Anyone else keep coming back?

[LeKill3rFou]

As you keep repeating yourself, I also allow myself : "But still, most video games are designed to be addictive, that's a fact." These mechanics are objectively present in games. And sometimes these mechanics are more obvious or more central to the game and even define its entire gameplay, as it is the case for Elden Ring : if you remove the reward system in Elden Ring, there is not much left. So yes, whether you like Elden Ring or not, its entire gameplay is designed to be addictive. That's the main point.

So... if I follow your reasoning, i.e all games are addictives. So Elden Ring is just like all other games, not different, and obviously, not "better"
I never said that I don't like it, I didn't play it yet. I watched few hours of stream and concluded that I have to wait to not waste my money in a game which is maybe not for me

 

[GrimReaper801]

If you've never been susceptible to video game addiction, good for you, I hope it stays that way. In the same way, many people control their cigarette consumption without becoming addicted. However, it doesn't mean that cigarettes are not addictive because of the substances that make them up. "Like" cigarettes, a video game is made up of different gameplay mechanics assembled together, some designed to keep the player on the game. Brain is not a dead organ, it reacts to everything you do, playing video games included.
Obviously, not being able to quit playing a video game and keeping coming back to it is not the same thing as being addicted to tobacco or alcohol. These are also two different things, with different causes and consequences. But fundamentally, they are based on a similar dependancy mechanism.

I don't think you understand how addiction works. It's a lot more complex than you seem to think. Especially in the case of substance abuse. You're also missing one key component of addiction which is that the addicted engages in his or her addiction despite the harmful and negative consequences to themselves and others.

Coming back to a game over and over again because it's the only game that gives you that dopamine hit isn't an addiction. The second you start putting that game over more important things, and often vital things, that's when it becomes an addiction.

Substance addiction and video game addiction are so fundamentally different in where they generally come from and their effects as to be impossible to compare unless simplified to absurdity for argument's sake.

You may say all games are designed to be addictive over and over again, that's simply not true. You are confusing engaging with addicting.

 

[GeneBox]

We don't talk about clinical addiction, it's obvious.

Except you literally mentioned drugs multiple times. As someone who has lost people to addiction I find your comparisons in general bit insulting mate.

You may know how things work in theory, but you certainly haven't experienced them. As you wrote, you "haven't been to space or the Moon".

I certainly haven't but I also know how things work factually, not theoretically, kinda have to as an engineer. None of the top tier scientists have been outside our solar system and yet we know exactly what's happening quite long distances away. I can keep this up but I'm hoping I made my point clear.

 

[GrimReaper801]

Well, I didn't miss this, since I mentioned it, ironically it is true, but nevertheless, from the beginning : "I don't know if this is a good thing or not for the health of the players though."

A vast oversimplification. You can be perfectly capable of putting down your game in favor of more important things and video games, if they are your only hobby, will be detrimental to your health. That does not mean you are addicted to them in any way. It means you need to diversify your activities.

Well, fortunately a word does not have one and only one definition, one and only one use. By the way, that second you talk about happens much faster than one thinks. And realizing it is not easy.

You are not entirely wrong. Not every word has only one definition. In this case, addiction is addiction. It's a well defined condition. You can't simply decide it has different meanings or push goalposts because it fits your argument.

You are right that this second, this transitional second, can happen very quickly and generally speaking, it's already too late when you realize you are becoming addicted to something. It is very hard to be aware of when something starts being an actual addiction. It doesn't change the facts though.

The similar aspect of both is definitely a chemical reaction that takes place for instance in the brain.

And that is one of the absurd oversimplification I was speaking of. Everything you do creates multiple reactions within your brain. Addiction is much more than just that.

So you think there are no gameplay mechanics that trigger the dopamine hit you mentioned above when we're playing video games, O.K.

Nice straw man. Definitely not what I said.

There are certainly some games designed solely around being as addictive as possible. Loot boxes, for example, are definitely meant to be an addictive mechanic. They are predatory at best and it's why they have been regulated and pushed back against. Addictive games and addictive games mechanics do exist but to claim most video games are designed to be addictive as fact is just plain wrong unless you only consider the mobile games market.

That's not to say that games that aren't built around being as addictive as possible aren't capable or delivering that dopamine hit but that's far from all that's required for something to be considered addictive.

 

[Ismaren]

I agree with almost everything you wrote.

 

[SigilFey]

A reminder to all not to assume that our opinions and views are superior to anyone's. If you're willing to present an argument, you need to be willing to have others disagree.

The conversation is getting personal. A few posts deleted. Back on topic, please -- which does not involve sarcastic cuts at other people's intelligence.

 

[EnDSchultz]

Apparently I missed all the fun.

But yes, this game does keep drawing me back in. Different build, different look, mod and customization scene always improving.

It's not a good RPG. Not a terribly good open world game either. But the aesthetic is so good, it just feels good to be there.

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

On the contrary, there is a strong argument here, since the whole gameplay of Elden Ring is based on the player's learning and perseverance throughout the game, until the end, whereas in almost all other games, you know all the gameplay after a few hours and the tens of hours that follow simply consist in reproducing the same gameplay base the game teach you at the beginning.

Okay, that could very well be true. It is indeed correct that most games give you the required gameplay 'tools' and most of act 2,3 are a mixture where you combine the various elements. But unless I read you wrong, you stated that there was more than enough "addictive gameplay" to make you come back for more. I fail to see however what difference it makes in what timespan you learn, have learned or keep learning them.
Lets take Tomb Raider as an example. The parcours stuff, climbing walls, overhanging ledges, swinging on trees. All that gameplay can be addictive, regardless if you learn it in the first hour of play, or its spread across 2/3s of the game.

Elden Ring sets up addictive gameplay mechanics, that's a fact. Some games do, some don't. Elden Ring does. It has nothing to do with liking or getting hooked on a game or its universe. With this kind of mechanics, you can play a game you don't like at all for dozens of hours.

To me they do play a part both. For me personally, World of Tanks would be a good example of an addictive game(play) which makes me revisit it even if I could very well ragequit 5 minutes afterwards.
But outside of the gameplay the setting still play a big part: I like tanks. I would not nearly give it the same attention if those tanks were carts with horses, for example.

And what makes Elden Ring particularly good in this area, what makes it not a rip-off at all (like AC Odyssey for exemple), is that the game constantly rewards the player's efforts and progress and there is a real sense of progression throughout the game. In other words, the player’s actions and achievements always pay off.

You have to be a bit more specific here in such case. Pay off in what sense exactly? Because I could be blunt again and say that a game like Fallout, Horizon also pays off when questing since you level up from it and get paid.
So inless you are referring to something special, I almost would dissmiss that claim in the sense of "does versus dont"

Post automatically merged: May 12, 2022

Yeah, everybody knows, I already wrote that was two different things. But still, most video games are designed to be addictive, that's a fact. We don't talk about clinical addiction, it's obvious.

You may know how things work in theory, but you certainly haven't experienced them. As you wrote, you "haven't been to space or the Moon".
I never played Doom, but I "know" the game, because everybody talked about it, I read about it, I watched playthroughs. I know that according to my tastes, it seems it's not my kind of game. However, I would be careful not to make any judgements or suppositions about the game without having played it myself, despite everything I've read, seen or heard about it.

I think you may have made a small error here. Because I have never said that Elden Ring IS a bad game, or that it IS void of substance. I said that according to what I have seen and read about the game It seem/appears like what I said and that to me it feels a certain way. In my book thats an informed opinion. And I definately dont need to have played the game to judge wether or not I like its setting (which is what I referred to as 'medievil') I simply dont care for games that play in such settings, so based on that plus what I had seem and read about it I formulated my opinion about it and discussed it here from the my point of view.
Also lets not forget that this discussion 'started' with the comparison between an open world having free-roaming as an inherited part of its gameplay. ... Let me try and grab the post I aim at:
It was this exchange that prompted my responses. Where I am op the position that I disagree with your view and that 'preset story' is not mutually exclusive to a free-roam open world.
(Exchange below)

Well I have to admit the scenary looks great but is there something you haven't seen/experince before? Total freedom is kind of a basic imo... at least in most openworld rpgs even some newer adventures. won't understand that as a unique selling point for ER...

Nope, in all open world games I played until now, except Skyrim perhaps, you do what the game tell you to do each time you follow a quest or a mission. That's not freedom, but guidance. Sometimes extreme guidance as if the player was a little kid, like the last Assassin's Creed games.
This is done through a formatted quest system, where nice NPCs tell you exactly what to do and how to do it, but also through the tons of question marks that fill the map and make sure that the player doesn't have to explore on his own, since he is told from the start all the points of interest, and through many other elements that take the player by the hand.
In Elden Ring, none of this is the case. The player is completely free, he has to learn everything by himself without the game helping him in any way, exploration and discovery are total and always reward the player, his choices are sovereign. If you see a place on the horizon that intrigues you, you can go there, always, and be sure you will find something. And that something will not be there by chance, but perfectly consistent with the structure of the game.
I never played a game like this before. Maybe Zelda Breath of the Wild offer the same kind of liberty, but I didn't play it.

Total freedom isn't kind of a basic, this is quite rare. Elden Ring is the first game to offer it to me, and I've played a lot of games, RPGs and open worlds. Because there is no system of any kind, just pure gameplay. In a way, Elden Ring took the dizzying nature of a Daggerfall and adapted it to a modern open world game, and DS-like of course.

 

[mallmann1978]

Hum... the gameplay in Elden Ring is "addictive" because it's your own point of view. Other players can describe the gameplay as boring, bad, fun, average, enjoyable, great... In the same way, I can say that Cyberpunk's story is damn addictive, but it's only my own point of view too, many can argue that it's predictable, bad, poorly written, boring, average,...
I agree with @GeneBox, your comparison is just a non sense

... and in my opinion, Elden Ring is a game with no sense. I value history too much. And Elden Ring offers absolutely nothing on this point. It's a matter of personal preference as you said. CP2077 shatters Elden Ring when it comes to history. Well, that's my opinion.

 

[SigilFey]

You have to be a bit more specific here in such case. Pay off in what sense exactly? Because I could be blunt again and say that a game like Fallout, Horizon also pays off when questing since you level up from it and get paid.
So inless you are referring to something special, I almost would dissmiss that claim in the sense of "does versus dont"

Agreed. This can so often be the core of so many invalid criticisms.

There is a lot static in the modern media when trying to label something "Good" or "Bad". In the end, pretty much everything has good qualities, and this tends to be the source of a lot of angst in social media (not to be confused with objective, professional media), resulting in many individuals ranting about game reviews "always giving everything at least an 8/10". To be perfectly frank -- that's almost never the case.

What we have are individuals that want to judge the quality of a product based on their own, subjective understandings, with no attempt to objectively rationalize how others would view that same product from their own perspectives. (I can mention again how I often use the Super Mario Bros. franchise as an example of exemplary visual and gameplay design...even though I, personally, can't stand the games.) Instead, many simply attempt to superimpose their own, subjective preferences onto something and call it rubbish...simply because they happen to like something else more. And that's not how it works. At all.

Thus, "pay off" is entirely subjective to the reasons one plays games. So, does Elden Ring pay off? Absolutely. In spades. Without any doubt. Unless...you want something that progresses quickly, tells a clear story, and provides clear instructions on how to utilize all of the mechanics. ER's progression can be vicious, its narrative cryptic and surreal, its mechanics often intentionally hidden or misleading. That doesn't mean that it doesn't "pay off". It means that people who don't like that sort of game need not apply. They'll have to go play something else, because that's the way this game works.

Same with every other game, including Cyberpunk 2077. The existence of this thread is directly indicative of the fact that it gets a lot right for a lot of people. The active player count on Steam doesn't lie. Then there are all the other platforms and consoles...

CP2077 isn't "broken". It's just not what a lot of people wanted. People that love it are not "fooling themselves". They just don't agree with the flaming and bashing.

 

[Netrunner2go]

Wouldn’t say it’s broken in general but also not intended like it should be on last gen consoles - and since they made a hugh amount of their sells on these platforms people have the right to call that out - nothing to do with „fooling themselves“ just honesty. fact.

 

[SigilFey]

Wouldn’t say it’s broken in general but also not intended like it should be on last gen consoles - and since they made a hugh amount of their sells on these platforms people have the right to call that out - nothing to do with „fooling themselves“ just honesty. fact.

And everyone in the world was offered an extended refund if they didn't like the game. Very, very few people took CDPR up on that. If the argument now is that they still don't like, well, that's fine! Everyone is welcome to their opinion. This does not invalidate the people that still enjoy the game and keep coming back to play more of it.

And that's the topic of this thread. Let's not to steer the conversation towards why people shouldn't come back. There are plenty of other threads for that.

_______________



For myself, I really love the city itself, I'm looking forward to trying out the new mechanics, and I very much loved the story and characters. Lots of excellent moments that I won't mind revisiting. I'm also very eager to see where they decide to take the expansions.

Mostly though, I'm looking to dive more into the combat. I literally played the entire first playthrough with a pistol and stun baton. Hardly even touched other weapons.

 

[Garrison72]

I'll likely play it a second time once the expansion comes out. Beyond that? I doubt it. Cyberpunk doesn't have the same draw as The Witcher.

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

Wouldn’t say it’s broken in general but also not intended like it should be on last gen consoles - and since they made a hugh amount of their sells on these platforms people have the right to call that out - nothing to do with „fooling themselves“ just honesty. fact.

From my observation it was very erratic in that regard. I own a PS4 copy of the game but had a sufficiently smooth ride with the game all the way through, so I never even had the need to apply for that refund which @SigilFey mentioned.

Mostly though, I'm looking to dive more into the combat. I literally played the entire first playthrough with a pistol and stun baton. Hardly even touched other weapons.

Agreed. On my first playthrough I forgot about the Grad you can find up the roof near Viktor, and only 'remembered' the sniper when you get Overwatch. But across my second playthrough its become the standard slot 3 weapon of choice. (Slots 1 and 2 were either assault rifle, SMG or shotgun lateron) but that very satisfying Tank gun of a sniper incuding that extremely satisfying fire discharge sound.. hmmm hmm!

So yes, CP77 definately has more than enough to want to return for, and it can even be small things really.
"The city" is a bit broad and all encompassing if I would give some examples (however its still true) so I will list a few 'small' things that are particulairly satisfying for me.
- The weapons and their look, sound and feel while in use.
- The design of the vehicles. I particulairly fan of Quadra styled vehicles, topped by Avenger and Type-66 Dino (gifted one) and Mizutani.
- The style differences between factions and corpo's: the ominous-red Arasaka style, the hexgrid Militech camouflage. Etc.
- The heavy usage of neons.
- The inhospitable-looking Badlands.
- The background and living style of Nomads (as displayed and projected through the Aldecaldos.
- The intrige of shady characters or concepts that bluntly manipulate their surroundings, such as what happens to the Peralez's.
- The various stories from random dead NPC that explain the (short) events leading to their demise. (Maybe not unique to this game but I found a lot of them intriguing.)
- The heavy usage of cyborg-ism (and yes I deliberately choose this wording)
- the styles of the character creation. Never before to my knowledge was I able to make a character like my V in CP77.

And I'll leave it here for the moment.

 

[Shafir]

@Spectral_Warrior
Reminds me of (one of) professional principle: quality is the sum of excellent details. And there are really a lot of them in CP´77.

And before someone with the quirks comes around the corner again... yes, they still exist, but they are not meant here .

 

[R001c]

I keep telling myself, 'Right! This is my last playthru. I'm going to end up spoiling the DLC if I don't give it a rest.'
Unfortunately, I'm just not listening. I even uninstalled once only to find myself installing it again a day later.

 

[LadyMiseryAli]

Was looking for an RPG to fill the void left by completing a Dragon Age and Mass Effect run. Remembered that this game looked cool when it was announced and decided 'why not give it the old college try'. Got it via Steam, modded it a bit, then the 1.5 patch came out. Was so glad I waited to play because it's filling my RPG void right now. On my second playthrough, almost at the end(sadface), but will probably do a third playthrough. Need to experience all three life paths, but I refuse to do any ending other than The Sun and will only romance Rockerboi because...reasons. Might hold off on a third playthrough until another patch drops maybe.

 

[TigerOnCatnip]

Since completing this game thoroughly (all side missions, NCPD scanners, gigs. psychos etc, even the ending 3 different times) Im halfway through a second playthrough. I have since tried to play Red Dead Redemption II, Metro Exodus, Days Gone, Far Cry 6, I even purchased Crysis 3 remastered (looks incredible) and I keep coming back to Cyberpunk 2077 lol. It's just such an amazing game and satisfying on so many levels. Yes I am aware of all the bugs (300hrs in it's hard to miss them) but the game still rules. I have a very high end rig and the game looks incredible for me but so do those other games that I mentioned. Still this is the one that keeps me coming back.

Anyone else have any game suggestions? Can't seem to really get into any of them like I do with this one

I have a total of maybe 3 games I currently play. Cyberpunk, GW2 and D3. I have been playing Cyberpunk since launch. Faithfully. I never experienced all the bugs that others were/are having. (except for my game flatlining not too far back but found that was due to mods conflicting)

I now have a new/better rig. My game is gorgeous and yes, I am STILL playing. (am at 2396h 37m)

I can't play much of anything else even when I want to. I get sucked back into that which is Cyberpunk and am happier than a pig in shit whenever new mods come out. Weehoo!

 

[Shafir]

[...]

I can't play much of anything else even when I want to. I get sucked back into that which is Cyberpunk and am happier than a pig in shit whenever new mods come out. Weehoo!

Yeah, that's kind of... crazy. V notes more often that NC devours people. Seems like the developers took it very seriously and were very successful with it .

 

[Netrunner2go]

Yeah, that's kind of... crazy. V notes more often that NC devours people. Seems like the developers took it very seriously and were very successful with it .

He said when new mods come out... so half way through the blessing is not on the developers

questionable if he would have 2k hrs on his watch without mods...