I think people generally don't understand what an achievement this game is

+
Any way you look at it, Cyberpunk simply gets way closer to unifying RPG, FPS, and open-world sandbox into one game than any other game has tried to before, and you can see this when you directly compare it to any similar game:
  • VS GTA and Watchdogs: Itemization, loots, detailed environments and detailed quests, high quality FPS mechanics in first person
  • VS Fallout: Sandbox, ability to go off-rails, much sharper FPS mechanics and movement
  • VS The Division: Seamless open world, sandbox, detailed quests, storylines
  • VS Borderlands: Seamless open world, sandbox
The other way around (what these games have that Cyberpunk doesn't have), you'll see that Cyberpunk either has what those games offer, if not fully, then partially, with the potentially to easily add them into the framework they've established.

I can understand and respect your opinion. I don't agree with it though. I think what flies under the radar is you can throw RPG elements into a game. This, by itself, does not make it an RPG. The important part is the interplay of those elements. And a lot of it falls on the underlying gameplay mechanics.

Quite frankly, this is where a lot of games slapping the RPG label on them fall short. They add or attempt to include character design, character progression, gearing/equipment, attributes superimposed upon the player, narrative choices/consequences, interactions with other characters within the gameworld, etc. into the game. Sadly, they fail to tie all of this together in a way where the gameplay feels and plays like an RPG.

To use an example, in this game I can adjust the physical appearance, starting attributes and life-path of V at the game start. It still feels like I am playing a generic V. No matter what choices I make there it feels like it's not really my V. Hell, I cannot even change the name of my character. I can then evolve this character via the character progression. Even so, it still feels like it's a generic V with a stronger ability to do generic V stuff in specific areas. The same could be said for the dialogue options presented to my character.

Exploring and navigating the gameworld itself presents the same... mental block. It would appear the only things I can really engage in within the game world are quests, many of which feel like they force me in a certain direction and only create an illusion of real choice, and combat. This is what is so disappointing about the focus, almost to the exclusion of all else, on pretty graphics and narrative. It ends up feeling like there is no true way to define or differentiate the character from one to the next. The ways you can are largely superficial.

TW3 arguably failed just as much when it comes to it's gameplay systems. The mechanics at a fundamental level. Weak progression, mostly combat/narrative, primarily action combat, a disaster of a loot/gearing system, etc. Yet, there I actually felt a connection to Geralt in a way where it reeled me into the character. I was playing the role of Geralt. CP, for a variety of reasons, has failed to capture that connection.

It does give more freedom to adjust the character. Sadly, most of those adjustments are, once again, superficial. Despite this minimal increase to freedom it still comes off as being forced into a pre-generated character. This game clearly tries to be a more "open world" then TW3. The problem is it does it in a way where that player -> character connection fails to reach anywhere close to the same strength. That connection, and the way the player is tied to the character they've assumed, is what defines an RPG.

In short, I do not see RPG in this game. I see cinematic. I see action/adventure. I see a respectable narrative, in spite of it's flaws. I see some looter/shooter elements. I see RPG elements and FPS elements. What I don't see is an RPG. I don't mean barebones RPG either. I mean... close to zero. As in, it almost completely fails at delivering an RPG experience.

It's funny because I remember having discussions with members on this very forum well before the game released. Now sure, perhaps we didn't see eye to eye on everything in those conversations. But... in many cases there was apprehension shared in those conversations with what we were seeing in reveals and whatnot. The concern the game was going to say it was an RPG, throw RPG elements into it but fail completely to deliver the experience of one. At this point I personally believe those fears have been realized.

The way I see it they can fix bugs in this game, improve performance, add activities outside the quest/combat content, improve it in various areas, what have you. I do not think they can fix the way the game fails to feel or play like an RPG. The reasons for that run deep. Too deep to be corrected without revamping the underlying mechanics. That just isn't going to happen.

Lastly, I'd reiterate what I've said elsewhere on this forum. I enjoy this game for what it offers. It is fun to play, warts and all. Regardless, I am disappointed it failed to deliver what it said it was trying to deliver. And I really do think it did.
 
I agree with this sentiment somewhat, but I think building that base was the hard task, the filling is the easy part and can be done by patch/dlc/expansion/sequels.

My biggest concern is that the negative reaction will send the message to CDPR that:
  • Let's never try something this ambitious again for this long because the fans will hate it
When with a slightly different wording, the message can be
  • The fans love and appreciate the base we've built, our big gamble was worth it, now let's fill the world with interesting stuff

Thanks for replying.

People are pretty angry toward the game because they spent 60$ or more for this result (and I'm glad that some people like you can still enjoy the game, sincerely... at least it wasn't all this crunch time for nothing) ; CDPR is on fire right now in the front line because they're the authors of the game, thus CDPR is the legitimate target for backlash since they're the one who accepted releasing the game in this current state ; but they're only partially at fault for this since it's been known that their investors did push hard on them to release the game EARLIER at an UNFINISHED state... Which means CDPR COULD have delivered the game of the decade, a masterpiece of art that we knew they could accomplish, but we've been spoiled this pleasure from a bunch of corporates. Irony.

Considering these information, it's as useless to judge this game like we could judge an art work, nor it is relevant to fire CDPR for some dev choices they were not totally at fault from.

But we (the crying crowd :mad:) do it anyway since we (as videogame players, consumers) commonly use to analyze / make reviews of a new product in the first place when it comes out and it's pretty much all the feedback we can give to CDPR, since none of us are qualified to judge their accounting, or marketing relationships, whatever. So if you take it that sending overly positive reactions (some would say fanboyism) would only comfort the investors to repeat this mess : boom, they'll win...
So basically we're giving negative reactions so the investors have that message engraved in mind for next time they feel like shooting on the games at point blank.

(NOTE : I don't agree with insulting people, nor I agree with harassing the devs for whatever reason. I only agree with, and respect game reviews, whether positive or negative, when they are justified.)

So basically, it's up to this dev studio to make a move now. They can choose between artistic freedom, or money. It's too complicated and boring to explain, but I guess everyone got the message. And yes, if I'm still wandering around in the forums after my disappointment, it's because I still have empathy for this dev company, they can make great things, maybe not this time...

Maybe CDPR left a SUBTLE message in the endings, should we call the emergencies ? :ROFLMAO:
 
I can understand and respect your opinion. I don't agree with it though. I think what flies under the radar is you can throw RPG elements into a game. This, by itself, does not make it an RPG. The important part is the interplay of those elements. And a lot of it falls on the underlying gameplay mechanics.

Quite frankly, this is where a lot of games slapping the RPG label on them fall short. They add or attempt to include character design, character progression, gearing/equipment, attributes superimposed upon the player, narrative choices/consequences, interactions with other characters within the gameworld, etc. into the game. Sadly, they fail to tie all of this together in a way where the gameplay feels and plays like an RPG.

To use an example, in this game I can adjust the physical appearance, starting attributes and life-path of V at the game start. It still feels like I am playing a generic V. No matter what choices I make there it feels like it's not really my V. Hell, I cannot even change the name of my character. I can then evolve this character via the character progression. Even so, it still feels like it's a generic V with a stronger ability to do generic V stuff in specific areas. The same could be said for the dialogue options presented to my character.

Exploring and navigating the gameworld itself presents the same... mental block. It would appear the only things I can really engage in within the game world are quests, many of which feel like they force me in a certain direction and only create an illusion of real choice, and combat. This is what is so disappointing about the focus, almost to the exclusion of all else, on pretty graphics and narrative. It ends up feeling like there is no true way to define or differentiate the character from one to the next. The ways you can are largely superficial.

TW3 arguably failed just as much when it comes to it's gameplay systems. The mechanics at a fundamental level. Weak progression, mostly combat/narrative, primarily action combat, a disaster of a loot/gearing system, etc. Yet, there I actually felt a connection to Geralt in a way where it reeled me into the character. I was playing the role of Geralt. CP, for a variety of reasons, has failed to capture that connection.

It does give more freedom to adjust the character. Sadly, most of those adjustments are, once again, superficial. Despite this minimal increase to freedom it still comes off as being forced into a pre-generated character. This game clearly tries to be a more "open world" then TW3. The problem is it does it in a way where that player -> character connection fails to reach anywhere close to the same strength. That connection, and the way the player is tied to the character they've assumed, is what defines an RPG.

In short, I do not see RPG in this game. I see cinematic. I see action/adventure. I see a respectable narrative, in spite of it's flaws. I see some looter/shooter elements. I see RPG elements and FPS elements. What I don't see is an RPG. I don't mean barebones RPG either. I mean... close to zero. As in, it almost completely fails at delivering an RPG experience.

It's funny because I remember having discussions with members on this very forum well before the game released. Now sure, perhaps we didn't see eye to eye on everything in those conversations. But... in many cases there was apprehension shared in those conversations with what we were seeing in reveals and whatnot. The concern the game was going to say it was an RPG, throw RPG elements into it but fail completely to deliver the experience of one. At this point I personally believe those fears have been realized.

The way I see it they can fix bugs in this game, improve performance, add activities outside the quest/combat content, improve it in various areas, what have you. I do not think they can fix the way the game fails to feel or play like an RPG. The reasons for that run deep. Too deep to be corrected without revamping the underlying mechanics. That just isn't going to happen.

Lastly, I'd reiterate what I've said elsewhere on this forum. I enjoy this game for what it offers. It is fun to play, warts and all. Regardless, I am disappointed it failed to deliver what it said it was trying to deliver. And I really do think it did.


I think this is a very good articulation of a lot of peoples' disappointment, including mine. Thus far, I'm having a lot of fun and enjoying it for what it is... It's not BAD. It just utterly fails the objective of what, I think, the original intent for it was, and what many of us were led to believe it was going to be.
 
The space shuttle challenger was quite the achievement as well, and it exploded on take off.

Sure, I'm sure that they will eventually bandage this game to the point of it being decent, but do you really think that it will get to the point that it lives up to the original hype? (Serious question). Honestly, The Witcher 3 is still a much better game, so it's not that they are incapable of putting out a excellent game experience. Do you really think that they were unaware of each decision made that took this game further and further away from what was originally advertised? There are unexpected bugs, then there is quality and features that were not delivered upon as indicated. A production team of this caliber, that has previously delivered much better, cannot be this unaware of what they have released as a "MVP". Now I am confident that they CAN deliver on the hype, but the have less faith regarding if they actually will or not. I will attempt to be optimistic, but the popular trend with game development these days doesn't make optimism these days easy. I'm sticking hoping that this game's potential will be reached and that something better won't come along before I tire of waiting. Pardon my venting.
 
The space shuttle challenger was quite the achievement as well, and it exploded on take off.

Sure, I'm sure that they will eventually bandage this game to the point of it being decent, but do you really think that it will get to the point that it lives up to the original hype? (Serious question). Honestly, The Witcher 3 is still a much better game, so it's not that they are incapable of putting out a excellent game experience. Do you really think that they were unaware of each decision made that took this game further and further away from what was originally advertised? There are unexpected bugs, then there is quality and features that were not delivered upon as indicated. A production team of this caliber, that has previously delivered much better, cannot be this unaware of what they have released as a "MVP". Now I am confident that they CAN deliver on the hype, but the have less faith regarding if they actually will or not. I will attempt to be optimistic, but the popular trend with game development these days doesn't make optimism these days easy. I'm sticking hoping that this game's potential will be reached and that something better won't come along before I tire of waiting. Pardon my venting.
People hyped this game to positively delusional levels, so I'm not convinced they could have matched expectations even if they did everything right. I mean, I for years I saw people talking about everything from unique cyberware installation sequences for every single implant a la Victor in Act 1, all the way up to and including getting a day job in a full fledged economy simulation as if CDPR were making The Sims 2077.

As for going forward, no, I don't think this is salvagable to the degree people want. Performance, optimization, glitches, QOL improvemente, sure. But gameplay mechanics, RPG systems, interactivity and reactivity of the city, player agency, no. Alea iacta est. The only company I know of to fundamentally overhaul and build upon their gameplay systems post release to the degree required is Paradox... and they make emergent, sandbox strategy games which are much more amenable to that sort of thing than the very handcrafted and scripted experience that is CP.
 
Top Bottom