS ARE THE WAY!"

[Click to enter combat map to prevent Dr. Dumb@ss from setting the lifeboat on fire]

To be fair, game "writers" basically do nothing more than write dialogue. A decent copywriter could fill-in and nobody would notice. A "writer" is also not a "game developer" so it's a bit like asking a Michelangelo paint your bedroom. He's moonlighting as a painter, might be finished before The Second Coming and certainly doesn't agree with you about your choice of colors...

Is there one book of fiction everyone loves to read, over and over, that fills them with excitement and the desire to repeatedly engage with it? No. And, that's why these "story" games usually don't get a lot of wide appeal even if they make the charts on Day1 sales.

The concept of "I AM PLAYING TEH ART" is what appeals to gamers that chase these games, but the satisfaction level is largely dependent on "is it a fun game."

The last "sort of" Open-World game that had a tie-in "sort of" story that was actually good was... "The Legend of Zelda." Maybe "Mario Brothers" might fit in there, but it had even less of a "story." (I preferred "The Goonies" coin-op... just because I could finish it on one quarter in the student lounge and still make it to my afternoon class... :) (Note: Even though I like it a lot, "Skyrim" et al's stories are bargain-bin garbage. Nobody gives a wet fart about those "stories.")

PS: Anyone know when the F GGG is going to create a workable multi-quote system on these forums? They're so darn spam-proofed I'm surprised they actually work.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

....So far the best write-up I've read was from kotaku AU, because of two reasons: it dwelt on the minutiae exhaustively, which I expected; but also because it highlighted, with no softening of blows, how stressful reviewing this game was for embargo-bound journalists. ...<five reviewers died while downloading the game><sic> :)

This is the "South Korean man starves to death while playing Starcraft" or "Taiwanese girl found after spending two years living in an internet cafe" level of "hype."

They didn't have to mention how they sacrificed themselves to review the game just so they could afford to buy a bathmat.

But, they did.

They could have written that "The game is a game and it doesn't suck most of the time" and as long as they paired that with "Reggies funeral will be on Tuseday" CDPR would have been happy with where the hype-meter hit.

For AAA titles, nobody gives a crap about Week2 sales. Nobody. That's chicken-feed compared to the overall importance of Week 1 sales. And, once its bought, it's a "movie-ticket." The movie could suck, but you still paid for it and getting your wasted money back is nearly impossible. Nothing short of audience's "mass flatulence from spoiled popcorn" will do as an excuse. Or, maybe if the theater burned down... from mass flatulence from spoiled popcorn.

The developers that still care about the overall quality of their title's play and presentation are largely, IMO, those still looking for their "breakout title." Well, at least for traditional games. The rest that "care?" They're the ones depending on continuing revenue from their title... They have an incentive to either please their audience or cull the weakest addiction-prone members of the herd.

No, I'm not a cynic. I just think the game industry largely sucks, real-life isn't fair... and kids should get off my lawn.

"

As for the game itself? It's all very WYSIWYG to me. I'll wait until I have a Ps5 at the very least, and even then it won't be in my short list of must-haves. But this isn't about my take on the game (I have utterly shit taste in games for the most part); that's inestimably less interesting than others'.

If Cyberpunk 2077 gets mod support, I'd consider buying it for PC. As a "console" game, it's pretty dead to me... I don't like a lot of the constraints placed on console-heavy games that are in this kind of genre. For a console game, I prefer a more free-form environment than a "story RPG with open-world elements." Skyrim? Maybe... But, I own it on PC and XBox and have only played the PC version.

My schadenfreude meter is pinging and I am eagerly awaiting the first of a slew of "Cyberpunk 2077 killed my neighbor's dog" youtube rant vids.

Unsurprisingly unsympathetic responses. In the words of Gandalf, 'I should have known'. :)