Do you actually like CP77 being shorter then Witcher3 ?

+

Do you actually like CP77 being shorter then Witcher3 ?

  • Yes (because)

    Votes: 31 7.1%
  • No (because)

    Votes: 365 83.9%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 39 9.0%

  • Total voters
    435
I'm not sure if there is a misunderstanding here, but I never said that the majority of players finished the game. If we only go by those who have finished the game, the "majority of players" I refer to are the majority of that 26.16%, so a fraction of a fraction as it were.

The point being, I believe people like longer stories providing that they are well written, and have enough pull to keep the player going to the end.
Maybe that I misunderstood :(
Anyway, Cyberpunk have one of the highest % of completion in my Xbox library. So either none of the games I play have an interesting story for the majority of players or I don't know.
But I admit that I have trouble to understanding why players don't finish their games. The only games I haven't finished are the games I didn't like. So a longer story for a game that I don't like, frankly I really don't care (don't care about everything about those games in fact...) :(
Best example, KCD, rather well rated, but only 3% of players have finish it... So disappointing o_O
 
Maybe that I misunderstood :(
Anyway, Cyberpunk have one of the highest % of completion in my Xbox library. So either none of the games I play have an interesting story for the majority of players or I don't know.
But I admit that I have trouble to understanding why players don't finish their games. The only games I haven't finished are the games I didn't like. So a longer story for a game that I don't like, frankly I really don't care (don't care about everything about those games in fact...) :(
Best example, KCD, rather well rated, but only 3% of players have finish it... So disappointing o_O

To be fair, KCD is quite difficult and any player going in thinking they can play it like Skyrim will get a sharp shock pretty quickly, so I bet a lot of people dropped the game early on. Additionally, the whole monastery quest (A Needle in a Haystack) can be awful to play.

On my second playthrough I levelled up my sneaking and lockpicking and before I did the quest, I snuck in and unlocked all the doors since I knew who I was looking for. In the end, I snuck in, killed him then ran.
 
But I admit that I have trouble to understanding why players don't finish their games. The only games I haven't finished are the games I didn't like. So a longer story for a game that I don't like, frankly I really don't care (don't care about everything about those games in fact...) :(
Best example, KCD, rather well rated, but only 3% of players have finish it... So disappointing o_O
I don't know what KCD is, but I guess a big factor might be sales, people buy stuff from discounts, like Steam sales and Xbox has these seasonal events as well. I got the Division and the Watchdogs that way, they were dirt cheap and I didn't finish either of them and I'm not going to. It's taking calculated risks. I went to look if those series would be anything for me and they don't so I don't need to bother with the sequels or anything with their formula. Finishing those games wouldn't gain me anything, but would be just time wasted for something I don't like, why would I do that.

Impulse buying is probably huge factor. I have games I have never played nor I will. Years ago I was still playing on PC it was another Steam sale announcements on some tech site and I used to log in Steam and it was like "that looks interesting, good user feedback too, I buy that, I don't have time to play it now but maybe later." Then one year I logged in and watched dozens of games in my library I had never played and realized that I didn't care any of them, 10 - 15 years younger me perhaps. So among other reasons, sometimes it may happen that we keep doing something for a while, without realizing it's actually something we have mentally unsubscribed years ago. Marketing exploits that, especially sales and games are there with everything else "Buy now or you may miss out!" and some of us end up buying stuff we never knew we needed and maybe we really didn't. Haha.

To keep this on topic, marketing, how it tries to get us, to get us. I can see quite a few ways to pad game length, opportunities in the Night City like there was this debacle that kept going first couple of months after launch. It was about how there's nothing to do and every food vendor, meaning every kiosk, stall and table should be interactive for content and immersion. For me, considering how packed some areas are, it looked like V walks few steps - dialogue prompt - walk few steps - dialogue prompt ... and so on and then some scenarios like say Woman of La Mancha and players V wouldn't happen to be in the best of terms with Tyger Claws, certain area is packed with stalls, then on Xbox it's X for reload / enter dialogue / select quickhack and B for exit dialogue and crouch. So how to fix that, have less kiosks and stalls and alike and then it's that world is empty.

For story content, there are tempting things there. For Militech, it's not only for get more inside information, but faster as the fact that they really aren't any better than Arasaka doens't necessarily open for players who don't do NCDP missions and read the shards, so it could actually work as a shortcut, further Meredith Stout / Gilchrist easily appears as huge opportunities as game really communicates huge things through characters. But that would be quite delicate thing to not to undermine any of the endings or create situation where it would seem logical for V to look help from them and then there's Silverhand, it would be odd if he wouldn't appear.

Like I wrote tempting but maybe it really is us, who tend to get us.
 
Kingdom come delivrance
Really good game, I like it (not the save system, but I deal with that)
If you want it, big discount (-75%)
But like BigWezz69 said, it's not a Skyrim game. It want to be as realistic as possible... Well, it stay a game, but you're not a god at all (you can realise that very early in game when you try to save a girl...Nope, run poor fool...)
Finishing those games wouldn't gain me anything, but would be just time wasted for something I don't like, why would I do that.
Honestly, even in discount, if I think that I couldn't like it, I don't buy it.
(but sometimes, I make a mistake, like for Yakuza LAD, full price, I will never finish it, that's for sure...)

Anyway, like I said, for me, Cyberpunk is too short obviously, whatever CDPR want to add, I'm for, that's for sure :)
(Maybe even with 200hrs main quest line, it would stay too short... I would be also sad during the credits...)
 
Kingdom come delivrance
Really good game, I like it (not the save system, but I deal with that)
If you want it, big discount (-75%)
Thanks. fantasy isn't really my thing, but at least now I know what KCD is.

For CP 2077, another tempting thing, though I'm not entirely serious about this. Street races, but while racing and driving related missions can net experience and eddies, it doesn't net any skill experience, how to solve that? And how that could be integrated to story, something that happens before V meets Claire or after?

Game isn't in technical state to be able to pull it at the moment, so this is just something I'm curious and there's nitro bottle in the backseat of V's Hella.
 
Not really fantasy, it's a "realistic" game, based on real characters (I think), real locations (I'm sure), real events (I think) and real life at time.
So no magic, no monster (so the shock for those who hoped a game like Skyrim).
You are a poor peasant who never wields a sword, so when you come across knights in armor or 3-4 bandits at the start, you avoid the fight and run as fast as possible, or you die... because, no "instant healing, hemorrhage possible, no aiming point for bows..."

For CP 2077, another tempting thing, though I'm not entirely serious about this. Street races, but while racing and driving related missions can net experience and eddies, it doesn't net any skill experience, how to solve that? And how that could be integrated to story, something that happens before V meets Claire or after?

Game isn't in technical state to be able to pull it at the moment, so this is just something I'm curious and there's nitro bottle in the backseat of V's Hella.
Just for money, it's not that bad. Or better, "iconic" unic cars.
Exactly like the Quadra Cthulhu ;)
Unic Mox car, unic 6th car,...
 
I prefer shorter games with great replay value.

The open world genre is less appealing to me because time is such a precious resource.
 
No, TW3 had the perfect duration
Their excuse was that people aren't finishing games. Most people never finished TW3.

I don't think it has anything to do with time. People can just play through a great game that they enjoy at their own paces. My guess is that most people out there aren't short on free time.

It probably has more to do with poor attention spans, impatience, and competition with other games.
 
Their excuse was that people aren't finishing games. Most people never finished TW3.

I don't think it has anything to do with time. People can just play through a great game that they enjoy at their own paces. My guess is that most people out there aren't short on free time.

It probably has more to do with poor attention spans, impatience, and competition with other games.

What you say is true, but lots of people did not finish CP77, so I wonder if CDPR will need to shorten the story again upon their next title .. :giveup:
 

Guest 3847602

Guest
I don't think anyone designs the game with the idea of 100% players finishing the main story, or even 2/3 of them.
I do think that the gap between 40% of players finishing he main story (CP2077) and 25% of them doing the same (TW3) is really big and that it tells something about the story's pacing or the quality of writing. And no, vanilla TW3 was not 50% longer game than Cyberpunk. If we look at TW3's achievements, only 35% of players had freed Dandelion. You can't seriously tell me that it takes more time to reach this point than to beat Cyberpunk's main quest.
 
I never finished The Witcher 3 either btw. Got until the middle of hearts of stone and never picked it back up. And every day that game gets further away the less inclined I am to pick it back up because I can't even remember how to play it and what the story was about.

Interesting note actually, when I took a break from Cyberpunk originally I was at around 50 hours or so. GoG even mentions that as the average amount of hours most people played. The Witcher 3 I have about 80ish hours into. That also includes some minor DLC like the cat and wolf quest, fool's gold, the X school gear scavenger hunts and such.

it's pretty similar I was in no rush to finish the game, I just went with the flow. Did most important side quests. Same as in Cyberpunk.

So to say that yeah one of them was significantly bigger than the other is just based on how much real side content you did. Which my current 2077 play-through is the perfect example of. I had to roll back my save 20 hours due to a little bug but I now have 117,5 hours played on GoG. I spent all that time getting legendary gear / a good looking outfit, collecting certain weapon blueprints , looking for optimal implants and of course trying out different builds.

A no DLC Witcher experience is pretty similar to a no DLC cyberpunk experience. It doesn't seem shorter at all. Maybe it's just because the Witcher has so much post launch content added and many people only picked the game up when it was already in the 30$ insane value bin?


But I can understand that the game did feel shorter. Mostly due to the first act being very rushy, as if the game really wants to push you toward "johnny content" and then the entire thing with the relic is also on a deadline. And it also seemed that they just had too much story to fit in that same amount of time. Witcher 3 did have the leg up on cyberpunk of being the third game in the series.

50 hours wasn't enough time to cram all that Cyberpunk into and I doubt 10-20 extra would've saved it. Maybe the main story, but that's about it.
 
Last edited:
I never finished The Witcher 3 either btw. Got until the middle of hearts of stone and never picked it back up. And every day that game gets further away the less inclined I am to pick it back up because I can't even remember how to play it and what the story was about.

Interesting note actually, when I took a break from Cyberpunk originally I was at around 50 hours or so. GoG even mentions that as the average amount of hours most people played. The Witcher 3 I have about 80ish hours into. That also includes some minor DLC like the cat and wolf quest, fool's gold, the X school gear scavenger hunts and such.

it's pretty similar I was in no rush to finish the game, I just went with the flow. Did most important side quests. Same as in Cyberpunk.

So to say that yeah one of them was significantly bigger than the other is just based on how much real side content you did. Which my current 2077 play-through is the perfect example of. I had to roll back my save 20 hours due to a little bug but I now have 117,5 hours played on GoG. I spent all that time getting legendary gear / a good looking outfit, collecting certain weapon blueprints , looking for optimal implants and of course trying out different builds.

A no DLC Witcher experience is pretty similar to a no DLC cyberpunk experience. It doesn't seem shorter at all. Maybe it's just because the Witcher has so much post launch content added and many people only picked the game up when it was already in the 30$ insane value bin?


But I can understand that the game did feel shorter. Mostly due to the first act being very rushy, as if the game really wants to push you toward "johnny content" and then the entire thing with the relic is also on a deadline. And it also seemed that they just had too much story to fit in that same amount of time. Witcher 3 did have the leg up on cyberpunk of being the third game in the series.

50 hours wasn't enough time to cram all that Cyberpunk into and I doubt 10-20 extra would've saved it. Maybe the main story, but that's about it.

In my case I played the entire Witcher 3 game including DLCs: 350 hours.
Cyberpunk 2077: 480 hours (almost 3 playthroughs now)
Fallout 4: 650 hours. Interesting I've only beaten that once. It's very easy to waste time in that game.

Countless games where I only have about 40 hours. Most of those I never finished, just didn't end up liking them.

Death Stranding: 9 hours
Borderlands 3: 3 hours! Claptrap was hilarious, but the fighting made me want to beat my head against a brick wall.
 
Hehe just noticed a sad fact, i have more then x2 time in ME andromeda then i have in Cp2077. Wow i wasent expecting this to ever happend.

cp2077: 150h
Me andromeda: 350h
Skyrim Se+Le:2300h
Fallout4:750h

Really hope a new patch will hit soon and some news about DLC. Also wish they would say anything about releasing modtools..
 
Borderlands 3: 3 hours! Claptrap was hilarious, but the fighting made me want to beat my head against a brick wall.

Was it really that bad? I had considered checking it out, but if it's that bad, I'll pass.

Skyrim SE - 2,213 hours
Skyrim - 3,327 hours
Fallout 4 - 2,753 hours

Creation Kit for all three games combined? No idea. But likely more than all the above combined :ROFLMAO:
 

Guest 3847602

Guest
Hehe just noticed a sad fact, i have more then x2 time in ME andromeda then i have in Cp2077. Wow i wasent expecting this to ever happend.
How many playthroughs?

As for me:
Fallout 4: 11h
Skyrim SE: 25h
Mass Effect Andromeda: 95h
Mass Effect LE: 111h
Dragon Age Inquisition: 295h
Cyberpunk 2077: 320h
Kingdom Come Deliverance: 330h
The Witcher 3: 730h
 
Top Bottom