Open world in support of/working against the story

+
I also saw Judy in the house, and I didnt play that long on any game.

That's the opposite of what I did.

Others have also commented about Judy never leaving, but sending phone messages that she is in Oregon.

Well, I wouldn't know about that. I just know she showed up immediately and started talking about Oregon.

She stays in town if you are romantic, pretty sure its a bug, but only the devs know for sure, maybe they'll explain one way or the other eventually

I still think it's a design flaw.
I think CDPR didn't realize that this was a possibility.
 
Disagree. I think it's a poorly implemented feature.

Maybe I should give a little more detail...I was at the Point of No Return and decided to finish a few things before I did it. I was at the very end of the game.
I suspect that Judy returning is triggered by certain missions being completed...but because I left the Judy quest until the very last minute, her return was triggered immediately.

Basically, after doing her missions, there was no time for her to text me because I went to her apartment right the heck away, after she gave it to me.



My point. The game assumed more time had passed after Judy gave me her apartment than actually had passed, simply because I didn't do the quest as soon as it was available. CDPR assumed I'd do those quests immediately; I guess they misjudged my feelings toward Judy, and expected me to go after the hot chick because...hot chick.

And I didn't.

This is one of the many, many reasons I think CDPR mis-judged their audience. I think they assumed we'd all play the game they way they did, the way they wanted, the way they expected, and didn't make allowances for people who don't conform.
I seriously think that this is a design flaw, not a bug.
I didn't start a relationship with Judy and she left NC, but when I went to the apartment Johnny mentioned that V gets all mushy inside because of the way Judy looks at her. There are certainly some bugs so we cannot be sure what was intended and what not. I also never saw the back at the apartment.
 
I didn't start a relationship with Judy and she left NC, but when I went to the apartment Johnny mentioned that V gets all mushy inside because of the way Judy looks at her. There are certainly some bugs so we cannot be sure what was intended and what not. I also never saw the back at the apartment.
I still think it's a design flaw.

Again, CDPR has made a lot of statements regarding how they expected the game to be played; I think they didn't think through what happens if someone doesn't dance to their tune.
 
The open world in this game, works best if you don't do everything, but instead do things you want to do, for whatever reason. I had many playthroughs, and I never did every quest on the map in a single playthrough.

The open world in this game is very good imo, but its not designed to be done in a checklist fashion. Its mostly supposed to create a full and believable city. You do extra content when you need to for money, or because you don't want them to kill that hostage, or you are curious what the story behind this area/gig is.

And, imo the game would be significantly lesser without it. In fact, in multi playthroughs, I tended to enjoy the gigs and side quests more than the main quest. Or rather, enjoyed the general open exploration on my own terms.

Basically, the player is supposed to consume the open world as needed, which is different for each player, depending on what their desires are at any particular time. Its like a buffet. It represents the city that exists outside of minimum requirements.
Post automatically merged:



completely disagree here, and its totally uneccessary to gut the game, you can already have a tight narrative experience if thats all you want. The city would be crap as a corridor, because it wouldn't feel like a real city. Also the city is full of interesting little stories, lore, and side content. The point of an open world in a narrative story is for the player to express the character and explore the world. Doing the open world content gives you a much better understanding of the context of the world, or allows you to express other sides of your character. My streetkid, i played as a person with a connection to Heywood, valentinos and Padre, So I wanted to do his quests, without killing valentinos, and I really wanted to explore and understand the context of the area. This was just as or more entertaining, in that playthrough, as the main story.
I agree with you on many of your points. But, "The point of an open world in a narrative story is for the player to express the character and explore the world.".
On one hand - I completely agree.
Just I feel CDPR completely failed to understand that. Their very story fights our ability to truly enjoy the world and the City.
No, the game would not be better with a more linear world. Being in Nightcity, having a car, a city right there, etc, all begs to be seen and explored.
BUT - the story fights against the open world ALL the time. If you stop and think about it - it starts to fall apart.
You're locked in Watson early - but it isn't time based - it's progression based. Letting the player explore prior to progression event would allow us time to leisurely explore the world. But that would ruin snark from the other protagonist. Hence - no matter how many weeks you sleep and travel around in Watson the artificial invisible walls are there.
Immediately after the progression event we get SO MANY timed quests - and by timed I meant the quest giver says "this is happening now you need to be here"

Every quest from a certain corporate person is I am waiting here you need to come now. If you spend five days doing other things it immediately starts breaking immersion thinking that they have been waiting there for so long.
Furthermore - the you are dying - you need to quickly find a cure.
Heck, we're even told that it is rewriting the brain and so quickly can be seen and watched in a 15 SECOND scan - after a "you going to die in X period of time being told after progression event.
Having nearly the ENTIRE main quest be hurry! hurry! hurry! in both rationale and people literally waiting in a location breaks immersion and being able to enjoy the open world properly.

Sure - you can turn your bran off and ignore person waiting in a booth - but is that the best design trigger for a quest immediately after opening up the world to explore? I say no.

RDR2 did FAR better at meshing open world and story. Even with a dying protagonist in RDR2 it wasn't the "immediate danger!! hurry! Hurry!" it was more survive, explore, have fun as well as enjoy this story we have for you.

CDPR tried to mesh a linear game story (like say Last of Us) and forcefully merge it onto a open world game with so much to see that they begin to be in conflict. We have zombies to survive, limited food, and need to keep ellie safe and get her to Denver - but oh look Chicago!! let's go explore...
 
I agree with you on many of your points. But, "The point of an open world in a narrative story is for the player to express the character and explore the world.".
On one hand - I completely agree.
Just I feel CDPR completely failed to understand that. Their very story fights our ability to truly enjoy the world and the City.
No, the game would not be better with a more linear world. Being in Nightcity, having a car, a city right there, etc, all begs to be seen and explored.
BUT - the story fights against the open world ALL the time. If you stop and think about it - it starts to fall apart.
You're locked in Watson early - but it isn't time based - it's progression based. Letting the player explore prior to progression event would allow us time to leisurely explore the world. But that would ruin snark from the other protagonist. Hence - no matter how many weeks you sleep and travel around in Watson the artificial invisible walls are there.
Immediately after the progression event we get SO MANY timed quests - and by timed I meant the quest giver says "this is happening now you need to be here"

Every quest from a certain corporate person is I am waiting here you need to come now. If you spend five days doing other things it immediately starts breaking immersion thinking that they have been waiting there for so long.
Furthermore - the you are dying - you need to quickly find a cure.
Heck, we're even told that it is rewriting the brain and so quickly can be seen and watched in a 15 SECOND scan - after a "you going to die in X period of time being told after progression event.
Having nearly the ENTIRE main quest be hurry! hurry! hurry! in both rationale and people literally waiting in a location breaks immersion and being able to enjoy the open world properly.

Sure - you can turn your bran off and ignore person waiting in a booth - but is that the best design trigger for a quest immediately after opening up the world to explore? I say no.

RDR2 did FAR better at meshing open world and story. Even with a dying protagonist in RDR2 it wasn't the "immediate danger!! hurry! Hurry!" it was more survive, explore, have fun as well as enjoy this story we have for you.

CDPR tried to mesh a linear game story (like say Last of Us) and forcefully merge it onto a open world game with so much to see that they begin to be in conflict. We have zombies to survive, limited food, and need to keep ellie safe and get her to Denver - but oh look Chicago!! let's go explore...

people make demands of you all the time, IRL I tell them sometimes they have to wait. The hurry up and do this asap stuff to save your life thing, None of these things are known to save your life.

V is just hoping/guessing, and in fact many of these things people were rushing you to do, don't really help you much. Finding Hellman is not particularly useful unless you choose Arasaka. Even then its questionable. Takemura spends weeks embroiling you in a power struggle to reinstate hanako/saburo and the honest truth? you probably would have achieved more, faster if you sided with yorinobu, or even michiko.

Just because some npc wants you to hurry up and do X doesn't mean its in your best interest, and it doesn't mean it'll give you a better chance of survival. Because it says Main story, we assume those threads will help us, But really, helping Evelyn was always a Longshot, I didnt do that plotline because I thought it would help save me. It happened to give a clue, but that was a Longshot ever since we found out she became a vegetable.

what ilm getting at is, we never really knew what things we did would matter or not matter for our survival, so the idea that we have to hurry to do something specific asap never really made tons of sense. Helping takemura served virtually no purpose at all for nomad ending, secret ending, and rogue ending. The big news is mikoshi is at Arasaka tower, which would probably be the first place anyone would look, especially given the past.

secret ending is unlocked by playing in a band, and panam by helping nomads steal tanks, rogue by going to a drive thru. No one can say which actions are the ones that lead to success ahead of time, so you may as well do what you feel. Many of people saying do this ASAP could easily have lead to V's death, or a trap. Many of them did.

it would be interesting to see how people would play the game if it was one life only, none of the quests were marked

I think they would still feel an urgency, but what would they choose to do? Which threads would they think are fruitful?

personally, I'd probably not have helped takemura the first playthrough,
 
Yes the little police encounters are stuffed to the gills with references to matters that are relevant to and add to the central plot elements of the game. It's a real shame that people have just assumed they're random encounters with no context because a lot of thought (and work) clearly went into them.

Somehow, the sheer amount of narrative thinking that has gone into the game doesn't seem to come across and seems not to get noticed by the most casual players. I really do wonder if it's because, between fast travel and showing everything on the map, the UI accidentally encourages a "bang bang, next" play style that means the details never get seen.
And @Ayinde_Palmer

I think it's a bit of what both of you said. I do worry that If you're used to being spoon-fed your motivations in the Cutscene-mission-reward style of game then you won't be looking for it, and maybe some of the marketing attracted players who aren't used to this level of detail.
Also if you're after a quick gaming session as stress relief and escapism maybe you don't need the extra tension.
Like I said I think it works for its own purposes but I don't think it works for all of the gamers' motivations for paying. There does need to be more "fun" to be had that isn't story related.
Not sure how they can square the circle though, there seem to be plenty of users who were left with the impression that there was "nothing to do" which means they missed it all so it wasn't telegraphed to then enough.
I don't believe that CDPR intended to create some type of immersion elitism. I'm used to looking at side text on hand for extra info, not all the info.
 
And @Ayinde_Palmer

I think it's a bit of what both of you said. I do worry that If you're used to being spoon-fed your motivations in the Cutscene-mission-reward style of game then you won't be looking for it, and maybe some of the marketing attracted players who aren't used to this level of detail.
Also if you're after a quick gaming session as stress relief and escapism maybe you don't need the extra tension.
Like I said I think it works for its own purposes but I don't think it works for all of the gamers' motivations for paying. There does need to be more "fun" to be had that isn't story related.
Not sure how they can square the circle though, there seem to be plenty of users who were left with the impression that there was "nothing to do" which means they missed it all so it wasn't telegraphed to then enough.
I don't believe that CDPR intended to create some type of immersion elitism. I'm used to looking at side text on hand for extra info, not all the info.

I don't think its immersion elitism... I think its kind of like...

Well first, let me make it clear, I think that the game, in order to work for most players probably needs to guide the player with the side info. However, It is true that having those systems changes human behavior, and the way players consume information/play. By labeling a quest as main quest, and pointing to it, the player will have a natural tendency to go there. They will decide, when they aren't sure what to do, that they guess this is what they should do. Which is the whole point, at the same time it may make a player feel like they don't have many real choices. Likewise, labeling the vast majority of gigs, makes people feel like gigs are the only things to notice.

So basically there is a tradeoff. As far as the depth of all the side content, in terms of lore. Did the player really want to know the backstory, if they didnt spend any time trying to figure it out? Not even that they should, but if you prefer going in Guns blazing, killing everything you see, and moving on to the next action would you really want to know the conversation the guy you killed had 3 weeks ago? or is it a hassle that takes you out of the game. Is there any way to information dump that type of player that they wouldn't find just as annoying? Would it kill their fun know this guy they killed was trying to get medicine for his family?

then there is a factor of resources, even if they decide that its better to create less realistic ways of info dumping, and that the player really wants it even though its opposite their playstyle. Is it feasible to deliver, lets say instead of a shard, some guy is going to be around who tells you the victim is a corpo teenager whose father hated her boyfriend. He has to be programmed to show up in the area, have voice work done, directed, binded, its going to add to the animation team workload, the npc flags, more possible bugs, etc. Could they deliver as much content knowing every side quest needs an increased amount of management/resource?

I think the way they did it, doesn't overload players whose playstyle is less curious, lets the player choose how engaged they are in these side/background stories, And allows them to tell a lot more short stories, and lore drops than they could do otherwise. Yeah, there are some players who may have wanted to know more who would have engaged with a different system, but reaching those players might have its own tradeoffs.
 
people make demands of you all the time, IRL I tell them sometimes they have to wait. The hurry up and do this asap stuff to save your life thing, None of these things are known to save your life.

V is just hoping/guessing, and in fact many of these things people were rushing you to do, don't really help you much. Finding Hellman is not particularly useful unless you choose Arasaka. Even then its questionable. Takemura spends weeks embroiling you in a power struggle to reinstate hanako/saburo and the honest truth? you probably would have achieved more, faster if you sided with yorinobu, or even michiko.

Just because some npc wants you to hurry up and do X doesn't mean its in your best interest, and it doesn't mean it'll give you a better chance of survival. Because it says Main story, we assume those threads will help us, But really, helping Evelyn was always a Longshot, I didnt do that plotline because I thought it would help save me. It happened to give a clue, but that was a Longshot ever since we found out she became a vegetable.

what ilm getting at is, we never really knew what things we did would matter or not matter for our survival, so the idea that we have to hurry to do something specific asap never really made tons of sense. Helping takemura served virtually no purpose at all for nomad ending, secret ending, and rogue ending. The big news is mikoshi is at Arasaka tower, which would probably be the first place anyone would look, especially given the past.

secret ending is unlocked by playing in a band, and panam by helping nomads steal tanks, rogue by going to a drive thru. No one can say which actions are the ones that lead to success ahead of time, so you may as well do what you feel. Many of people saying do this ASAP could easily have lead to V's death, or a trap. Many of them did.

it would be interesting to see how people would play the game if it was one life only, none of the quests were marked

I think they would still feel an urgency, but what would they choose to do? Which threads would they think are fruitful?

personally, I'd probably not have helped takemura the first playthrough,
You hand wave away the person waiting in a diner for days/week while you drive around and do stuff. Yes, in real life (and some game design) you communicate to the other party "I'm ready to meet, or mutually agree to meet in X days". 2077 doesn't do this.
You hand wave away the we don't know this will cure us - when V has zero idea what will and is desperate to find out ways he can. A guy who 1) SAVES your life, 2) Sticks around while you mend helping Vic {yes for his own interests too}, and 3) Is potentially a gold mine on information about the Company who made the chip killing your mind/personality...
How long do you risk letting that person sit in a diner?

How long have you ever waited for a date/business meeting if they don't show? 1 Hour? Two? 6 hours? 12hours? You see how the sillyness of him just sitting there and waiting for DAYS/longer becomes silly to the extreme because the writing and game design was MEET NOW - U Come nowzies!!! instead of say - a phone call saying OK I'm ready let's meet or a mutually agreed upon time.
OR more realistically Takemura figures you're blowing him off and he'd start trying to monitor and follow you and then approach you while you travel around known areas (DRs area, etc)

Yes, just because someone wants you do to a thing and we need to meet doesn't mean you HAVE to - correct. But REALISTICALY there are consequences for not. The River going to investigate the "person" - umm SERIOUS consequences that can be measured in hours
Panam - serious consequences as loot would be sold and then she has zero reason to help you as you didn't help her
Judy - another person would have "serious physicals status ISSUES"
You make them wait too long there are serious consequences beyond them giving you the middle finger for seemingly being stood up.

The moment you start to think all the holes appear.
The moment you get closer to examine you see Georges Seurat's lack of detail up close vs far away. Whereas in 2077 it is not to the benefit of the piece but in monsieur Seurat part it gives additional meaning.

If YOU were told your brain is being rewritten and every day you lose more of yourself and you don't get into a OMG need to move quickly on this thats how YOU choose to roleplay. But vast majority of humanity is indeed fixated on survival and that is a weee bit of important motivation for most people.

But using a ticking clock trope - in both overall theme as well as in side quests/quest design - then IGNORING the ticking clock/ hand waving it away is good design to you?
 
You hand wave away the person waiting in a diner for days/week while you drive around and do stuff. Yes, in real life (and some game design) you communicate to the other party "I'm ready to meet, or mutually agree to meet in X days". 2077 doesn't do this.
You hand wave away the we don't know this will cure us - when V has zero idea what will and is desperate to find out ways he can. A guy who 1) SAVES your life, 2) Sticks around while you mend helping Vic {yes for his own interests too}, and 3) Is potentially a gold mine on information about the Company who made the chip killing your mind/personality...
How long do you risk letting that person sit in a diner?

How long have you ever waited for a date/business meeting if they don't show? 1 Hour? Two? 6 hours? 12hours? You see how the sillyness of him just sitting there and waiting for DAYS/longer becomes silly to the extreme because the writing and game design was MEET NOW - U Come nowzies!!! instead of say - a phone call saying OK I'm ready let's meet or a mutually agreed upon time.
OR more realistically Takemura figures you're blowing him off and he'd start trying to monitor and follow you and then approach you while you travel around known areas (DRs area, etc)

Yes, just because someone wants you do to a thing and we need to meet doesn't mean you HAVE to - correct. But REALISTICALY there are consequences for not. The River going to investigate the "person" - umm SERIOUS consequences that can be measured in hours
Panam - serious consequences as loot would be sold and then she has zero reason to help you as you didn't help her
Judy - another person would have "serious physicals status ISSUES"
You make them wait too long there are serious consequences beyond them giving you the middle finger for seemingly being stood up.

The moment you start to think all the holes appear.
The moment you get closer to examine you see Georges Seurat's lack of detail up close vs far away. Whereas in 2077 it is not to the benefit of the piece but in monsieur Seurat part it gives additional meaning.

If YOU were told your brain is being rewritten and every day you lose more of yourself and you don't get into a OMG need to move quickly on this thats how YOU choose to roleplay. But vast majority of humanity is indeed fixated on survival and that is a weee bit of important motivation for most people.

But using a ticking clock trope - in both overall theme as well as in side quests/quest design - then IGNORING the ticking clock/ hand waving it away is good design to you?
The days of games when quests timeout if you don't do them now now now are, thankfully, largely gone. Just like games where you had three lives and no saves and if you died you had to start the entire game from the beginning again.

Plot urgency crashing against the player's desire to do other things is more or less a standard trope of almost every game that tries to do open world these days. There's no obvious solution that can marry the two without making the plot artificial in *different* ways and completely dramatically inert (eg "if you do this now because of [insert plot random reason] it will matter but immediately afterwards there will be no urgency because [insert plot reason] and you can go back to doing what you like").

Between suspending disbelief to do things at my own pace and having to do everything at a certain pace because the plot demands it, I'd rather suspend my disbelief.
 
The days of games when quests timeout if you don't do them now now now are, thankfully, largely gone. Just like games where you had three lives and no saves and if you died you had to start the entire game from the beginning again.

Plot urgency crashing against the player's desire to do other things is more or less a standard trope of almost every game that tries to do open world these days. There's no obvious solution that can marry the two without making the plot artificial in *different* ways and completely dramatically inert (eg "if you do this now because of [insert plot random reason] it will matter but immediately afterwards there will be no urgency because [insert plot reason] and you can go back to doing what you like").

Between suspending disbelief to do things at my own pace and having to do everything at a certain pace because the plot demands it, I'd rather suspend my disbelief.
"The days of games when quests timeout if you don't do them now now now are, thankfully, largely gone. " You changed my argument but I'll roll with it...
"those types of games" like 2077 and the implant quest when you encounter the guy? Try ignoring it and driving off elsewhere to do XYZ
Like RDR2 and crime seen?
Like Witcher 2 if you dont go and rescue a certain someone she undergoes additional time as captive and another has to save her which affects how she addresses you/events?
{2077 would have had them as just markers on the map you can do at any time - even weeks later!!!} - instead of ohhh.. things going on at once and you need to CHOOSE one (player agency) and deal/see the consequences {Cause and effect from player choice}
W3 - as part of a quest there are ramification as well as player roleplay ramifications to waiting while events in another room take place that you hear/listen too. Minor - but there.
You mean - realism? I'll take my some realism in my games thanks.

"Just like games where you had three lives and no saves and if you died you had to start the entire game from the beginning again."
You mean like any game with an IronMan mode/similar like a Dark Souls on difficult? Those games aren't made anymore or have gone by the wayside and I need to explain what Ironman mode is as it is part of the "days when they made games like..."

Somehow I think we are still in the days where games like the above are still being made. as well as still being played.

"There's no obvious solution that can marry the two without making the plot artificial in *different* ways and completely dramatically inert (eg "if you do this now because of [insert plot random reason] it will matter but immediately afterwards there will be no urgency because [insert plot reason] and you can go back to doing what you like")." Off the top of my head - either you do it with messages - I'm ready to meet Takemura, fade/shift and you're at the diner OR Takemura hangs out outside of your apartment area or Vic's and says let me buy you <meal> and lets talk....
 
Last edited:
"The days of games when quests timeout if you don't do them now now now are, thankfully, largely gone. " You changed my argument but I'll roll with it...
"those types of games" like 2077 and the implant quest when you encounter the guy? Try ignoring it and driving off elsewhere to do XYZ
Like RDR2 and crime seen?
Like Witcher 2 if you dont go and rescue a certain someone she undergoes additional time as captive and another has to save her which affects how she addresses you/events?
{2077 would have had them as just markers on the map you can do at any time - even weeks later!!!} - instead of ohhh.. things going on at once and you need to CHOOSE one (player agency) and deal/see the consequences {Cause and effect from player choice}
W3 - as part of a quest there are ramification as well as player roleplay ramifications to waiting while events in another room take place that you hear/listen too. Minor - but there.
You mean - realism? I'll take my some realism in my games thanks.

"Just like games where you had three lives and no saves and if you died you had to start the entire game from the beginning again."
You mean like any game with an IronMan mode/similar like a Dark Souls on difficult? Those games aren't made anymore or have gone by the wayside and I need to explain what Ironman mode is as it is part of the "days when they made games like..."

Somehow I think we are still in the days where games like the above are still being made. as well as still being played.
Well if you want "minor but there" there are more than a handful of moments in Cyberpunk where, a quest having initiated, if you do nothing or fail to react the quest will either fail outright or go a way you didn't want.
 
The moment you start to think all the holes appear.

That's not a problem unique to CP2077, but oh-emm-jee, you are so right about CP2077 on this one.

The sheer number of times when I've thought to myself, "Well, wait...why can't I just...?" when I see a painfully obvious solution which the game will not let me employ...

If YOU were told your brain is being rewritten and every day you lose more of yourself and you don't get into a OMG need to move quickly on this thats how YOU choose to roleplay. But vast majority of humanity is indeed fixated on survival and that is a weee bit of important motivation for most people.

I have to admit, on my first playthrough, I treated a lot of the story urgency as if it were gameplay urgency, and it totally turned out that i could take my time.
I kept asking myself after another chip-glitch whether this would be the one that kills me, but they seemed to be window-dressing only.

After a while, you definitely start to see behind the curtain, and what you see is so much simpler than you'd have thought at first...

But using a ticking clock trope - in both overall theme as well as in side quests/quest design - then IGNORING the ticking clock/ hand waving it away is good design to you?

Not in the least.

That said, though, I don't like ticking clock games; in an open world like Night City, I want to explore the gigantic crapola out of it! If I only have a limited time to play, that means I only have a limited time to explore.
Rather than actually playing the game, I'll save, go treasure-hunting, make a list of where everything is, load up that last save, go collect it all, save again. Cuz otherwise, that's all wasted time when time is a finite resource.

I keep thinking about how much I wanted to play this game based on the promo material I was seeing, but now, after several months and the sheer number of times and ways I would have done things wildly differently than CDPR did, I have to go back and re-examine those trailers and such to see how the ads and the product don't match: was I fooling myself or did CDPR shamelessly hide all of the parts I wasn't going to like?
I really don't know. Wish I did.
But it does seem like they hyped what I would call "the good parts" and quietly brushed aside what I would call "the bad parts" in their ads; I feel fooled, but only for the first time, so...shame on CDPR. (Next time, though, shame on me.)

I still want to play the game I thought I was getting.
 
You hand wave away the person waiting in a diner for days/week while you drive around and do stuff. Yes, in real life (and some game design) you communicate to the other party "I'm ready to meet, or mutually agree to meet in X days". 2077 doesn't do this.
You hand wave away the we don't know this will cure us - when V has zero idea what will and is desperate to find out ways he can. A guy who 1) SAVES your life, 2) Sticks around while you mend helping Vic {yes for his own interests too}, and 3) Is potentially a gold mine on information about the Company who made the chip killing your mind/personality...
How long do you risk letting that person sit in a diner?

How long have you ever waited for a date/business meeting if they don't show? 1 Hour? Two? 6 hours? 12hours? You see how the sillyness of him just sitting there and waiting for DAYS/longer becomes silly to the extreme because the writing and game design was MEET NOW - U Come nowzies!!! instead of say - a phone call saying OK I'm ready let's meet or a mutually agreed upon time.
OR more realistically Takemura figures you're blowing him off and he'd start trying to monitor and follow you and then approach you while you travel around known areas (DRs area, etc)

Yes, just because someone wants you do to a thing and we need to meet doesn't mean you HAVE to - correct. But REALISTICALY there are consequences for not. The River going to investigate the "person" - umm SERIOUS consequences that can be measured in hours
Panam - serious consequences as loot would be sold and then she has zero reason to help you as you didn't help her
Judy - another person would have "serious physicals status ISSUES"
You make them wait too long there are serious consequences beyond them giving you the middle finger for seemingly being stood up.

The moment you start to think all the holes appear.
The moment you get closer to examine you see Georges Seurat's lack of detail up close vs far away. Whereas in 2077 it is not to the benefit of the piece but in monsieur Seurat part it gives additional meaning.

If YOU were told your brain is being rewritten and every day you lose more of yourself and you don't get into a OMG need to move quickly on this thats how YOU choose to roleplay. But vast majority of humanity is indeed fixated on survival and that is a weee bit of important motivation for most people.

But using a ticking clock trope - in both overall theme as well as in side quests/quest design - then IGNORING the ticking clock/ hand waving it away is good design to you?

I would say its silly of the npcs to demand you meet them now, its just game logic so the npc is in a specific place without too much hassle. Jackie for example literally sits waiting by maelstrom, even though you can tell him you have other things to do first for the plan.

If someone told me meet me now, I'd probably tell them nah, set a time, or not reply to the text. Unless its a friend in need, or its convenient. I'd find it more unreasonable for someone to expect you to show up somewhere with no confirmation, than for them to sit waiting. Thats their own fault. no lies, sometimes I don't see messages in game, or irl for days.

Also, realistically, I wouldn't believe takemura would lead me to a solution.
1)he tells you his motivation
2)he has shown no actual props within Arasaka. Oda tells him next time he sees him, he is dead.
3)the things he asks you to do are more likely to kill you in moments, rather than weeks. Realistically immersion wise, would you agree to war with a mob boss with one guy who says if you win that war, he will talk to a lady who might be able to cure your unheard of illness. Are you really selling that as a survival strategy?
4)Eff Arasaka, nothing you learn in game suggests Arasaka is particularly trustworthy, or that your interests align with theirs. In fact the more you learn, the less it seems like the Arasaka alliance is a good way to survive, or that its a good idea to work with the saburo faction.

Likewise a friend of mine, after betrayal by VDBs, he didnt go back there until he was sure there was no other way to progress. You posit that following the main story is clearly the best chance for survival, when the fact is, its literally not. You die trying to get relic, you die working with the VDBs, if you play very hard, you probably die multiple times in that warehouse attack.

its just like blue eyes says, V, in pursuit of survival, does things that are more likely to kill them than the death they are trying to prevent. Especially if the player is rushing the main story.

I think I'm going to stream a hardcore(one life) very hard game, I feel like it will be very hard for V to survive 2-3 weeks and end the game. Even with all my foreknowledge.

If the game had dead ends, or bad endings. I would assume the arasaka alliance was one of those dead end paths.
 
Last edited:
I would say its silly of the npcs to demand you meet them now, its just game logic so the npc is in a specific place without too much hassle. Jackie for example literally sits waiting by maelstrom, even though you can tell him you have other things to do first for the plan.

If someone told me meet me now, I'd probably tell them nah, set a time, or not reply to the text. Unless its a friend in need, or its convenient. I'd find it more unreasonable for someone to expect you to show up somewhere with no confirmation, than for them to sit waiting. Thats their own fault. no lies, sometimes I don't see messages in game, or irl for days.

Also, realistically, I wouldn't believe takemura would lead me to a solution.
1)he tells you his motivation
2)he has shown no actual props within Arasaka. Oda tells him next time he sees him, he is dead.
3)the things he asks you to do are more likely to kill you in moments, rather than weeks. Realistically immersion wise, would you agree to war with a mob boss with one guy who says if you win that war, he will talk to a lady who might be able to cure your unheard of illness. Are you really selling that as a survival strategy?
4)Eff Arasaka, nothing you learn in game suggests Arasaka is particularly trustworthy, or that your interests align with theirs. In fact the more you learn, the less it seems like the Arasaka alliance is a good way to survive, or that its a good idea to work with the saburo faction.

Likewise a friend of mine, after betrayal by VDBs, he didnt go back there until he was sure there was no other way to progress. You posit that following the main story is clearly the best chance for survival, when the fact is, its literally not. You die trying to get relic, you die working with the VDBs, if you play very hard, you probably die multiple times in that warehouse attack.

its just like blue eyes says, V, in pursuit of survival, does things that are more likely to kill them than the death they are trying to prevent. Especially if the player is rushing the main story.

I think I'm going to stream a hardcore(one life) very hard game, I feel like it will be very hard for V to survive 2-3 weeks and end the game. Even with all my foreknowledge.

If the game had dead ends, or bad endings. I would assume the arasaka alliance was one of those dead end paths.
I am getting so tired of the strawmen.

Yes it's silly to have a person sit for days/longer in a location but it isn't game mechanics - its how they CHOOSE to design the game. Instead of agree to meet - fade to black - then fade in to the actual meeting.

"Also, realistically, I wouldn't believe takemura would lead me to a solution." I didn't say he realistically would be/appears to be but as you only have two leads from the beginning it would make good sense to see what the guys knows sooner rather than later as you have a mere two clues to go on at the beginning. My point was story design on top of open world with a ticking timer (V's death) reinforced over and over and over by everyone in the game creating a drumbeat of gotta move to save yourself. Wheny our open world and game mechanics directly oppose your story there is a problem hence this thread - not viability of a NPCs ability to save you.

""Likewise a friend of mine, after betrayal by VDBs, he didnt go back there until he was sure there was no other way to progress. You posit that following the main story is clearly the best chance for survival, when the fact is, its literally not."" Considering the only way to reach the endings of the game as written by CDPR you LITERALLY CANNOT reach the end of the game until you do Takemura's questas so CDPR disagrees with you. LITERALLY. You can and should pursue Panam and Judy lines as both good but also makes good sense too but all one of them does is change the ending yo reach AFTER DOING Takemura's Quests!!!!!!!!! I don't disagree with some of your points but Takemura's viability as savior has nothing to do with what I brought up. A man sitting on a motorcycle for weeks without sleep, eating, or drinking was one.

Please let me know what ending you reached when you abandoned the main quest and did every other fixer and NCPD quest on the map - oh wait they have zero affect on the ending of the game. Bad merger of Story/Ticking Timer/and open world.

Do his quests make sense? Not great. This thread is about this story as written on top of a open world and how they don't mesh well and you keep having to change peoples arguments to somehow Takemura is our best hope?!?!

Going back to your VDB statement - I completely agree. The mind-reaped someone to be trapped in their own body to endure reaping, and the inability to move - like someone under anesthesia in surgery waking up. This is a horrendous thing to do to someone. V learns what happened to Ev, sees the affects, knows it took someone really skilled to do it, that she just took a job from the VDB and did her own thing, and this was the retribution they gave her. Yet, as written, our V has near zero problem working for them, doesn't bring up they are suspect #1 for Ev, and blindly trusts them when they want to piggy bank in their heads even a Hacker/skilled computer V blindly goes along with it instead of dumping them out of their head and moving on with the mission - which they aren't needed for as the give zero assistance except "go to the cinema now" . BAD WRITING - granted you didn't want to do their quest - as you the player had reservations - yet your V was never given a chance to say or act on those reservations. Just a binary choose which side you take choice. You didn't argue anything to the contrary -but yet another example of disconnect.
 
Yet, as written, our V has near zero problem working for them, doesn't bring up they are suspect #1 for Ev, and blindly trusts them when they want to piggy bank in their heads even a Hacker/skilled computer V blindly goes along with it instead of dumping them out of their head and moving on with the mission - which they aren't needed for as the give zero assistance except "go to the cinema now"
I not totally agree with that :(
V works for VDBs willy-nilly (if that is said in English).
There are several times when you can "squash" Placide, V also can said some things about Evelyn to Placide or Brigitte ("Evelyn Parker... Ring a bell ?"). But since it is absolutely necessary to meet Brigitte to know if she can remove the chip (or not). V has no real choice, He must work for them.
And if you do all the main quests before this one, you have no other solution. Hanako said "You must find a upgraded SoulKiller", not more. Basically it's the last possible track.
 
The point is n
I am getting so tired of the strawmen.

Yes it's silly to have a person sit for days/longer in a location but it isn't game mechanics - its how they CHOOSE to design the game. Instead of agree to meet - fade to black - then fade in to the actual meeting.

"Also, realistically, I wouldn't believe takemura would lead me to a solution." I didn't say he realistically would be/appears to be but as you only have two leads from the beginning it would make good sense to see what the guys knows sooner rather than later as you have a mere two clues to go on at the beginning. My point was story design on top of open world with a ticking timer (V's death) reinforced over and over and over by everyone in the game creating a drumbeat of gotta move to save yourself. Wheny our open world and game mechanics directly oppose your story there is a problem hence this thread - not viability of a NPCs ability to save you.

""Likewise a friend of mine, after betrayal by VDBs, he didnt go back there until he was sure there was no other way to progress. You posit that following the main story is clearly the best chance for survival, when the fact is, its literally not."" Considering the only way to reach the endings of the game as written by CDPR you LITERALLY CANNOT reach the end of the game until you do Takemura's questas so CDPR disagrees with you. LITERALLY. You can and should pursue Panam and Judy lines as both good but also makes good sense too but all one of them does is change the ending yo reach AFTER DOING Takemura's Quests!!!!!!!!! I don't disagree with some of your points but Takemura's viability as savior has nothing to do with what I brought up. A man sitting on a motorcycle for weeks without sleep, eating, or drinking was one.

Please let me know what ending you reached when you abandoned the main quest and did every other fixer and NCPD quest on the map - oh wait they have zero affect on the ending of the game. Bad merger of Story/Ticking Timer/and open world.

Do his quests make sense? Not great. This thread is about this story as written on top of a open world and how they don't mesh well and you keep having to change peoples arguments to somehow Takemura is our best hope?!?!

Going back to your VDB statement - I completely agree. The mind-reaped someone to be trapped in their own body to endure reaping, and the inability to move - like someone under anesthesia in surgery waking up. This is a horrendous thing to do to someone. V learns what happened to Ev, sees the affects, knows it took someone really skilled to do it, that she just took a job from the VDB and did her own thing, and this was the retribution they gave her. Yet, as written, our V has near zero problem working for them, doesn't bring up they are suspect #1 for Ev, and blindly trusts them when they want to piggy bank in their heads even a Hacker/skilled computer V blindly goes along with it instead of dumping them out of their head and moving on with the mission - which they aren't needed for as the give zero assistance except "go to the cinema now" . BAD WRITING - granted you didn't want to do their quest - as you the player had reservations - yet your V was never given a chance to say or act on those reservations. Just a binary choose which side you take choice. You didn't argue anything to the contrary -but yet another example of disconnect.

Ok, let me try to simply my point and why we are having this exchange.

1)How the player chooses to engage with the open world aspects has to do with each player's own take on the story.

a)The decision of how, and when to do side quests is not defined by game mechanics, or narrative.

2)Its not unreasonable to let people wait, Its unreasonable, to you, based on your RP, and choices in the game. This is fine. All I'm saying its up to the player to do whatever makes sense to them(in the open world stuff/MQ has less control)

3)Nothing, based on ingame story suggests that the MQ is going to be any more helpful to your survival than doing a fixer quest.

a) fixer quests, are generally lower risk, short quests that give you money, which gives you resources which increases your chance of not dying before you get a cure. They also give you knowledge of the game, some of which can inform you about the groups which you are aligning with, and how good an idea it is to align with them.

b)MQ quests are generally, longer, riskier and more likely to get you killed. If your goal is survival, you should always go into them well equipped, prepared for death, and with no regrets. (based on the context of the story)



So essentially, I'm not disagreeing that how you see it, doing the mq is the only logical way to proceed. I am debating that it is the only way to understand the situation for any type of V.

My point is, if V doesn't trust takemura, or VDBs, or wants to have the best cyberware and gear available before putting themselves in deadly hard to escape situation(best way to gear up is money and street cred and experience), that is not an illogical choice.

If V thinks attacking a warehouse crawling with high end Arasaka security might get them killed before 3 weeks passes, they might want to go on a date, or help a friend, or save kidnapped kid first. This is not an illogical choice.


And a lot of information exists in the open world. If V wants a better understanding of who the players are and what risks their are. Some of the non MQ provides it. Extra information on the relic, Whether yorinobu really cares about you, and what he is doing. How the VDBs treat outsiders. How they treat people within their community. What type of organization is the tiger claws, the aldecados, the afterlife mercs, rogue. The nature of consciousness. Who is netwatch, Whats the old net like.

These things are relevant to understanding the main quests, and the choices you have to make.

Unfortunately, it is a game, and the MQ doesnt have infinite choices. So you will eventually have to follow some parts regardless. Vdbs are the only path to Alt. Finding Hellman gives you relic data (though alt doesn't need it, Hanako demands you solve her company problems) And Hanako confirms the location of mikoshi(though I think rogue probably knows already, and Johnny suspects, and the nomads could probably guess) So you have to do this stuff. But who you choose in the end, and why is based on information, and connections you make outside of the MQ.

The MQ is essentially, after the heist, the story of how Arasaka/Hanako/takemura(the world) manipulates V, and V's circumstances to trap V into a solution that serves their purposes. They actively try to lower V's options, and pressure V to choose their path. Takemura suggests Hanako is the only one at arasaka that could help him, (she isn't, rogue knows michiko, yorinobu's main target is takemura not V) Takemura dissuades you from dealing with rival corps. Takemura constantly puts time based pressure on V to act now, don't question, we are your only option.

The only way to break out of this trap is to rebel, and do things outside the MQ, The only way to make better(more informed) decisions is to explore the world and choose for yourself. Its not a coincidence that the other endings exist outside of MQ. However, they don't want it to be a no brainer, they want V to feel a pressure to conform, They want it to be understandable why a person in the world that V lives in feels like the corporate solution, and following the obvious path feels like the only way to survive. They want to make it so the very game(world) itself is telling you the only path forward is through arasaka.


Well, though I'm sure you will be like, this wall of text is nonsense, thanks for the debate, it made me realize somethings about why they structured the Arasaka/corpo path as the default one. And also why some people feel forced dominated by the main narrative.

I'm a natural rebel, so to me not doing everything they say, when they say, and questioning everybody's perspective is natural.

But you are right, there is one dominant aspect of the narrative, which does suggest the player should act a certain way, though they do give clues though that it might not be the only way to see things.

Johnny, rogue, panam, Judy, river, Kerry, Evelyn, VDBs, Delamain, Misty all give different perspectives on how to engage with a world that wants you to take a single path.
 
Last edited:
Plot urgency crashing against the player's desire to do other things is more or less a standard trope of almost every game that tries to do open world these days. There's no obvious solution that can marry the two without making the plot artificial in *different* ways and completely dramatically inert (eg "if you do this now because of [insert plot random reason] it will matter but immediately afterwards there will be no urgency because [insert plot reason] and you can go back to doing what you like").
While true the conflicts created by slapping open world and compelling cinematic narratives together vary based on the narrative. Many open world games don't appear to concern themselves with synergy between the narrative and open world concepts. CP is perhaps a good example. The whole two weeks to live concept creates a dire sense of urgency. The open world concepts offer freedom, exploration, etc. In short, the two weeks to live concept doesn't pair well with open world.

An alternative approach would be to carefully construct a narrative fitting into those open world aspects. None of this is to say the narrative cannot create a sense of urgency. Merely that it should do so intelligently in a way where there are periods of urgency and others where it dies down a bit. In the process you would end up with short sections of narrative where it would make logical sense to explore the open world at your leisure.
 
Top Bottom