6 month game retrospective...lets talk

[Spectral_Warrior]

When comparisons to RDR2 are being brushed aside as not relevant and "unfair", I find it strange that FO76 is used to defend the state of this game and CDPR's actions. I own FO76 and when it released there was a full playable game. It had some serious issues and it was not the game that many Fallout fans wanted, but it was not any where near the unfinished state that CP2077 was and still is. Also, it is an online only multiplayer "live service" game, so the comparisons don't really stack up.

Well, all I can say is that I have never said comparisons to games like RDR2 are unfair.
And I have been able to play Cyberpunk as a full playable game also, and I say that because I have no care nor blindness towards the hypetrain where it persists that stuff was not in the game.
So from my perspective its a 'fair comparison'

 

[northwold]

When comparisons to RDR2 are being brushed aside as not relevant and "unfair", I find it strange that FO76 is used to defend the state of this game and CDPR's actions. I own FO76 and when it released there was a full playable game. It had some serious issues and it was not the game that many Fallout fans wanted, but it was not any where near the unfinished state that CP2077 was and still is. Also, it is an online only multiplayer "live service" game, so the comparisons don't really stack up.

I find it rather hard to see how CP is not "a full game". A glitchy game, sure. But not containing components that some people imagined it would does not mean it is incomplete. Just that their expectations were not met.

 

[reaper1]

But not containing components that some people imagined it would does not mean it is incomplete.

True, but not containing many of the ideas and concepts that the developers were selling the game on the back of does make it incomplete. It is capable of being played from start to finish because time was used to stitch what they had of a game together, but that doesn't excuse the fact that it was a rush job and the game is incomplete.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

True, but not containing many of the ideas and concepts that the developers were selling the game on the back of does make it incomplete. It is capable of being played from start to finish because time was used to stitch what they had of a game together, but that doesn't excuse the fact that it was a rush job and the game is incomplete.

the ideas and concepts they were presenting as being in game, are in game.

some of people's interpretation of those ideas/concepts are not in game.

 

[KunoichiRider]

the ideas and concepts they were presenting as being in game, are in game.

some of people's interpretation of those ideas/concepts are not in game.

I am baffled that people even discuss ideas and story when AI, physics and gameplay mechanics which meet even the lowest expectations of customers in 2020 are clearly not in the game.

The standard of craftsmanship in this piece of art is on such a low level, I am always stunned that people invest time in discussing higher artistic tier aspects of this game.

 

[th3orist]

i bought the game at release and played it on a high end pc (rtx 3090)
i have logged in 60h and finished the campaign and also did some side exploration and i have to say: i have the exact same complaints that people with 800 or more hours played have so i honestly guys dont understand how you could stand playing this game so long, seriously. the writing was on the wall for me after the first 5h or so.

anyways, these are my takeaways from the game 6 months after release

1) graphics wise its a mixed bag: it can look great at times but also many corners of the world feel straight like the quality of Fallout graphics, meaning outdated, blurry textures, simplistic geometry etc.
2) the open world feels dead, there is not enough variety in terms of side missions, encounters etc.
3) the UI is bad, managing inventory is more than annoying and does not inspire you to want to actually be too long inside it and craft stuff and whatnot.
4) traversing the world is ok, but the population at times looks braindead, the traffic is very weird, distant traffic is just a ghost, feels really bad to see cars coming towards you, you run to get them and they just then disappear. super bad feeling
5) i did not find the story very captivating tbh, witcher 3 was way better, same goes for the voice acting i have to say
6) keanu reeves as Johnny did nothing for me, i found his performance numb
7) artdesign of weapons, cars and outfit is great - unfortunatelly there is no transmog which can be argued does not matter, but then again in the real world i also dont always see myself looking down but still i dress in a certain way. same i would do with V - it does not matter that i dont see my character, i just know how i look for others and thats what makes me feel good about myself.
8) the game world simply is not finished, many aspects of the game are missing, for example physicalized trains, rooms that are just cut off etc
9) car physics are weird and shooting does not really feel good either.

all in all: very VERY disappointed, i wish i had my 60 bucks back, this game to me is not worth more than 29,99 in its current state and for what it offers.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

i honestly guys dont understand how you could stand playing this game so long, seriously.

I could said, it's a little bit like a movie that I can rewatch many times without getting bored (like T2- Judgment day) while a lot of people have only seen it once and that's enough for them. "boring, bye...".
Not real explanation, it's like that, that's all

 

[northwold]

i bought the game at release and played it on a high end pc (rtx 3090)
i have logged in 60h and finished the campaign and also did some side exploration and i have to say: i have the exact same complaints that people with 800 or more hours played have so i honestly guys dont understand how you could stand playing this game so long, seriously. the writing was on the wall for me after the first 5h or so.

anyways, these are my takeaways from the game 6 months after release

1) graphics wise its a mixed bag: it can look great at times but also many corners of the world feel straight like the quality of Fallout graphics, meaning outdated, blurry textures, simplistic geometry etc.
2) the open world feels dead, there is not enough variety in terms of side missions, encounters etc.
3) the UI is bad, managing inventory is more than annoying and does not inspire you to want to actually be too long inside it and craft stuff and whatnot.
4) traversing the world is ok, but the population at times looks braindead, the traffic is very weird, distant traffic is just a ghost, feels really bad to see cars coming towards you, you run to get them and they just then disappear. super bad feeling
5) i did not find the story very captivating tbh, witcher 3 was way better, same goes for the voice acting i have to say
6) keanu reeves as Johnny did nothing for me, i found his performance numb
7) artdesign of weapons, cars and outfit is great - unfortunatelly there is no transmog which can be argued does not matter, but then again in the real world i also dont always see myself looking down but still i dress in a certain way. same i would do with V - it does not matter that i dont see my character, i just know how i look for others and thats what makes me feel good about myself.
8) the game world simply is not finished, many aspects of the game are missing, for example physicalized trains, rooms that are just cut off etc
9) car physics are weird and shooting does not really feel good either.

all in all: very VERY disappointed, i wish i had my 60 bucks back, this game to me is not worth more than 29,99 in its current state and for what it offers.

So personally I think what you say is fair (though it was not my experience) and it very much depends on your expectations for a game and whether you dig the themes of the story.

I also think the game seriously hampered its prospects by failing to find a happy medium for delivering quests and gigs. By putting everything on the map at once, and by peppering the world with fast travel points, it discourages exploration, when a lot of the atmosphere comes from exploration and finding things. The systems get in the way of actually showing off what is good about the game.

There's also a point in the presentation of the main quest as super urgent which, again, dissuades players from taking their time.

I wrote a VERY long review on reddit about this which essentially boils down to: this is a very narrative focused game, with a gameworld that expands hugely on the narrative's themes. For the "right" kind of player it is a staggering achievement in narrative and atmosphere. But it is not for everyone and it is not immediately obvious when you pick it up where its strengths lie.

PS I am not for one moment suggesting people "didn't play it right", and I don't think marketing it as all things to all people did the game any favours.

PPS for anyone with time to kill the review is here. [snip] No it's not because the forum reproduced the whole damned review when I posted a link so it's on reddit called "a review from someone who got it after the patches".

 

[KunoichiRider]

this is a very narrative focused game, with a gameworld that expands hugely on the narrative's themes. For the "right" kind of player it is a staggering achievement in narrative and atmosphere. But it is not for everyone and it is not immediately obvious when you pick it up where its strengths lie.

This is not a novel. This is a computer game.
Basic features of a game of this type are not implemented. The "craftsmanship" is so poor it has a negative effect on "atmosphere". This is immediately obvious for anyone who has an objective view on this product.

 

[northwold]

This is not a novel. This is a computer game.
Basic features of a game of this type are not implemented. The "craftsmanship" is so poor it has a negative effect on "atmosphere". This is immediately obvious for anyone who has an objective view on this product.

Different people like different things from computer games. That's kind of my point. There's no objective truth when it comes to taste.

I think Disco Elysium is the worst computer game I have ever played (and that one really IS a novel). Other people think it is manna from heaven. I'm perfectly comfortable with that and I'm never going to claim they're "wrong".

PS For example, you talk about the "physics". I actually have no idea what you're referring to which suggests that whatever you're referring to mattered not a jot to me in this game because i simply did not notice it. Clearly it does to you and that's fine.

 

[KunoichiRider]

Different people like different things from others in computer games. That's kind of my point. There's no objective truth when it comes to taste.

Games: There is an objective truth to pathfinding of cars, implementing rag dolls, ...
Literature: There is an objective truth to grammar.
Painting: There is an objective truth to the use of your brush.
Music: There is an objective truth in using an instrument.

 

[northwold]

Games: There is an objective truth to pathfinding of cars, implementing rag dolls, ...
Literature: There is an objective truth to grammar.
Painting: There is an objective truth to the use of your brush.
Music: There is an objective truth in using an instrument.

Well I guess you'd better avoid people like Rothko and Seurat then.

(I'm not going to disagree with you on traffic, which does not work properly, for example, but the question of whether traffic kills the experience is a subjective one.)

 

[KunoichiRider]

Well I guess you'd better avoid people like Rothko and Seurat then.

(I'm not going to disagree with you on traffic, which does not work properly, for example, but the question of whether traffic kills the experience is a subjective one.)

Rothko and Seurat do NOT show poor craftsmanship.
Their works explain the artistic reasoning why something is "omitted".

What is the artistic reasoning in cars not being able to drive around obstacles, and the failure in AI, physics and mechanics in this game in general?

 

[northwold]

Rothko and Seurat do NOT show poor craftsmanship.
Their works explain the artistic reasoning why something is "omitted".

What is the artistic reasoning in cars not being able to drive around obstacles, and the failure in AI, physics and mechanics in this game in general?

The problem here is that you are arguing from a perspective that if something is not finished (and plainly the game is not in the sense that some systems are plagued by glitches) it is impossible for everyone to enjoy. That is a view. It is not mine.

I hate to resort back to Skyrim yet again, but that game was very close to broken on release (and many of its problems were never patched except by modders). And yet people clearly managed to enjoyed it anyway.

I really don't mind that you have issues with the game. But it's not legitimate to demand that everyone else agree with you and complain that anyone who doesn't is somehow an idiot (or, in your parlance, "unobjective" -- they may be "unobjective" in the sense that they like the game, yes).

Edit: in other words, you appear to prioritise certain aspects of a game's design. Other people prioritise different aspects. That is absolutely fine. Good for you, good for me.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

This is not a novel. This is a computer game.

Just a little detail : Video games are here for fun and simply for fun. So basically, it can be really anything

 

[reaper1]

Just a little detail : Video games are here for fun and simply for fun. So basically, it can be really anything

So what were CDPR apologizing for? What is anyone here, including myself complaining for? In fact, why is any gamer criticizing any game? The excuses being made for the state of this game and CDPR's attitude are baffling at this point.

 

[Kizu_KCM]

Just a little detail : Video games are here for fun and simply for fun. So basically, it can be really anything

True. :v but CP is not a visual novel game

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

This is not a novel. This is a computer game.
Basic features of a game of this type are not implemented. The "craftsmanship" is so poor it has a negative effect on "atmosphere". This is immediately obvious for anyone who has an objective view on this product.

an objective fact is irrelevant to the value art.

the red in a piece of art can be washed out, or faded, thats an objective truth.

how that effects the artistry, or enjoyment of the piece is subjective.

in fact being objectively finished or unfinished, does not define a piece of art's value. sketches from certain artists are highly valuable.


you aren't wrong to say your opinion on what ruins art for you, but thats an opinion.

car pathfinding may not be an important factor in what people want from a game. Frogger doesnt need realistic physics, or self driving car ai to be a good game. And it certainly wouldnt effect my review of an rpg like chronotrigger.

So an objective fact, cannot make a subjective opinion objective.

like someone saying someone is objectively unattractive, because they are short, or their haircut is unprofessional.


On topic, this may be why they are focused on objective improvements like bug fixes, Though personally, i would rather have subjective improvements like new content, game modes, story, and feature expansions

 

[Riven-Twain]

Moderator: Hey there, all. This thread has wandered rather far from the original topic, and has become a bit too general.

There are already threads for similar discussions:
Cyberpunk getting better?
Cyberpunk 2077 User Reviews & Impressions
I began to appreciate Fallout 4 after playing Cyberpunk for 300 hours.

Thread closed.