I'm undecided because I feel like the length and how they frame the missions is great, especially with the side missions, too, but I think that there were 1 or 2 instances where I felt that things went by too fast.
by replay you mean 20 minute lifepath (that's it)
as for 140 hours, 70+ of that consist of simple gigs and ncpd crime (i'm being generous when i say 70+, for me, it was 90+ )but i guess it depends
I would have been ok with it if I could replay with different life paths and get some different experiences but they all are the same more than 98% of the time so nope I'm not happy with current length
Really surprised with the results 
My 100% Cyberpunk playthrough takes 70-72h, my last W3 playthrough around 240-250h. Why people prefer such a short game ? I really don't know. But as long people are happy...
My 100% Cyberpunk playthrough takes 70-72h, my last W3 playthrough around 240-250h. Why people prefer such a short game ? I really don't know. But as long people are happy...
No
You don't cut a story down because "there's too much story", you cut it because there's not enough time.
I personally don't know a single person who would be disappointed with "too much content".
I'm not even sure where the whole issue of "too much story" in the Witcher 3 came from? If there was too much story, why make 2 very expansive DLC's?
You don't cut a story down because "there's too much story", you cut it because there's not enough time.
I personally don't know a single person who would be disappointed with "too much content".
I'm not even sure where the whole issue of "too much story" in the Witcher 3 came from? If there was too much story, why make 2 very expansive DLC's?
Last edited:
I don't know who these ... people, reviewers, whatever are that have convinced CDPR that The Witcher 3 was "too long", or if that's just some PR excuse thrown out to s'plain why the game is shorter ... but, I'm in the category of gamer where if I like, love, enjoy a game, i want the thing to to have 25 Million hours of playable content, so I never ever forever have to do a 2 play through after I've invested time in developing a character I like, to start with a new character.
No, i want games to be ridiculously bloated with content.
Hopefully, some time in the near future, the development of AI assisted development can give us something like that, where AI takes smart templates, human-hand-crafted quests/characters learns, and can pop out thousands of hours of new playable content, locations, characters, items, new game features/improvements/updates and do it all so fast and cheap that the days of just a handful of DLCs will look like a desert wasteland with a few puddles of water compared to the AI-dev revolution of a dozen or more AI-developed, human curated/tweaked packets of 10 DLCS all at once ... and there's dozens to select from all with new original content as good as, if not better than the base game to add at leisure when one's ready for more.
Yeah, maybe I'm a dreamer, or something's wrong with me brains to imagine such things, to think that more, and an overabundance of more is a good thing ... but, that's me.
No, i want games to be ridiculously bloated with content.
Hopefully, some time in the near future, the development of AI assisted development can give us something like that, where AI takes smart templates, human-hand-crafted quests/characters learns, and can pop out thousands of hours of new playable content, locations, characters, items, new game features/improvements/updates and do it all so fast and cheap that the days of just a handful of DLCs will look like a desert wasteland with a few puddles of water compared to the AI-dev revolution of a dozen or more AI-developed, human curated/tweaked packets of 10 DLCS all at once ... and there's dozens to select from all with new original content as good as, if not better than the base game to add at leisure when one's ready for more.
Yeah, maybe I'm a dreamer, or something's wrong with me brains to imagine such things, to think that more, and an overabundance of more is a good thing ... but, that's me.
The Witcher 3 dragged on for me but Cyberpunk did not. I wish I saw a little more of Cyberpunk without realizing how much baggage it's had. It's a totally different game and I know they tried to see results from those before to compare but I really wanted Cyberpunk to be longer. I find Cyberpunk way more engaging, interesting and lovable then W3. (hot take I know, don't hurt me) I tried to get trough 100s of hours of W3 and couldn't. I wouldn't mind it for Cyberpunk.
I didn't like it at first but now on my third play-through I appreciate it. They give a little shape to my characters development without being overbearing and in the second act I can just put the story to one side and play in an open world. The emphasis and sheer quantity of side missions and encounters make this possible and stop the game just being the single story. Certainly helped to extend its life and able to should be able fit new DLC (and story mods maybe) into it's framework
No, because I spend 130hs on W3 (with both expansions) and 190 on Cyberpunk. That's why
Still, you can quickrun CP77 in 15-20hs, getting the worst ending possible and no satisfaction, but what's the point besides proving some point?
But with all optional main quests and side quests, the game is comparable with W3, with W3 being maybe a bit longer, but not in a significant way.
Still, you can quickrun CP77 in 15-20hs, getting the worst ending possible and no satisfaction, but what's the point besides proving some point?
But with all optional main quests and side quests, the game is comparable with W3, with W3 being maybe a bit longer, but not in a significant way.
just make a save file before the decision and see how it plays out
203 hours now and have been dreaming of them adding content to an empty world that doesn't allow the player to interact with much of it.
Look yes it has content but basically through the quests, after all of that you are searching for content sitting around, can't sit and order food, can't go into clubs listen to music, can't BD. The list goes on and on, too many things the game lacks (content.)
Want me to stream it and show you? (Regardless, I love CP77.)
Last edited:
After actually playing through the game twice, the whole "we cut the story because the original was too long" is complete bullshit. The main story is a fraction of W3's for no other reason than that of all the other cut content in the game. Piss-poor management.
On my 3rd play through and yes the main story is very short if skipping scenes, Witcher Wild Hunt alone without the expansions is by far the best period.
I do love the CP77 story as well, Just want more...
Wild guess, some random person on twitter, reddit, whatever said they thought TW3 was too long and that got extrapolated and blown out of proportion to be a big deal (and potentially taken out of context). I can't rationalize the too long argument with any degree of logical reasoning unless it's because the quality of the content fails to maintain interest throughout the entire experience. In which case the fault does not lie with the temporal component but the content failing to maintain interest. Put differently, at that point the flaw is with the content.
Personally, I think this issue appears in CP at points. Some of the side content is absolutely brilliant. The people constructing it deserve every bit of praise thrown at them (seriously, good job team). Other portions come off as procedurally generated, filler content. It's not good in any sense of the word. When engaging in the latter it feels like a mindless time-sink. When engaging in it the game can feel too long or dragged out.
In CP I don't think it's fair to say the game is short. Not if you look at the complete picture. The primary narrative is at the shorter end of the spectrum. I'd place the blame there on the story being told though. It's kind of hard to keep things interesting when the narrative is, "Got thing in head killing me, must fix.". At a certain point you run out of room. And yes, this is a way of saying the primary narrative in this game isn't very interesting at a conceptual level in my opinion.
On a somewhat unrelated and potentially controversial note.... For some reason I think this game would have been better if instead of trying to force an extended, singular primary narrative into it they went with a.... short story approach. V in Night City. You're not saving the world. You're not saving yourself. You're not trying to "save" anything. You're just a merc in NC doing jobs and trying to propel your prospects in a positive direction. You're trying to survive the dystopian world in a non-specific way. I can't quite place why. Or, at least, sufficiently articulate why.
I can never understand why games length should be a problem for anyone. If a game feels "too long" it probably means that you're not enjoying it enough and that the problem is not the sheer volume of content but the quality of the content itself. With that being said, I have nothing against good, short games, but in an open world, RPG-ish adventure, there should be a lot of content, especially side quests.
people lose interest if things are too much even if they like them. Different people have a different attention span. So its hard to say the perfect time, but, sometimes people will actually consume more of something if its packaged differently.
To be honest the main story felt like the right length the first time. In a game like this, I don't think the main story needs to be super long. They could add more side stories with depth though
I'm still enjoying the game.
We all certainly have our criticisms.
For instance, I felt like the game was lots of small bite-sized chunks, some of them connected, but one could possibly play the game 15 minutes at a time, and not really leave anything dangling much between sessions.
Alternatively instead of; go to location, do thing, objective completed, some quests could have merited from getting a little more spread out over the range of the city where one objective out of a multi-objective quest has several sub-objectives, red-herrings, deceptive leads, components/information/people to talk to to unlock or access another part of one of the quest objectives, and a player finds themselves almost chasing their own tail all over the city.
For some mind-sets, I'm sure this kind of quest could play as annoying, but, there's those of us that might enjoy something a little more stretched out, and less direct than go to location, do/find/kill/retrieve thing, objective complete/fail.
i wouldn't have minded finding a thing, but, discovering through examination of the thing that it's a fake/decoy/body-double, and then have to find clues that lead to the discovery of where the real thing is, and chase all over the city, interviewing, and ferreting out the information that takes me there ... or, having the option to try to pass off the fake, or fail perception to see that it's fake back to the job-giver.
We don't, however, have that. most everything is corralled into little boxes of location/objective together in one place. Even the races are go to location and do the thing.
There may have been a couple cyberpsycho jobs where a trail had to be sniffed out with optics/witcher-vsion, and some of the Brain Dance recording investigating for clues seemed a little more involved with engaging discovery.
There's much more could have been done with the deployment of activities and how/where they're engaged, as well as spreading them out with unnecessary, but engaging embroidery of the bojective/quest but, we have what we have.
For side quests I did. But for main quest (like we meet keira metz at start, and her impact is directly in end), sometimes it takes too much time. I didnt had much time when I played TW3
