Not a bad effort.
On art and creative side of things there's immersion in sense of virtual tourism. That can be sometimes something people don't associate with immersion but for example games with even mediocre driving physics tend to have very good paint and livery editing features. I don't know today but few years back, these features had most persistent crowd and it turned out a lot of them were serious hobbyist, students or apprentices or real professionals. So why some paint works and liveries in racing games look like they are done by professionals? It's because they are. And why when somebody asks new shapes nobody supports that particular enhancement, that's because it's worthless in practicing how to use tape economically.
In story driven game like CP 2077 that has some very interesting things going on that are really difficult to summarize for the sake of scope alone, but something for example: [SPOILERS] Kazimierz Dąbrowski’s Theory and Existential Depression in CP2077 | Forums - CD PROJEKT RED
For story driven game certain level of cohesion is needed to make things work together and make sense to player / tourist and in general make other things possible.
Then there's immersion, immersive mechanics / features and there's immersion has a different meaning because user goal is different. In that context immersion is a word invented to obfuscate connection to Freudian death drive.
So yeah, you are on to something there and it's definitely better than using same term for things that are quite different and if you think of these as spectrums, extremes might create situation that virtual environment turns not so good experience for different crowds. Say there were positive reaction for changes in how fixers work in patch 1.5 but for me there's certain practical problem with that accessing some things I liked to revisit on GIG's and then it's also so infantilizing that for me it's out right toxic. I just fucking can't. And I'm not buying Bartigan's explanation above as they could just tied gigs becoming available to either Street Rep or character level.
Panam stuff is also... it doesn't work and when going to topic of sexuality, infantilizing means emasculating and while there was some positive feedback about that too, I just have this feeling that there's this thought there that more automatically means better.
Loot, virtual pets, all that, I'm fine with them as long as I don't need to get involved with that and they are all optional content. For some they are important features, we can coexist, like the same game, even different features are what makes game experience work for us.
This relates to topic. Having more places to explore, it sort of doesn't work if there's nothing to be found. One of the details of Night City, floor plans make sense surprisingly well. It's like real world apartment buildings. You seen type or apartments, you seen them all. I don't say you can't request it, but hope you understand why it's irrelevant to many.
yeah thanks for some understanding
because from the people around me (South East Asia) the ones who like 2077 the most are quite surprising from the group of people that not into serious gaming but from casual gamers and notably female
the VIBING-type are the majority of players in the game even though there's nothing to do in it and along with STORY-type these types are more likely to be loyal to 2077 and defend the game to the death than the GAMER-type
they participate in internet dramas and beg people to give 2077 a chance, complement the good parts of the game, ignoring the bad parts of the game even when the game is in really bad shape (around the time of the first launch)
while the gamer type is likely to talk shit and complain a lot about how bad the game was and other things and not even sink in with the story
So I gather the idea that could appeal to the mass both loyal to the brand and those who just come and go
Post automatically merged:
when you making this takeJust a detail, did you ever check the number of players who even finish games ?
(not only Cyberpunk, but most of games)
In general, it's less than 20% and it's often way less than 20%. So I assume if a player didn't even finish the game (at least the main story line), no chance that he would replay it again... replayability or not.
it proves my point further that the game needs to make more impression on more of the mass
give them the playground to hook them longer
and replayability is not only just finishing the game and replaying again but playing for a while, stop playing, and sometime later somehow come back to play the game and start over play for a while either finished story or not
then the overall world is as important as the story gives them a good impression that makes them want to come back and have fun