Is really The Witcher 3 more for an RPG than Cyberpunk?

+
* Judy's quests ending
* Panam's quest ending
* Maelstrom quests ending
* Sinnerman's quests ending
* The fact you can end any assassination quest with killing the target or kidnapping them
* Us Crack/Kerry's ending
* Kill or Spare the Voodoo Boys/Side with Netwatch
* Save or let Goro die.
* The four endings of the game

No, the random monster attack equivalents don't have multiple endings but you have huge numbers of choice sin the game.

Save Brick and he'll help you later in the game.

I'll have to agree with Mebrilia here.

It's not that the game doesn't give you choices. It's the outcomes of said choices that's highly disappointing and ultimately meaningless. So much so that in reality it's mostly the illusion of choice that's presented to you.

Let's take the Voodoo boys as an example. You can either cut off the heads of the gang or let them live. But does it really matter? What effect does it have? What meaningful change is there?

Let's look at Maelstrom's quest. No matter who you side with and which Militech suit survives, they'll both just hand you a piece of highly classified and experimental tech. No matter what your previous choices were. Sure, Brick will help you if you helped him but it's also irrelevant because if you sided with Royce, Royce appears in his stead leading to the exact same result.

Let's look at saving Evelyn. The cloud 9 conversations offer you a ton of choices. One of which is with the first doll. Once you wake the doll up, you get 3 choices. Threaten, bribe or ask for info. All three end up exactly the same - the doll gives you the information you want. Talk to Woodsman, whatever you say, you'll get the information. If you did Shabo's quest beforehand you can use it to accelerate the conversation but it all ends the same way.

The list goes on of completely meaningless choices. The only one I've seen that I felt was actually meaningful was Claire's quest. It's highly disappointing to have so few meaningful choices in a game that looks like it's constantly throwing choices at you. I haven't even seen them all because I'm trying to make this last as long as possible but to say the choices have an actual impact on the game is, in my opinion, wrong.

If, depending on which suit survives, you acquired the flathead even slightly differently it would make a world of difference.

If not saving Brick meant you didn't get help and it made the quest harder, it would make a world of difference.

If the doll in cloud 9 told you to shove it when you threaten her, or gave you less info when simply asked politely or some variation that would have you find the information you need differently. It would make a world of difference.

If the new leadership of the Voodoo boys decided to put a hit on you and you get some quest to fight them or some random event where you get attacked. It would make a world of difference.

I could keep going but I don't really want to. The consequences do not have to be world altering to be meaningful, but this lack of meaningful consequences is definitely disappointing to many.
 
Honestly? Witcher 3 is blown out of the water.

* Save the kids or save the Bloody Baron's wife
* Make the Queen or King of the Isles
* Kill the Mad King or not

Honestly, most of the sidequests don't have any choices whatsoever. They're just scripted, which is FINE. That doesn't take away from the RPG elements at all.

YOu don't remember well tho. Keira you can make her join kaher moren and she will help you. She can be killed or she gets impaled on the public place by radovid. There are many other examples like this across the game and the expansion. But you see here is the difference.

Geralt is a defined character you are forced to be geralt. V in the other hand is supposed to be your character but in the end is just a Geralt you can customize or chose the gender and this is another big departure on what it was promised.

The witcher 3 was a fantastic game but i won't call it an RPG just an Action Adventure game wich is fine for what is it. But Cyberpunk were based on a pen and paper and was meant to have more character agency that is simply is not there and not only that even player agency is missing.

If to that you combine that the open world looks amazing but is a wasteland and souless open world that act like a scenery and not even well ((because A.I dosn't exist and you can't basically interact with nothing)) is an huge problem.

Take the open world of cyberpunk and take the open world of GTAV or Red Dead Redemption. You could say: Hey but those are not RPG

And i would answer: Exactly do you think Cyberpunk 2077 is different? It really isn't it just do thing insanely worse. The only perk the game has is some nice narrative. Counted on the finger. On sidequest and main story that's about it.
 
And i would answer: Exactly do you think Cyberpunk 2077 is different? It really isn't it just do thing insanely worse. The only perk the game has is some nice narrative. Counted on the finger. On sidequest and main story that's about it.

I honestly think that Cyberpunk 2077 is an RPG and the biggest problem it has isn't remotely choice or storytelling.

Or options for that matter.
Post automatically merged:

I'll have to agree with Mebrilia here.

It's not that the game doesn't give you choices. It's the outcomes of said choices that's highly disappointing and ultimately meaningless. So much so that in reality it's mostly the illusion of choice that's presented to you.

All games are the illusions of choice since consequences have to be programmed in.

Let's take the Voodoo boys as an example. You can either cut off the heads of the gang or let them live. But does it really matter? What effect does it have? What meaningful change is there?

The Voodoo Boys are all dead. Which is a pretty big consequence.

Let's look at Maelstrom's quest. No matter who you side with and which Militech suit survives, they'll both just hand you a piece of highly classified and experimental tech. No matter what your previous choices were. Sure, Brick will help you if you helped him but it's also irrelevant because if you sided with Royce, Royce appears in his stead leading to the exact same result.

Yes, because said piece of equipment is the sole reason you are proceeding and without it, you fail the entire game questline.

Let's look at saving Evelyn. The cloud 9 conversations offer you a ton of choices. One of which is with the first doll. Once you wake the doll up, you get 3 choices. Threaten, bribe or ask for info. All three end up exactly the same - the doll gives you the information you want. Talk to Woodsman, whatever you say, you'll get the information. If you did Shabo's quest beforehand you can use it to accelerate the conversation but it all ends the same way.

The entire point of being in Clouds is to get information so you're asking, "Fail or succeed?"

You can also kill Woodman or leave him alive.

The list goes on of completely meaningless choices.

Except the meaning is usually in characters being dead, alive, or hostile/friendly. Which is by itself pretty meaningful.

If not saving Brick meant you didn't get help and it made the quest harder, it would make a world of difference.

Siding with Maelstrom means you avoid a fight in the later of the game.

If the new leadership of the Voodoo boys decided to put a hit on you and you get some quest to fight them or some random event where you get attacked. It would make a world of difference.

You mean like Placid tries to kill you or not, which is what happens if you kill Brigitte or side with Netwatch?

I could keep going but I don't really want to. The consequences do not have to be world altering to be meaningful, but this lack of meaningful consequences is definitely disappointing to many.

Frankly, it seems like you're asking for things that are either in the game or for the game to end on game overs early.[/quote]
 
I honestly think that Cyberpunk 2077 is an RPG and the biggest problem it has isn't remotely choice or storytelling.

Or options for that matter.

Exactly here i wanted you. Because in the end what makes different Cyberpunk from GTA is the narrative but in the end no. Cyberpunk don't even barely qualify as an RPG. Qualify Cyberpunk as such would be calling Far cry an rpg. ((it has multiple ending it has characters it even has progression)).

And that's exactly my point.

This game was advertised as RPG first and foremost and does an awful job at being one both in the System and even on the narration.

I had the impression this game was all about Jhonny heck you get even rewarded for worshipping him basically with a secret ending.

Also if you want to see what are true choice and concequences that matters are.
Play new vegas.
Or baldurs gate 3.
There is a vast difference.
 
Play new vegas.
Or baldurs gate 3.
There is a vast difference.

I love New Vegas, I admit, but I genuinely hate Baldur's Gate 3. I also think that saying, "It's not an RPG" undermines RPGs as a genre.

I admit I think of Cyberpunk 2077 as not very Far Cry and more Skyrim.
 
I love New Vegas, I admit, but I genuinely hate Baldur's Gate 3. I also think that saying, "It's not an RPG" undermines RPGs as a genre.

I admit I think of Cyberpunk 2077 as not very Far Cry and more Skyrim.

I am not sure why you hate bg3 but since you are familiar with new vegas now you understand where choice and concequences are meaningful. As for skyrim it may not offer a lot of choice or concequences however it leave you the freedom to play the character you want in a interactive open world and with mods even better. Something Cyberpunk lacks totally like totally.
 
All games are the illusions of choice since consequences have to be programmed in.

Of course all choices have to be programmed in?

Just because the choice was programmed in by a human doesn't make it an illusion, the choice can still be an actual choice between 2, 3, 4 or 5+ different paths.

The Voodoo Boys are all dead. Which is a pretty big consequence.

1. No the Voodoo boys aren't all dead. Their leadership is.
2. How is it a big consequences? What change is there? Such a big event should be accompanied by an equally big reaction.

Yes, because said piece of equipment is the sole reason you are proceeding and without it, you fail the entire game questline.

You're missing the point.

Your deal is with Meredith. She survives, you get the Flathead, sure, it makes sense she owes you one. If the other guy survives, why would he even care? Why would he let you keep a piece of highly valuable tech when he owes you nothing as Meredith died through her own actions? Why wouldn't he be more interested in bringing back the flathead and looking good in front of his corpo overlords, especially since it's obvious you couldn't stop him from taking it?

Simply making you jump through an extra hoop to get it would make sense and add some weight to your choice. Right now, there is no weight behind your choice.

The entire point of being in Clouds is to get information so you're asking, "Fail or succeed?"

You can also kill Woodman or leave him alive.

Again, missing the point. It's not about failing the quest. It's about going about it differently. You'll get your information one way or another, it's called a story arc. Right now you'll get your information one way, and one way only. No matter what gold dialogue you chose.

Let's say you threaten the doll and she tells you to shove it. Well now you have to find the information you need in a different way. It can be as minor as a shard lying around with some information that will point you in a slightly different direction that might cause you to hack Woodman's computer instead of talking to him. The end result is the same, you have your info for the story's sake but two players wouldn't necessarily end up talking to the exact same NPCs and be fed the exact same lines.

Killing Woodman has literally no effect on anything. Woodman might as well be citizen #5873 after you've spoken to him.

Except the meaning is usually in characters being dead, alive, or hostile/friendly. Which is by itself pretty meaningful.

Again, You're saying this as if shooting some random citizen in the street was a meaningful choice. Voodoo boys are now hostile. OH GAWD, whatever shall I do? They already were. Stand near them for too long and they'll attack the same way they would after you kill their leaders.

Siding with Maelstrom means you avoid a fight in the later of the game.

You mean like Placid tries to kill you or not, which is what happens if you kill Brigitte or side with Netwatch?

Missing the point again.

And, no, what you get when Brigitte is dead and Placide is dead is not what I'm talking about. Once they're dead. What now? This gang is left with a power vacuum. Someone will take their place and lead the Voodoo boys. They're not all suddenly dead. Doesn't it make sense to you that they would want to get back at you?

It doesn't have to be some crazy over the top quest. A simple random event. A car with a few Voodoo boys attack you. Or more on theme, they send a Netrunner after you. Something. A reaction to your actions. Right now, the end result is - the Voodoo boys don't like you BUT they didn't before anyway! What a consequence.

Frankly, it seems like you're asking for things that are either in the game or for the game to end on game overs early.

I hope this clears up what I mean.

Ultimately, I think we're better off agreeing to disagree. You're listing killing Woodsman as a meaningful choice which it just isn't. It's clear we won't see eye to eye on the matter.
 
Last edited:
The witcher 3 was a fantastic game but i won't call it an RPG just an Action Adventure game wich is fine for what is it. But Cyberpunk were based on a pen and paper and was meant to have more character agency that is simply is not there and not only that even player agency is missing.

If to that you combine that the open world looks amazing but is a wasteland and souless open world that act like a scenery and not even well ((because A.I dosn't exist and you can't basically interact with nothing)) is an huge problem.

Take the open world of cyberpunk and take the open world of GTAV or Red Dead Redemption. You could say: Hey but those are not RPG

And i would answer: Exactly do you think Cyberpunk 2077 is different? It really isn't it just do thing insanely worse. The only perk the game has is some nice narrative. Counted on the finger. On sidequest and main story that's about it.

I consider TW3 to be an RPG, but it is not the sort of RPG that gives ultimate freedom to make whatever character the player wants. Geralt is still a witcher, and the player has to play that. The game provides Geralt and his role is fixed, the player gets to fine tune Geralt and supply their own interpretation of what he does. All of this remains within the scope of the larger predetermined story.

I may be fixed in my role for Geralt, but my interpretation of Geralt feels like I make a difference. In CP2077, I can run around and play the game for 100 hours, but I do not feel like I make a difference.

This makes TW3 is the better RPG game.
 
I consider TW3 to be an RPG, but it is not the sort of RPG that gives ultimate freedom to make whatever character the player wants. Geralt is still a witcher, and the player has to play that. The game provides Geralt and his role is fixed, the player gets to fine tune Geralt and supply their own interpretation of what he does. All of this remains within the scope of the larger predetermined story.

I may be fixed in my role for Geralt, but my interpretation of Geralt feels like I make a difference. In CP2077, I can run around and play the game for 100 hours, but I do not feel like I make a difference.

This makes TW3 is the better RPG game.

On that i can agree.
 
as i said. disco elysium is an rpg and you can't change the outcome of almost anything. different outcomes is not necessarily what makes a game an rpg. player agency is more than an outcome.
 
as i said. disco elysium is an rpg and you can't change the outcome of almost anything. different outcomes is not necessarily what makes a game an rpg. player agency is more than an outcome.

Disco Elysium has a stat system that reflects very deeply also in the dialogues unlike cyberpunk 2077
 
Disco Elysium has a stat system that reflects very deeply also in the dialogues unlike cyberpunk 2077

sure. because the game has no combat. they need to make the a deep dialogue system. cyberpunk's stat system works with the combat and the dialogue and the skill checks for doors or terminals.
 
I don't see the witcher 3 consequences as impactful. In the end, nothing changes.

If you side with the tree spirit, the townfolks will die, and the baron will commit suicide. Kill the tree spirit the townfolks will become slaves, and the baron will leave to find a cure for his wife. The final result is similar. That questline doesn't impact the game in any way, the Sargent will behave in the same way no matter what you chose.

If you take the Catriona plague files, nothing happens. It's not like you have the cure for the worst disease in the land.

Whatever you do with the werewolf will cause the same result, he will not be in the town.

Geralt will resolve the fiend quest no matter what he chose.

There are so many similar quests.

The Witcher 1 and 2 had real consequences.

I see cyberpunk as a game that is similar but different to the witcher series. I see cyberpunk as a more grounded and realistic game. Nothing will change in my life if I will help an old lady change a tire. Nothing will change in my life if I will stop a kid from crossing the road and not get hit by a car (I did that last year). I might get a thank you for my effort, and then I will continue with my gray life. The world will not change, no one will see me as a hero.

There are many elements in cyberpunk. My daughter and I are playing the game differently, and I feel like NPCs react to us differently. I see her play, and it feels like a different game.
 
Last edited:
Ok, it seems that most people who consider TW3 more of an RPG than CP, is because your actions have more consequences in the world. This generally seems to be important for alot of people here to consider the game an RPG. I completely disagree. If anything, the genre were your actions affect and have the deepest impact in the world are strategy games. Other than that ANY story driven game with zero RPG elements can be based around a choice and consequence system.

Also consider the fact that many old table top RPGs (and pen and paper, and video games) were simple dungeon crawlers where your "choices" had no impact at all. The objective was to loot and survive the dungeon.

RPG is more about your character (or your team). How you progress and develop your character to deal with the problems you face against the scripted content. The game should give you different options on how to do that, depending on YOUR choices in how YOU have built your CHARACTER (or characters if it is team based) . Your actions may have zero impact on the world state or the progression of the story. But you get to complete the story on your terms, (with the game providing you different ways to do it, a.k.a RPG, but your choice shouldn't necessarily affect the world state or the story, as wasn't the case on several if not most old pen and paper/tabletop RPGs.). On said dungeon crawler a rogue could avoid traps, other characters will have to deal with them, and combat itself will be handled in various ways depended on your character, or avoided altogether. Just a few examples.

These elements exist in CP. I played a melee tank/dps character. I couldn't hack. I did not hack anything. I did not use stealth at all. I did not even shoot. I butchered everything on my way to complete the game. I used several shortcuts since i had the strength required to open doors. I avoided several fights because i was intimidating enough for people to fear me etc. On the Witcher every single encounter, you had to handle it like a swordman. Sure you could have some variation if you were more focused on signs, but Geralt is a swordman through and through.
 
Last edited:
Personally I view TW3 as an RPG and CP2077 not so much because of the actions, consequences and level of immersion I can achieve.

In TW3 you feel like Gerald.
Everything feels like a living breathing world and your actions as the Witcher make a visible impact aka your decisions matter.

On higher difficulty it really requires you to know the enemy in advance, prepare and do your legwork.

The characters you interact with also matter more, at least in my opinion.

Now let's look at V.
Life paths don't matter.
You can YOLO the entire game, with little to no consequences.

Big events in the world can't be influenced.
It also sucks that in the main story you just suck at V. Almost all your efforts results In a trainwreck.
Evelyn...no matter how hard you try...dead end. In more than one way.

Panam story... extraction, her family business...doesn't do anything.

Hanako/Takemura failure, no matter what.

Heist...blowup.

Dex...not even revenge.

VDBs are fucking you over sideways all the way.

And ultimately no matter what you do, you cannot save yourself as V.

This loss of agency and constant failure makes it feel like V isn't a character that can influence the world or his/her life. You are just on a rollercoaster.

Why can't amazing Netrunner V not counter the VDBs schemes?

Why can't my brawler V get some rep with the Animals and open up some different path to solve encounters.

Like, if you have won the boxing matches, that they would respect you, or at least hear you out?

There are only 3 side-missions where your reputation matters.

Cyberpunk as a genre is supposed to be bittersweet.

But 2077 is just bitter.

It's almost comical that for V 2077 is like our 2020.

Everything V held dear goes to the shitter and within this single year V loses everything so spectacularly.

Gerald feels like Gerald.

But V...feels like nothing.
 
Both are very much "RPG" games, anything else is wrong imo. I would argue probably more so than any other so called "RPG" games in the market.
Every games have its "limitations" & "focuses." Everything ... If people expecting "life simulator" out of any games, than please just go outside & have a role play with your life instead hehe
 
I guess if we take the reaction of random NPC to the player as a way to measure if a game is RPG or not, then I guess that Baldurs gate and Neverwinter nights 1 are not RPGs, because the NPCs are static and never react to the player's actions.

Edit: by the way i checked and those games only have one ending, i guess we can cross the RPG mark from them.
 
Last edited:
The best description is.
In Witcher based on what you said and did that decision caused characters and the world behave differently to you.

This made my decision making feel valued and consequential.

CP2077 has no such thing. I can't make my V and nice person or a bad person. There is no consequence even if I could because there seems to be no morality system. This issue with the fact that the city feels half finished and dead and this game suffers greatly to me.

Combat is secondary to me so honestly I don't care if its better than the witcher or not but this game doesn't feel like an RPG to me.

I expected a long interesting multi-branched story that changed based on my decision of HOW I did the quest rather then IF I did them.

Anyway before anyone here says that's impossible to do. Baldur's Gate 3 managed to do it with a much smaller developer. If CDPR wanted to do this they could have.
Instead they just marketed the game as something it never was.
 
Witcher 3 feels more like a "rpg" ironically because its main story and characters are more developed and stronger - giving the player a better sense of what they are actually roleplaying - thanks to the novels and how they were faithfully adapted to the spirit of those books and source material.

Ok were TW succeeds better than CP77: the problem lies in that Geralt was and is a much more developed character than V, resulting in a player more acutely aware of the "difficult" decisions Geralt has to deal with and how everything affects him and he affects the world of the witcher through such decisions, with V on the other hand there is no anchor really and the sole roleplaying element is reduced to something pretty generic and broad like "me want to survive (and potentially make eddies)" which in itself is quite boring most likely.
 
Last edited:
- character customization.
- dialogue choice.
- skill checks.
- build variation.
- Multiple endings.

sounds like a Bethesda RPG too me.
 
Top Bottom