Do you feel immersed in 2077? Well, you're not alone.

[GrimReaper801]

It may diverge on game mechanics, it may diverge on art design... But no, those appear from time to time while in 100% of the cases you see "tpp Vs fpp".

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to argue here.

I did say "Every single one". That would be 100%.

And yes, I said there's a big subjective component in immersion, but also objective

The guidelines sure are. The rest is purely subjective.

Saying such things as "improving AI behavior can only help immersion" is objective truth. It just can't have the opposite effect.

Saying "this, this and that is what makes a game immersive" is completely wrong. It's what makes it immersive for you.

As an example, if you look at RDR2 (only using it because you just mentioned it). You say the NPC interaction is top notch and I agree on that. For you it might've played a major role in how immersed you were. For me it didn't. At least, most of the interactions didn't. Saying "hello" to NPCs or just standing very close to them and watching them react in many different ways might be immersive for many. It's not for me and many others because we don't actually care about it. This kind of interaction adds nothing to my immersion and not having them wouldn't make me feel less immersed.

Immersion is something people feel, it's as subjective as it gets.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to argue here.

Just what I wrote, that every discussion about immersion ends up touching the perspective. Which is something I found interesting to say the least.

The guidelines sure are.

Saying "this, this and that is what makes a game immersive" is completely wrong.

Sorry, but I see a contradiction here. There's a foundation (a definition if you will) for the word immersive in games, some may found one aspect more important than other, some may even say they (subjectively) feel more immerse in Tetris than in Skyrim, but Skyrim is a more immersive game than Tetris, objectively.

 

[GrimReaper801]

Sorry, but I see a contradiction here. There's a foundation (a definition if you will) for the word immersive in games

There really isn't. Just like there isn't a clear definition of what an RPG is - another recurring topic around here.

some may found one aspect more important than other, some may even say they (subjectively) feel more immerse in Tetris than in Skyrim, but Skyrim is a more immersive game than Tetris, objectively.

We are talking about what people are feeling. By stating that "Skyrim is a more immersive game, objectively" you are effectively saying that people should feel more immersed in Skyrim. You also just admitted that some would feel more immersed in Tetris than they would in Skyrim. Some people would simply never be able to get immersed in Skyrim. I've seen people argue that they can't get immersed in fantasy worlds cause it's all made up.

Are they all wrong to feel that way?

Some people would say TW3 is far more immersive than CP2077. I disagree. CP2077 is far more immersive to me. Who's right? Let's say your own opinion is that TW3 is indeed more immersive, are you saying I am wrong for feeling more immersed in CP2077?

You are quite literally arguing about how people should feel.

It's like arguing about what makes a game fun. You, from what I gather, would say Skyrim is more fun than Tetris. I would agree with that but I would disagree that it is objectively more fun. It's more fun for me. Some people would spend days playing Tetris and shut down Skyrim in a matter of minutes. Fun in videogames, just like immersion, has objective guidelines - improving interactivity can only help make a game more fun - but it is ultimately subjective.

Seems like we will have to agree to disagree as our view are clearly fundamentally different and I'm certain the moderators are about to clamp down on this.

 

[BigWezz69]

It's just weird to me to think that Cyberpunk could be more "immersive" (or at least to be more immersed in the world) if there were cinematics (or gameplay) in third person. Third person and "immersive" really don't match together, in my opinion

I did not mean for added immersion, more added emotional connection to a character. I don't get much out of V since V, I do not connect with them since they are just the vessel for the player, which imo is a waste.

I believe CDPR should have made V their own character in the same manner as Geralt was his own person.

What compounds the issue for me (me as V) is the lack of connection to NC, little to do, neigh on impossible to be V since I do not feel like V is part of the city at all, thus me, the player am not part of the city.

Really in all I think CDPR shot close to the mark with this game, the IP is excellent, the lore, character (on the whole), music ect .. but for me, they just did not nail it, mainly due to lack of immersion. I feel like the game could have been so much more ..

But, each to their own and if people are still enjoying the game, then more power to them.

Post automatically merged: Jan 17, 2022

You probably don't / won't like it but the interaction with NPCs in rdr2 is top notch.

RDR2 nailed the immersion for me, and the NPC interactions were the best I've ever seen. How the game could smoothly transition from a Great to Antagonize was brilliant and really added to the feel like Arthur was talking to real people. Even seeing them go about their business was interesting to see, and again, this just added to the immersion.

Seeing NPC's die .. oof it almost felt too real

 

[nirile1410]

... First time I heard it, I was driving in watson, looking up at the mega buildings, the rain, the lights, the night sky. The characters and the city feel incredibly real....

...Feels like Night City calls you, so you launch the game after a hard day’s work, and it feels like home, feels like the city, the heavy atmosphere, the rain at night, it comforts you, you forget everything and feel so immersed into the world....

Despite the flaws, bugs and whatnot, I do. I still do feel immersed into the world whenever I visit. Yes, even if I can't play rollerderby or ride a bicycle in some race with a stranger or whatever. I feel like a visitor, yes, but a visitor to a strange, dangerous beautiful land.

I'll quote something we hear a lot here on the forum: "Hey, this is not an Architecture Simulator! We don't care about the City, if it's lacking from the gameplay side"
Jokes aside, that's a good comment.
Just wanna try expand it, adding some line:

... I was driving in watson watching the city, and that's because tha't the only spot I can actually sit. I can't use benches, chairs, stools or whatether....
.. The characters feel incredibly real...
Yes, the braindead NPC make me feel immersed, the police is so powerfull that spawn on sight.... I feel so inmersed that all NPC in my area crouch in fear when I shot once, and they de-spawn when I turn my back to them....

... I feel like a visitor.... Yes... the only living character in a city of fake people....

To wrap up:
Saying that the characters and the city feel real... I mean... You actually ever played an open world game?

 

[maniak6767]

Yeah very immersive game.

RDR2 nailed the immersion for me, and the NPC interactions were the best I've ever seen. How the game could smoothly transition from a Great to Antagonize was brilliant and really added to the feel like Arthur was talking to real people. Even seeing them go about their business was interesting to see, and again, this just added to the immersion.

Seeing NPC's die .. oof it almost felt too real

RDR2 NPC interactions are cartoonish and not realistic, also it's nothing new. Old ideas, new clothes.

Some people just want some simulation. Playing Kingdome Come - game is overloaded with interactions, some mechanics are cool, some are crap, overall I don't get people wanting some weird additionial interactions. Sitting in Inn and getting +1 Strength because I've read some book, isn't really immersive.Getting your clothes dirty, because of...reasons. But you can summon horse in any place and moment, just like that. Gameplay in this game, is it fun? sometimes. Most of times it's not.
Maybe some developers just want to make games fun to play....

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

You are quite literally arguing about how people should feel.

Nope, I'm arguing that some games are objectively more immersive than others because of the way they are designed. Which makes the rest of the discussion pointless.

Post automatically merged: Jan 17, 2022

Seems like we will have to agree to disagree as our view are clearly fundamentally different and I'm certain the moderators are about to clamp down on this.

Totally agreed

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

You probably don't / won't like it but the interaction with NPCs in rdr2 is top notch.

I have it installed, but I haven’t had the feeling to try it out. I checked out a bit of someones let’s play to get an idea, and it seems to have an extrelemely annoying opening chapter. And it gives me the vibes of being not much more than GTA V with hooves.

 

[GrimReaper801]

And it gives me the vibes of being not much more than GTA V with hooves.

It's not, at least not in my opinion.

It's a fairly well-written and very well executed cowboy desperado fantasy.

It has very little of GTA's wackiness.

 

[northwold]

I did not mean for added immersion, more added emotional connection to a character. I don't get much out of V since V, I do not connect with them since they are just the vessel for the player, which imo is a waste.

I believe CDPR should have made V their own character in the same manner as Geralt was his own person.

What compounds the issue for me (me as V) is the lack of connection to NC, little to do, neigh on impossible to be V since I do not feel like V is part of the city at all, thus me, the player am not part of the city.

Really in all I think CDPR shot close to the mark with this game, the IP is excellent, the lore, character (on the whole), music ect .. but for me, they just did not nail it, mainly due to lack of immersion. I feel like the game could have been so much more ..

But, each to their own and if people are still enjoying the game, then more power to them.

Post automatically merged: Jan 17, 2022

RDR2 nailed the immersion for me, and the NPC interactions were the best I've ever seen. How the game could smoothly transition from a Great to Antagonize was brilliant and really added to the feel like Arthur was talking to real people. Even seeing them go about their business was interesting to see, and again, this just added to the immersion.

Seeing NPC's die .. oof it almost felt too real

There is, of course, a danger in having a strongly defined player character in that it will alienate some people, which does break immersion.

Geralt is an interesting example. It took me probably 50 hours to find him likable or in any way interesting, and during that 50 hours, because the character is predetermined, the game had already alienated me in a borderline offensive way by not letting me play gay with some quite hostile language from a male prostitute, together with its wearisome obsession with teenage male fantasy sex scenes that made me feel it was created by immature frat bros for immature frat bros (which is something I subsequently discovered is lifted straight from the books). It's quite something that the rest of the storytelling was good enough to get me past that.

Other players will be alienated by different things.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

I have it installed, but I haven’t had the feeling to try it out. I checked out a bit of someones let’s play to get an idea, and it seems to have an extrelemely annoying opening chapter. And it gives me the vibes of being not much more than GTA V with hooves.

I guessed it right

 

[AvarageEnjoyer]

Yeah very immersive game.

RDR2 NPC interactions are cartoonish and not realistic, also it's nothing new. Old ideas, new clothes.

Some people just want some simulation. Playing Kingdome Come - game is overloaded with interactions, some mechanics are cool, some are crap, overall I don't get people wanting some weird additionial interactions. Sitting in Inn and getting +1 Strength because I've read some book, isn't really immersive.Getting your clothes dirty, because of...reasons. But you can summon horse in any place and moment, just like that. Gameplay in this game, is it fun? sometimes. Most of times it's not.
Maybe some developers just want to make games fun to play....

Ahh, RDR 2. A game where you can murder an entire town full of people and lose honor - only to regain it in couple of minutes by greeting civilians and returning fish to the water, truly a masterpiece of immersion.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I guessed it right

I’m an open book.

 

[BigWezz69]

There is, of course, a danger in having a strongly defined player character in that it will alienate some people, which does break immersion.

Geralt is an interesting example. It took me probably 50 hours to find him likable or in any way interesting, and during that 50 hours, because the character is predetermined, the game had already alienated me in a borderline offensive way by not letting me play gay with some quite hostile language from a male prostitute, together with its wearisome obsession with teenage male fantasy sex scenes that made me feel it was created by immature frat bros for immature frat bros (which is something I subsequently discovered is lifted straight from the books). It's quite something that the rest of the storytelling was good enough to get me past that.

Other players will be alienated by different things.

I get what you are saying, but considering how well TW3 sold, and how many people love the character, and the game, I'd say that a fully fleshed out character is a better idea.

I understand that its not the same as "V is you, you are V", but with how much immersion breaking issues the game has, I neve felt like I was in NC.

Considering how well they wrote Judy, Jackie, ect, I think they could have made good protagonists (one made, one female like ME1, 2 and 3).

Post automatically merged: Jan 17, 2022

RDR2 NPC interactions are cartoonish and not realistic, also it's nothing new. Old ideas, new clothes.

Each to their own, but comparing RDR2 NPC's to CP77's NPC's just underscores how limited CP77's NPC's are. Little to no interaction with them, and seeing clones, and all the NPC's in lock sync step crouching when scared is poor at best. That sort of NPC AI is a far "older idea" and I wouldn't even say the clothes are new

And sorry, but looking at the NPC Ai side by side, RDR2's AI is more convincing imo.

Some people just want some simulation. Playing Kingdome Come - game is overloaded with interactions, some mechanics are cool, some are crap, overall I don't get people wanting some weird additionial interactions. Sitting in Inn and getting +1 Strength because I've read some book, isn't really immersive.Getting your clothes dirty, because of...reasons. But you can summon horse in any place and moment, just like that. Gameplay in this game, is it fun? sometimes. Most of times it's not.
Maybe some developers just want to make games fun to play....

KCD is a good example of a game with a semi defined character and with RPG elements. Sure people can go an spend endless hours knocking about Inn's and towns, playing dice, drinking and getting drunk, having to clean themselves, hunt, ect, but that's them role playing. If those things do not tickle you pickle, you do not have to do them outside of any main story/quest.

CP77 has very little to do outside of the main/side story(s)/hustles ect. There's riding on the roller coaster, that's cool, but I think the game could have been more engaging and immersive is players could go off and do their own thing for a while. And those who do not want to do that, then they do not have to do it.

Fingers crossed for the future

 

[northwold]

I get what you are saying, but considering how well TW3 sold, and how many people love the character, and the game, I'd say that a fully fleshed out character is a better idea.

I understand that its not the same as "V is you, you are V", but with how much immersion breaking issues the game has, I neve felt like I was in NC.

Considering how well they wrote Judy, Jackie, ect, I think they could have made good protagonists (one made, one female like ME1, 2 and 3).

I think for this game, especially, which is predicated on you the player making a choice of which of a number of possible interpretations of what your soul / end point should be to go for, a slightly blank slate in first person was absolutely the right choice and I really don't think that would work any other way. But, yes, with a story like Witcher 3 I agree that more fixed character was the right way to go. But Witcher 3 isn't really asking the player to think about much it's more telling a straight adventure story.

 

[BigWezz69]

Ahh, RDR 2. A game where you can murder an entire town full of people and lose honor - only to regain it in couple of minutes by greeting civilians and returning fish to the water, truly a masterpiece of immersion.

And that sort of thing is optional and actually difficult without getting shot to death, and even if the player survives, they have a massive bounty to pay.

Or you could just go play cards, hunt, fish, race horses, ect. Somewhat more peaceful

CP77 has very few things for the player to do other than missions/side story/hustles.

Some people like doing immersive stuff. NC is dripping with atmosphere, its design is amazing, and it looks like there would be so much to do .. but there isn't, and that's a shame. V cant even get a damn haircut

Post automatically merged: Jan 18, 2022

I think for this game, especially, which is predicated on you the player making a choice of which of a number of possible interpretations of what your soul / end point should be to go for, a slightly blank slate in first person was absolutely the right choice and I really don't think that would work any other way. But, yes, with a story like Witcher 3 I agree that more fixed character was the right way to go. But Witcher 3 isn't really asking the player to think about much it's more telling a straight adventure story.

What you say also touches on another issue I have with the game, the story. While its nice to have to let the player question what the soul is and if V is still V with JS in him/her. But I'd rather a more defined story, it doesn't have to be spoon fed to the player, and could still have plenty of choices. The Mass Effect trilogy is a good example of what I mean.

Shepard is enough of a character that the player understands their motive/drive, stop the Reapers, (Like Geralt, find/help Ciri), but is open enough for the player to be a paragon, be a renegade or a blend of both. While the story in the ME trilogy is the main driving factor, its strength lays in its character, their bonds, and Shepard's interactions with them.

I'm not saying CP77 should have been the next ME, but just that ME is similar since it too focuses on characters and their bonds.

But yes it cool that CP77 is vague enough in some aspects that it allows the player to sit and think, but to me, it comes off as whishy washy, but thats just me

 

[AvarageEnjoyer]

And that sort of thing is optional and actually difficult without getting shot to death, and even if the player survives, they have a massive bounty to pay.

Or you could just go play cards, hunt, fish, race horses, ect. Somewhat more peaceful

CP77 has very few things for the player to do other than missions/side story/hustles.

Some people like doing immersive stuff. NC is dripping with atmosphere, its design is amazing, and it looks like there would be so much to do .. but there isn't, and that's a shame. V cant even get a damn haircut

I definitely agree about haircut, the lack of barbershops is unacceptable, and I agree about minigames, they should definitely be added.
However, I definitely disagree on what makes the game more or less immersive.
For example, GTA, RDR or any other Rockstar game past 2005 have more minigames, animations and other fluff than Morrowind. However, I would argue that Morrowind is a much, much more immersive game than anything Rockstar has ever released. Why? Because of the atmosphere and, more importantly, consequential player choice - not with the story, unfortunately, but with gameplay. In terms of gameplay, it offers much more opportunities to tackle on the task the game presents you than GTA, despite having less fancy animations. The diversity of means and narrative consequences are main metrics by witch I would consider the game to be immersive or not. And, considering the existence of genre called "immersive sim", that is build entirely around this two concepts, I feel like i'm not the only one who thinks this way.
What I'm getting at, I wouldn't mind some card games, or any other minigame, it is certainly would be welcomed. But most importantly, Cyberpunk 2077 should be building upon it's already present strengths - diverse gameplay opportunities and story branching. I felt most immersed in the game during missions like The Pickup and I Walk the Line, when the game gives you narrative and gameplay options and reacts accordingly. Hell, I felt immersed even in some of the fetch missions, in cases when they encouraged use of surroundings, different skills/upgrades and planning. This is what I absolutely want more of and I think this is what defines immersion - and not necessarily ability to say "hi" to some bypasses.

 

[Feline_Witcher]

Yes! weather + music + time of the day and night and where you are at the moment in game.
And some places may look completely different from the last time you've been there.
View attachment 11274232

Goddamn, there never were more beautiful graphics than RedEngine

 

[BigWezz69]

I definitely agree about haircut, the lack of barbershops is unacceptable, and I agree about minigames, they should definitely be added.
However, I definitely disagree on what makes the game more or less immersive.
For example, GTA, RDR or any other Rockstar game past 2005 have more minigames, animations and other fluff than Morrowind. However, I would argue that Morrowind is a much, much more immersive game than anything Rockstar has ever released. Why? Because of the atmosphere and, more importantly, consequential player choice - not with the story, unfortunately, but with gameplay. In terms of gameplay, it offers much more opportunities to tackle on the task the game presents you than GTA, despite having less fancy animations. The diversity of means and narrative consequences are main metrics by witch I would consider the game to be immersive or not. And, considering the existence of genre called "immersive sim", that is build entirely around this two concepts, I feel like i'm not the only one who thinks this way.
What I'm getting at, I wouldn't mind some card games, or any other minigame, it is certainly would be welcomed. But most importantly, Cyberpunk 2077 should be building upon it's already present strengths - diverse gameplay opportunities and story branching. I felt most immersed in the game during missions like The Pickup and I Walk the Line, when the game gives you narrative and gameplay options and reacts accordingly. Hell, I felt immersed even in some of the fetch missions, in cases when they encouraged use of surroundings, different skills/upgrades and planning. This is what I absolutely want more of and I think this is what defines immersion - and not necessarily ability to say "hi" to some bypasses.

In a way then you could just boil it back to "choice". Having a choice to do things or not to do them is the immersion.

In games like RDR2, GTA, Morrowind, Skyrim, and similar games, the player has the choice to interact with the environments instead of just doing the main/side quests/stories. But in CP77 there is little scope to do anything outside of the main and side stuff.

The world and setting of CP77 there could have been so much that could have been added; gambling, races, smuggling, hustling people, mugging people, cosmetic customisation, car customisation, buying new apartments, brain dances, deep diving the net, ect ect. All of that could have been optional and non-mandatory, so for those who think its a waste or just don't want to do it, they would have the choice to reject it and crack on with the stories.

As for the actual missions and stories, I think there should have also been more branching options and outcomes, again, to capitalize on player choice. Act One, getting the spiderbot and dealing with Royce, more of that please, a lot more! And to add to it, there should have been consequences such as the gang trying to kill V if V killed or double-crossed Royce. Perhaps they could have ambushed V once or twice until another of V's friends suggest dealing with them once and for all .. or something like that?

 

[medion_no]

I live in the game...