"Release: When Ready"
Well, It's released, so i take it that they felt it was ready? I have already waited 8 years for this game, waiting one more year would not have bothered me.
Well, It's released, so i take it that they felt it was ready? I have already waited 8 years for this game, waiting one more year would not have bothered me.
W
Well they got it better, but doesnt excuse lauch which was complete shitshow, also doesnt help that performance varies from user to user even when using same rigs. For all the mades made no diffrence in performance, stil getting around 50-55 in less crowded areas, and huge drops with action on screen
Please stop this rant. We paid for this game, it is not a gift.
We paid based on false declarations, mischievous marketing and advertising.
The WHOLE game is a false promise.
We paid based on false declarations, mischievous marketing and advertising.
The WHOLE game is a false promise.
20k is the number of players of Witcher 3 after 1 month from launch, and you are saying it like it would be a bad result
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - Steam Charts
An ongoing analysis of Steam's player numbers, seeing what's been played the most.steamcharts.com
Yes it would be a bad result, because Witcher 3 did not start with 1 million concurrent players https://www.pcgamer.com/cyberpunk-2077-has-over-a-million-concurrent-players-on-steam/#:~:text=That's a new record for a singleplayer game.&text=Fallout 4 previously held Steam's,game at launch in 2015 as Cyberpunk 2077 did! Dropping from a million to 200k and after that to 20k in a month (during the holidays and worldwide lockdowns) is not a great showing for a game that was supposed to be THE open world RPG!
Oh definitely, I won't ever see myself defending the absolute disaster that was on, and around the launch. If it weren't for the frequent patches we got before christmas, and one of my friends keeping me up to date I stil wouldn't be playing it. CDPR however, stil has quite a long way to go, and this goes for all platforms.
I think most people don't blame the studio, only the suits... the corpos, the management. they were the ones making the questionable decision to release too early - probably to match deadlines for manager bonuses. The devs are not the ones most of us blame. Other than that? I think our money is support enough for now... considering we did not get what we were promised.
I would you compare this to what Rockstar did to PC players with GTA 4 and Red Dead Redemption 2?
It was a half baked product. Plain and simple. I really want what was promised by CDPR and I think that what evertyone is wanting as well.
It's hard to compare the Witcher 3 with Cyberpunk because expectations back then were not off the roof like they have been for Cyberpunk. Back then CDPR was known mostly to their fans only, and the Witcher 3 was the 3rd game of a series, which means, assets, general layout of the game, setting, characters, gameplay loop, general aesthetics... were very well established. Basically the Witcher 3 was just an improvement over the Witcher 2 on the open world area, but the quests mechanics were the same (and I remember when the Witcher 3 got released some folks here were hating it because it was straying too far away from the 1st and 2nd episode)..
Anyway, with Cyperpunk you're talking about a brand new IP (so new setting, new design, new general aesthetics) AND about a switch from a 3rd person RPG to a 1st person one (which means new gameplay loop, new assets and animations to render...). And with the notoriety CDPR has gained with the Witcher 3, tons of people expected tons of different stuff out from this game. CDPR marketing didn't help on this, but basically, the more you watch older marketing videos from them, the more you see they were advertising the game before even knowing what kind of game it was supposed to be. They were still trying to figure out how the game was supposed to be played and to feel in 2018, it's pretty obvious.
1. They first had to sell the game back then as a 1st person game (first controversy, they went back and forth on this internally, which took them so much time away from simply dropping content into the game)
2. Then they had to sell the game to FPS gamers who got interested (second controversy : those FPS fans were worried because it was an RPG the game would feel like The Division with sponges taking bullets over and over)
3. Then they had to win back their RPG fans who got afraid of this whole FPS controversy by selling them a game which was on par with the Witcher in terms of storytelling... which Cyberpunk is, to an extent.
All of this to say, the game wasn't as easy to develop as the Witcher. It has to be taken into consideration when comparing the two in terms of content and such.
I personally didn't expect anything from the game, so maybe that's why I find it to be very fun now. I can go beyond what "lacks" in the game without any issues and thus I'm able to see its inner beauty and clever moments/designs.
We do. And I'm saying this as someone who loves the game because I basically expected nothing of it until I played it, mainly because I was (wrongly) sure it wouldn't fit my taste because it was 1st person. I didn't expect the game to be to my taste because of that, but in the end I find it even better than what I had in mind thanks to the 1st person.
Now, what I'm mainly complaining about is that, we want a better game, with more content, etc, that's for sure. Everyone does. But because of that specifically, we should as a community of old followers here sort out our ideas and provide constructive feedback and criticism. Half the posts on these forums sound like the game is the worst game ever made. This isn't the case, objectively. I'm not talking about the marketing or the over-hype around it, but in a neutralway.
The game has strong assets. It has a strong foundation. It has great characters. It has a unique vision and a great setting. It just needs more content put into it and some polish over it.
What, in your own words, is the vision of Cyberpunk 2077, and what makes it unique?
It comes from the world created by M. Pondsmith, in all its glory (I'm not talking here about the gameplay loop, mind you).
It has a unique vibe only this world has.It has this bittersweet taste only those multi layered characters who lived in Night City long enough to be completely drained by it have. Slices of life spiralled into madness because of the society they live in. Broken souls.
I've played countless hours of the table top version, and of the Shadowrun one, and I find the game to hit all the right spots. It sends me back to run briefings with my street samurai in Shadowrun, it sends me back to my netrunner character in CP 2020. It's very immersive and absolutely insane in terms of design (
just think about the Arasaka parade
Moreover, the game being in first person and putting accent towards the narrative experience over everything else put even more emphasis on this setting.
Bottom line, there are tons of med fan based 3rd person games (RPG or Action Adventure). But there are very few cyberpunky genre based 1st person games. And it comes from the lore made by Pondsmith, to which the game does great justice. Thus, the "unique" vision.
Last edited:
I strongly disagree. This game does not make the world Mike created justice at all. Granted the artstyle is beautiful and there are some interesting parts however the rest of the game is truly a mediocre shooter and an awful RPG experience overall. I would had enjoyed far more a less arcade experience levels don't belong in cyberpunk nor leveled items as well. Seriously at this point if not for the art teams i would love if were others that were tasked to make the game.
As it stands now this game is exactly what Mike told he wanted to avoid. Cyberpunk only in the title.
Because is even very far from the source material in many things and even on the spirit of it.
While mostly correct, there have been quite a few developer interviews where the devs either strongly hintet at or plainly stated that there'd be features to the game that just aren't here.
Now, granted, it could be that these developers were either actively working on those features or, to the best of their knowledge, these features were already working, but then management stepped in, decided to "release now" and anything not fully functional has been cut. Still, this doesn't paint a pretty picture, at least of the devs that took part in those pre-launch interviews.
Of course, ultimately, any and all criticism should always target the shapeless entity known as "CDPR" - while we can argue if the suits at the top were solely responsible or not, accusing specific individuals is asking for trouble. Don't do that.
Well we agree on the artstyle and overall aesthetics then. The side characters are also well done in my opinion to showcase different parts of living into such a world.
As for the gameplay, I'm not one who is really sensitive about this, I'd rather enjoy a good immersive and well laid story over a strong gameplay experience so we might disagree because of that.
I take what's good to be taken from the game and I don't really care about what it could be on top of that.
Part of the appeal of cyberpunk as a pen and paper system it was that it was grounded on reality a shoot out was a serious business and usually when happened it was an heavy risk to take. Sadly in the game shoot out are rather mundane. We have this one walking army called V that murdered on himself or herself dozen and dozen of cybered and not cybered folk this is one of the key element why the game is far from the source material. They went sky rocketing with the plot even putting elements in that have no place in cyberpunk ((duble jumping sandsquatch magical potion?)). I am a fan of the pen and paper and sadly beside the look and some questline i don't recognize the setting in the game. Also i don't think the gameplay in cyberpunk is immersive at all it felt arcadeish
I guess it might depend on how we played the PnP game ? I played it for years (with Shadowrun too) back when I was in highschool and college about 15 years ago, we were young and had a rather "arcady" DM who would definitely put us into big shoutouts and explosions rather than smaller gigs. If you think V murdered half of the city, our characters back then probably murdered the other half. Maybe that's why ? (same happened with Warhammer btw, which is also a very grounded system but where we ended up with war dancers one shotting everything in sight).
Plus, the game being set 50 years after the paper one, I find it okayish to go into this direction. Even though it obvisouly has this problem other games have too of giving you tons of enemies to kill for the sake of gameplay mechanics to the detriment of the message conveyed (Uncharted rings a bell here). It may seem like some dissonance.
But I agree with you, more grounded quests and less flashes would be more than welcome in the game. I hope they put way more of those moments in it. Quiet moments or tightly done gigs with just one baddie to take down and more consequences after it. Half the players would probably scream their lungs out because the game would be too slow but as I've said, I'd take one more bonfire talk with Panam & friends over a big setpiece with explosions anytime. Maybe our thoughts are not so different after all ?
So far I found the side quests especially to be good because of this : rather than telling an overarching story about huge corporations and filled with explosions and action, they tried to focus more on how it feels to live in such a world, and what it means. Judy, Evelyn, Panam, the Peralez, Joss (River's sister), Claire. They had something which felt more settled and grounded about them. The quests I loved the most were the ones where it was just a beautiful sight of the city, and characters talking about their lives and how they barely managed to make it through another day. They felt broken by the demise of a city which was looking like a dream city in the background, but which was terribly awful looking when you stepped into it.
In those moments, the gameplay and game issues stepped down and the real potential of the game came through. I thought the game did the Cyberpunk setting justice thanks to those quieter sequences.
Wait, the game Mike himself worked on together with CDPR and praised the studio for "getting it right"?
Praised probably before they got Keanu Reeves and cut half of the game.
Praised probably before they got Keanu Reeves and cut half of the game.
Not sure... he even does quite a long cameo in reading short conspiracy stories on the radio (Morro Rock). The cuts don't impact the vision the game has. It impacts other things for sure, but not the depiction of the setting M. Pondsmith created.
BTW
I would have loved more Evelyn Parker, for sure, as your signature suggests
Praised probably before they got Keanu Reeves and cut half of the game.
Here's a quote from Mike from December 10th, article @ Wired: