The silver lining of modern game releases. "QA tester for Cyberpunk 2077.", can be put on the résumé.
Seems like U.I is a mess and the loot system is broken.
Waiting for benchmarks and optimisation videos.
Waiting for benchmarks and optimisation videos.
I generally don't take pre-release game reviews seriously most of the time because reviewers are trying to rush through the game at an unnatural pace anyway, and they're playing early-access on top of that... I'd rather avoid reading a bunch of negative nit-picky junk and actually play the game for myself because I genuinely think it's going to be amazing.
I think a lot of people know this game is going to be a slow burn, much more so then probably any rpg experience we've seen in the past, with so much broken up into the Lifepath choices, and how much time we devote seems to equate to how fulfilling the game will be to each person.
That said; Cyberpunk 2077 might actually be the 1st game in a long time that is actually review-resistant, aside from the most consistent assessment being that it's buggy; very buggy.
I wish there was some powerful voice in the room of todays landscape that could utter the sentence: "If a highly detailed Open-world game isn't buggy in one way or another, it wasn't built correctly"
I wouldn't agree. If your space probe smashes into the intended landing zone and explodes because someone forgot to convert units of measurement properly turning around and saying, "Space is hard.", is a completely hollow statement.
Yeah same here
Once they get them fixed and they get more feedback from the community etc. I have no doubt that it will end up being just as popular as the Witcher is. It still have a 91 score on metacritic based on 44 reviews. So it is not exactly a bad score all in all
And from those two reviews (Yongyea and Laymen) they didn't mention anything particular about the RP/story aspect being particular bugged, but rather more technical things. But maybe those just weren't the worse bugs or maybe that is what the day 0 patch is mostly focused on fixing.
That a bad analogy though. In your example the probe is irreparably destroyed. Here the game still exists and can continue to be worked on. It would be more like the space probe making a bit of a hard landing and not being able to steer to the left quite as well as it should. Which is much more a "space is hard" kinda result.
Fair enough. The point is if you release a game with bugs galore it's not reasonable to say bugs are difficult to find, pin down and fix or software at such a scale will inevitably be buggy all over the place.
I've played newly released games where there might be a rare minor glitch here or there. Nothing gamebreaking or serious was experienced in them. It's possible I didn't run into the gamebreaking or serious bugs in those games. Even so, this is different from finding a gamebreaking bug or glitch around every corner. If bugs are routine during a playthrough it's sloppy work, plain and simple. Why it's sloppy work is a completely different discussion.
Bear in mind, I'm not saying that is going to be the case with CP2077. I don't know if it will be or will not be. It's certainly possible much of the broken stuff in the builds handed to reviewers will be corrected when the game is finally released. If not then, sorry, a get out of jail free card because a game of this magnitude is difficult work is off the table.
Even if there are many bugs and they obviously can ruin the experience like in any game. From those reviews I have seen, the game itself is getting very good feedback.
To me it seems like the main campaign is a bit short or at least shorter than I personally prefer, this guy completed it in 25 hours.
But was not disappointed in anyway and at least for him, he is pretty sure that the game will meet expectations and even go above them. He doesn't talk about any bugs, but he is probably saving that for a later review.
The way I look at it, its annoying with bugs and the fewer the better. But given a bit of time and CDPR getting them fixed. I don't think that people have to worry that this is most likely going to be GOTY, at least that is my guess. And when the multiplayer and expansions comes, with the "core" game fixed, they will most likely contain far less bugs. To me CDPR can pretty much expand Cyberpunk almost as much as they want. They are only focusing on one little area now around Night city, but they could make expansions in Europe, Asia, Russia or the rest of the US etc. If they want to. And if they open up for modding and make some good tools for it. This could go be a new Skyrim that people will play for a very long time.
So personally im not worried about the game being good, I have tried many games that have been out for a long time (Looking at you Atlas, what a mess
) and even played some GTA 5 as well last week and it didn't take more than 1 or 2 hours before it bugged.
Basically what im getting from them all is what i always get from "reviews", play it yourself and make your own mind up
Where they see a 25 -30h main questline i see 75-90h on just the 3 backgrounds once, hundreds more hours diving into dialogue choices and outcomes across 3 backgrounds on numerous characters to see them through and experience different builds, countless hours working out relationship's an how they may or may not interact with the MQ and lets not forget the 35+ hours of side content on par with the MQ an no doubt for a few of us probably surpassing it so thats potentially hundreds more hours of branching dialogue and outcomes to explore to see how it all interacts and work together.
I played DA:O on PC an did about 30+ playthroughs an a further 20+ on xbox one with BC, DA:I 30+ playthroughs on p4 an 40+ on xbox, the reason i say this you can/could complete both titles in the 25-40h mark but you dont, you explore the dialogue, build relationships, make a build and explore the world, so that 25-40h can easily stretch easily to 70-100h, especiallyfor DA:I an i expect CDPR's branching dialogue to be atleast on par if no surpassing that which is found there.
I also play Bethesda games annually, bugs are a feature to me
Where they see a 25 -30h main questline i see 75-90h on just the 3 backgrounds once, hundreds more hours diving into dialogue choices and outcomes across 3 backgrounds on numerous characters to see them through and experience different builds, countless hours working out relationship's an how they may or may not interact with the MQ and lets not forget the 35+ hours of side content on par with the MQ an no doubt for a few of us probably surpassing it so thats potentially hundreds more hours of branching dialogue and outcomes to explore to see how it all interacts and work together.
I played DA:O on PC an did about 30+ playthroughs an a further 20+ on xbox one with BC, DA:I 30+ playthroughs on p4 an 40+ on xbox, the reason i say this you can/could complete both titles in the 25-40h mark but you dont, you explore the dialogue, build relationships, make a build and explore the world, so that 25-40h can easily stretch easily to 70-100h, especiallyfor DA:I an i expect CDPR's branching dialogue to be atleast on par if no surpassing that which is found there.
I also play Bethesda games annually, bugs are a feature to me
This reviewer is obviously allowed to have her opinion, but I really don't trust Gamespot when it comes to reviews.
To me when you review a game, you need to have some standards for how you judge them. Is the game innovative? Is it fun? buggy? etc. and you need to compare these things against other games.
If a game gets 10/10, I expect it to be a damn good game, doesn't matter if its a flight simulator or a shooter. Both of these games shine in some way or another over other games despite them not even being in the same genre.
So looking at Gamespot giving Cyberpunk 7/10, means that according to them it's a "Good" game similar to other games which have gotten 7/10 as well.
Marvel's Avengers sep. 4 2020 got 7/10
Basically a game that was dead on arrival.
Hardly any players left after 3 month.
As comparison this is 7 days to die, which is from 2013.
Obviously it have been updated a lot since then, but back then Gamespot gave it 2/10.
If a game is almost dead after 3 month, surely it is not a good game, otherwise people would play it. I doubt Cyberpunk will have these numbers after that period of time, but guess we will have to wait and see.
Fifa 21 got 8/10
This is a game that pretty much haven't changed at all the last what 5 years or so? Even to the point where people found Fifa 20 graphics in the 21 version.
It have a Metacritic scores from users of 1.1 out of 10 on PC and 0.7 out of 10 on PS!!
So taken everything into account of how to review and compare games, they consider a game that is dead on arrival, to be as good as Cyberpunk, and despite pretty much all reviewers saying that it has some issues, it is still one hell of an amazing game. But not only that, a game which for so many years have had absolutely no ambition except robbing people for money through gambling and microtransaction is considered a better game?
I don't know how they review games, but to me they are completely off the mark with most of their reviews, so I don't trust them to be honest.
Last edited:
Review from the Swedish site FZ: https://www.fz.se/recension/285164-cyberpunk-2077
Score: 5/5
Pros: A brilliant RPG
Insane Night City
Extremely flexible
Very well directed
Cons: Bugs and glitches
He thought he rushed through it and the main story took about 30 hours, but I guess the meaning of "rushed" vary from person to person.
Score: 5/5
Pros: A brilliant RPG
Insane Night City
Extremely flexible
Very well directed
Cons: Bugs and glitches
He thought he rushed through it and the main story took about 30 hours, but I guess the meaning of "rushed" vary from person to person.
You can't review this game in 10 hours. These reviews should have been allowed at least 2 weeks prior release. They are meaningless. They basically told us what we already knew :
Huge world, Short main story but tons of content so main story fuck it.
Tons of bugs (expectable thing from any Open world game, and same bugs as well)
Low performance on high end systems.
Great next gen game.
Worst reviews ever made in the industry, put out just as clickbaits.
Huge world, Short main story but tons of content so main story fuck it.
Tons of bugs (expectable thing from any Open world game, and same bugs as well)
Low performance on high end systems.
Great next gen game.
Worst reviews ever made in the industry, put out just as clickbaits.
Just what do we count as 'main story', anyway? A lot of technically 'optional' quests seem like they would still be part of the story! Then, as a mercenary, any random job you take on in the game is related to that, too .... It sounds like a lot of the secondary quests are quite involved & will be well worth going through! Probably find the odd little one off jobs being quite quick, easy & not so worth it but overall there'll certainly be plenty of content
From hearing how long it took for the varies reviewer to complete it, they seem to range between 15-25 hours if you rush it.
But they also say that you won't get the best experience if you do.
So my guess is that CDPR did it like this, so people that just want to complete it and "move on" can do so fairly quickly. But if you are a person that like RPGs and want to get deep into it, get as many options as possible, side missions are where you have to go. They are not just "Do this and get some loot", but will impact and explain what is going on in the main quest in more details.
Whether that was the design idea behind it by CDPR I don't know. But at least that is the impression I get. And apparently some side missions are not just 20 minute long but can be several hours.
For me at least, I will probably focus a lot more on side missions compared to main missions.
These are people that have completed the game, some have spend 40 hours on it etc.
Sorry guys — question. Anybody read the IGN Japan review? https://jp.ign.com/cyberpunk-2077/48777/review/20202077
There seems to be a spoiler inside. This bit:
Have these bastards just ruined the game for me? Or is this just a spoiler from the old tabletop game? Would appreciate your thoughts.
There seems to be a spoiler inside
. This bit:Just as Johnny blew the Arasaka Tower with a nuclear bomb that day 50 years ago, nothing changed, it is unlikely that a revolution would solve all of its problems. Yes, in order to swim through this world, which is as complicated as or more complicated than Night City, we cooperate in unconscious collaboration with others, as V and Johnny did so, sometimes hurt each other. However, there is no choice but to do something about it. And what helps in such a case is the endless interest in the world itself-the blaze of curiosity that this work has rekindled.
Have these bastards just ruined the game for me? Or is this just a spoiler from the old tabletop game? Would appreciate your thoughts.