It depend what are you said by "finish".
For the main story, yep that's sound wierd to not finish it one time at least (except if you really don't like the game).
If it's "100%" the game, that seem more "normal" for me. Personally I don't finish games 100%, because there are things I don't want to do like Auxiliary Heart on Cyberpunk or "silly and boring" challenges in RockStar games.
But the main story, I always finish it normally
And to be honest, in TW3 if you don't finish the main story, it's only because you don't want it. While in Cyberpunk, there may be other reasons beyond the control of the players (bugs, problems...)
Knowing that I have most of the GIGs left, to finish the quests for Panam, Judy and Kerry and a few other side quests.
I answered 'no' initially, but maybe I was wrong. Imo the main quest is a good length, but the problem comes that it is too...not open enough It doesn't lead the people who want to spend longer in CP77 to the side quests. You end up having to headcanon reasons for V to ignore the main quest and do side missions.
Otherwise, I don't consider CP to be a short game if you want to spend time in its world.
The game definitely felt way too short for as much as I enjoyed it , its main story only lasting about 20 hours or something and the side-quests not making up for it . I tried doing all side-content first cause I feared this would have been another "Skyrim" story length wise and I wasn't wrong .
I would have liked something more similar to The Witcher's length and I think it would have been necessary to further develop many of this game's characters and plots...which do instead feel quite rushed .
For TW3, 14.81% of players have finish the game in any difficulty (survivor of the ordeal).
For Cyberpunk, 26.21% of players have finish the main story (The world).
Completion rates are about 10% higher on steam for each game, but what's really mind-boggling is only 66% players unlocking "Lilac and Gooseberries" in TW3. It takes less time to do it than it takes for you to meet Dexter DeShawn in CP2077.
I don't know the facts about why CP77 is shorter than TW3. Only what CDPR have said.
That being said, with what I do know, I don't think it's too far fetched to say that a considerably large portion of players - who didn't finish TW3 - don't exactly... dislike the game being "too long." I'd even go as far as to surmise that a good amount of them appreciate it.
It took me personally, at least, 4 or 5 real attempts to get around to finishing TW3. At no time was I thinking "this is too long..." or anything like that. A lot of the points of the game are better each time. It was like a really good high quality book for me in that way, anyway. When I did finish it, (I got... good endings) I was overcome with joy - the journey was fantastic, that of my journey through the game & with Geralt & Co., and that of Geralt & Co.'s journey.
I do find it hard to believe that the conscious decision (or design choice) to make CP77 shorter was that of a good one, or rather, "for the players," so to speak.
Stand to reason this poll is HEAVILY slanted to the hardcore gamers/CP77 fans who still haven't had enough of the game 8 months after the disastrous release. More casual gamers who make up the huge majority are not here to voice their opinion, but given a majority of players don't even finish any given game...we can safely assume their priorities would be way different from the poll majority. Quality over quantity (sadly we hardly got either).
That said, it would make sense with more OPTIONAL content in a sandbox world such as Night City.
"DO YOU ACTUALLY LIKE CP77 BEING SHORTER THEN WITCHER3 ?"
No, because although not familiar with The Witcher 3, for me, games can never be long enough. With the exception of the NCPD hustles, I always do all gigs, side and main jobs. Always. Never skip a single 1 of em.
Even always do Stefan.
Could complete the game in 2 hours, skipping all dialogs, rides, battles, side jobs, gigs and just doing the main jobs, but why should I?
Always enjoying everything the game's got to offer. Depending how long I play everyday, could take up over a week to complete 1 playthrough.
I admit, I'm actually a different mind on some games that SHOULD be shorter as a matter of pacing but these are pretty rare and I only have a few examples:
* Far Cry 3: The game should have ended with Vaas' death and then moved on to Cintra. Hoyt Voker's island was superfluous and hurt the pacing of the game. I think they could have put it in as a DLC and everyone would have been happy.
* Red Dead Redemption 2: Likewise, I think the Epilogues could have been DLC and possibly the entire Guarma level.
Sometimes pacing benefits from knowing when to edit a story out. The thing is that Cyberpunk 2020 feels like you only get Two Acts of a Three Act Structure with a third part of the game missing after you fix your brain. There seems like a huge amount of set up in the game with you vs. the Arasaka corporation and Yorinobu but you never even meet the guy.
That being said, with what I do know, I don't think it's too far fetched to say that a considerably large portion of players - who didn't finish TW3 - don't exactly... dislike the game being "too long." I'd even go as far as to surmise that a good amount of them appreciate it.
I'd question the point of completion rate stats too. Sometimes people buy games and don't play them until later. Placing them on the backseat has more to do with mood, time and various other areas completely unrelated to their length. I've watched half of a movie or TV series then watched the other half 6 months later. I have a half read book sitting on a desk as we speak. It hasn't been touched in a couple months. It's not because it's lacking in any way.
Stats detailing time to completion are even further into "this is completely irrelevant" land. Is fast travel being used or not? Presumably those stats are relying on averaging. In which case quite a lot of context goes out the window. Player A fast travels everywhere and takes 40 hours. Player B doesn't use fast travel at all and might take 80 hours. Blindly settling on 60 hours to complete isn't going to paint an accurate picture for player A or B.
Prior to those entering the picture the accuracy of such stats in both cases can be brought under consideration. In theory it should be a simple matter of collecting simple data which is none of their damn business via relatively simple means. Regardless....
I do find it hard to believe that the conscious decision (or design choice) to make CP77 shorter was that of a good one, or rather, "for the players," so to speak.
Heh, my cynicism drives me toward two angles. The first is delivering less game is less involved. If you deliver a long game and people demand less game at the same price point then it's not a great leap to arrive at an instant excuse to lower costs while keeping profits per unit identical. The second angle is it creates the opportunity to pull out the "listen to feedback" card. People asked for less game so we gave them less game. Bask in our consumer friendliness.
Of course, there is some question whether CP really is "less" than TW3. For the main narrative it may be. The side content in CP is tightly tied to and interlates with the main content though. I'm not sure it's fair to isolate out the main narrative in each game and compare them.
I admit, I'm actually a different mind on some games that SHOULD be shorter as a matter of pacing but these are pretty rare and I only have a few examples:
Yup. I'd consider "this game is too long because I couldn't finish it completely within X time interval" to be silly. The only rationalization for "too long" is if the pacing or way events are setup comes off as drawn out or doesn't quite fit. In which case the length itself is not the problem. It's the way the content was put together.
One example would be the White Frost bit at the end of TW3. For almost the entire game the White Frost was sitting in the background as a lore element. Bits and pieces of information detailing the great prophecy of doom and gloom. The elder blood will save the day. Exposure to the state of affairs in the mystical world of the other Elves during portal hopscotch adventures with Avallac'h. Tying that to the true nature of the Wild Hunt. Otherwise known as the vicious, space Elven slavers.
Moving the White Frost front and center at the very end and tying it to the fate of Ciri, and indirectly Geralt, was arguably forced and out of place. It didn't quite fit with the pacing to do so. It arguably would have fit better to handle the fate of Ciri, and indirectly Geralt, via other means. Keep the great frozen destroyer of worlds in the backdrop.
On a completely unrelated note. Is it the dark art of Necromancy after the 6 month point?
Of course, there is some question whether CP really is "less" than TW3. For the main narrative it may be. The side content in CP is tightly tied to and interlates with the main content though. I'm not sure it's fair to isolate out the main narrative in each game and compare them.
Honestly, I'd say its not actually that tied in because most of the Gigs don't effect the other quests and are easy to miss.
There's a very good argument that a lot of the "side content" isn't actually side content at all. Judy and Panam's missions and River and Kerry's should have probably been incorporated into the main quests.
And the fact its hidden just causes players to miss it.
I'd rather keep the epilogue as it was quite good a good pay off for the last chapter as it was grim, and because of Arthurs fate. It sort of helped the player almost come to terms with Arthurs action as what he did gave John the chance that he got to be with his family and to be a better man.
Guarma however .. yeah, not really needed and I feel all I got out of it was just seeing Dutch going further down a horrible path, which while interesting, it wasn't needed as we had already seen it start, and everything after they got back proved it.
Completion rates are about 10% higher on steam for each game, but what's really mind-boggling is only 66% players unlocking "Lilac and Gooseberries" in TW3. It takes less time to do it than it takes for you to meet Dexter DeShawn in CP2077.
I've talked about this before but I found the opening of Witcher 3 so staggeringly boring and dour that I abandoned the game not once but twice within a couple of hours. I only picked it up a third time because I simply couldn't understand how a game that well reviewed could be so astonishingly tedious.
(For me, it really found its groove once you got to Novigrad and I can barely stand much of the content in Velen and White Orchard; it just feels like a succession of generic miserable peasants being generic and miserable. There is essentially no character before Novigrad possessed of an ounce of charisma. Opening on softcore porn of Yennefer also didn't predispose me to liking the game.)
It may be that other people reacted the same way which would explain what you're seeing.
Honestly, I'd say its not actually that tied in because most of the Gigs don't effect the other quests and are easy to miss.
There's a very good argument that a lot of the "side content" isn't actually side content at all. Judy and Panam's missions and River and Kerry's should have probably been incorporated into the main quests.
And the fact its hidden just causes players to miss it.
Agree re side content isn't side content and the systems in CP can cause a player who doesn't play with an exploring style to miss an awful lot of world building and narrative that is directly relevant to where the story is going. How quests were delivered really felt like it needed much more thought, as if the developers were hurrying players in the wrong direction and wasting the clearly incredible amount of work that went into other parts of the game.
I've talked about this before but I found the opening of Witcher 3 so staggeringly boring and dour that I abandoned the game not once but twice within a couple of hours. I only picked it up a third time because I simply couldn't understand how a game that well reviewed could be so astonishingly tedious. (For me, it really found its groove once you got to Novigrad and I can barely stand much of the content in Velen and White Orchard; it just feels like a succession of generic miserable peasants being generic and miserable. Opening on softcore porn of Yennefer also didn't predispose me to liking the game.)
It may be that other people reacted the same way which would explain what you're seeing.
Who knows? It's still really weird to see that 1/3 of players didn't play more than an hour and a half of the main story.
About Velen - well, the general consensus is that it has a really strong atmosphere (show, don't just tell approach to presenting the war-ravaged land was compared very favourably to the sanitized approach adopted by Dragon Age: Inquisition) and Bloody Baron and Ladies of the Woods questlines are considered to be the base game's highest point when it comes to the narrative. A Towerful of Mice is among the most beloved sidequests in the game.
It's nice to see someone who had almost the opposite experience to still end up liking the game.
Yeah, they cut the story because Witcher was too long, they removed wall running due to level design, they canceled 3rd person cutscenes because of immersion etc. etc. etc.
Sound like a bullshit to me, they obviously just had no time or resources for doing that.
Nobody can like that short story in RPG, DLC to Uncharted is actually longer than Cyberpunk's main quest
Who knows? It's still really weird to see that 1/3 of players didn't play more than an hour and a half of the main story.
About Velen - well, the general consensus is that it has a really strong atmosphere (show, don't just tell approach to presenting the war-ravaged land was compared very favourably to the sanitized approach adopted by Dragon Age: Inquisition) and Bloody Baron and Ladies of the Woods questlines are considered to be the base game's highest point when it comes to the narrative. A Towerful of Mice is among the most beloved sidequests in the game.
It's nice to someone who had almost the opposite experience to still end up liking the game.
Yes I absolutely hated the Bloody Baron and everything about it (I'm no fan of the Ladies of the Wood, either). So I think depending on your taste the opening has the potential to be quite alienating because it's too gritty / misery porn soap opera without the game already having shown you a more magical and escapist hand (this is possibly why they felt it necessary to have Yennefer prancing around naked in the first scene -- just to promise more to come for the target market(?!)).
PS I suppose there's also an issue that forest-clearing-village-forest-clearing-village, while initially pretty, isn't a particularly engaging environment if you're not enjoying the stories.
(this is possibly why they felt it necessary to have Yennefer prancing around naked in the first scene -- just to promise more to come for the target market(?!)).
Who knows? It's still really weird to see that 1/3 of players didn't play more than an hour and a half of the main story.
About Velen - well, the general consensus is that it has a really strong atmosphere (show, don't just tell approach to presenting the war-ravaged land was compared very favourably to the sanitized approach adopted by Dragon Age: Inquisition) and Bloody Baron and Ladies of the Woods questlines are considered to be the base game's highest point when it comes to the narrative. A Towerful of Mice is among the most beloved sidequests in the game.
It's nice to see someone who had almost the opposite experience to still end up liking the game.
I found it to be too short. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the game for what it is, but with a little re-arrangement (say, exploring and doing a lot of side-gigs in all of Night City before the Heist), they could have fleshed out up the main quest with more interaction with all companions after getting Johnny Mnemonic in V's head.
metro.co.uk
