Okay this is really two different games, isn't it?

[mightymatt27]

I recall CDPR saying the biggest issue with open world narratives is the dissonance between an urgent plot and allowing the player casual exploration of the world. They said they wanted to solve this problem with TW3. And here they are in cyberpunk giving V the most urgent plot objective ever, lol.

That's interesting because I don't think they solved that at all in Witcher3. How was that not an urgent mission... Ciri is pursued by the Wild Hunt who we meet early on and DANG... are they bad news! Better get on that and do this mission... oh fork! I'm not even high enough level to pursue the main quest line so now I kind of have to dilly dally with side quests for no good RP reason. That's how it feels when I play at any rate.

It probably doesn't help that you're in an open "world" vs Cyberpunk which is an open "city".
V hoppin and boppin from one side of the town to another makes more sense than Geralt fast traveling over a continent all willy nilly.

At least in Cyberpunk I either:
A) can pursue the main quest line w/ no to minimal need to do side quests to level up
B) optional main quest lines are provided, so RP wise they make sense
C) There are some spots where you are waiting on someone to get back to you. This gives you a chance to do some gigs and level up

It's not perfect, but I think it offers some leeway.

 

[wolfpaw5555]

And if you don't really like side quests or whatever then maybe there's other games you'd like to play?

 

[Spockprime]

Two different games? Yes.

Post automatically merged: Jan 19, 2023

You're missing the point.

You say your V decide to also take the time to help others. Which, y'know, fine. But the narrative makes it very clear you don't have time for an "also". V is facing insurmountable odds and must achieve it in a very short amount of time. An also is not a possibility according to the narrative. Not according to anyone's head cannon. According to the game's narrative. The amount of stuff V needs to do to POSSIBLY have a chance at surviving alone would be incredible but within "weeks tops" (again, Vik's words)? It would require absolute laser focused determination, skills and a lot of luck.

The game's narrative also makes it very clear that V does not want to die. V wants to keep on living. V might not want to keep on living by the end but for the majority of the game, V wants to live. Yet, V does not have time to work on surviving and helping everyone and their dogs.

Wanting to live and going on a billion tangents while simultaneously having to achieve a ton of incredibly difficult things to POSSIBLY survive all the while a "weeks tops" sword of Damocles is swinging above your head.... There would be no time for an "also, I want to romance, also I want to improve this person's life, also I .... etc".

It really is all just for gameplay reasons, I get that and I'm pretty ok with that, but narratively it doesn't make sense.

I genuinely don't care much about this. I love the game regardless of this but there is some clear issues with the way the narrative is presented in relation to the actual gameplay. My main gripe is how it's simply a missed opportunity. I don't care enough to let it affect my opinion of the game nor will it stop me from buying the expansion or the next game. It's really just a shame they didn't bridge that narrative gap.

That's my take as well. To avoid a level of cognitive dissonance that would ruin the game for me, I have to pick one of the two incompatible themes and ignore the other. I choose to ignore the impending death story, and play the open world. I would like to play the combined theme, but that's not possible with the current structure of being dead in a couple of weeks.

 

[GrimReaper801]

That's my take as well. To avoid a level of cognitive dissonance that would ruin the game for me, I have to pick one of the two incompatible themes and ignore the other. I choose to ignore the impending death story, and play the open world. I would like to play the combined theme, but that's not possible with the current structure of being dead in a couple of weeks.

This is the unfortunate reality of so many games.

It's just particularly in your face in CP2077 but so many others suffer from this to varrying degrees.

It's a fairly easy to ignore issue and I genuinely don't understand how some equate saying there is an issue to not liking the story. You can like something and still objectively see the issues with it. A product can be an amazing product despite it's flaws. Pointing out the flaws in any given product is the only way for things to potentially get better.

My point since the begining has always been that the timer could have been used so much better. It could have elevated an already good story to a higher level had it been more than a convenient plot device to drive the story. It could have been the driving force behind so much instead of this nothingburger.

 

[ENDERS_]

I agree with the OP's sentiment here 100%.
I've only ever read about how the storyline goes, as I've avoided it all together since launch. (Over 700 hours of gameplay.)

On launch day I simply ignored Jackie. I left him standing at that noodle stand and never looked back. I never visited Misty, or Vic, I just ran around.
I even found a way out of Watson in order to enjoy the rest of Night City and the explorable world around V. Of course that step of breaking out of the confines set forth for the player lead me to discovering that this game could have played out much more like Skyrim, for example, in the way that they simply allow the player to go anywhere they want, and do whatever they want, from the get go.

I really never wanted to play a storyline, as I don't in the RPGs I play (like Fallout 4, or Skyrim). I simply make my own path. In that respect I believe that the game probably does have continuity issues moving forwards, and the congruence of it all may fall apart as V proceeds beyond that "a couple weeks, Tops" that Vic gives V.

Perhaps some day I will create a new playthrough and delve into this full story, but I suspect it won't be until well after the Phantom Liberty DLC is released.

Until then I keep playing my Launch Day V, who has never went back to talk to Jackie at that Noddle stand.

 

[Akrap]

I know this is a debate that will always just go round and round. I liked the story, I just didn't like the pacing of it.

I think more of the game should have been spent with Jackie building up a reputation. I think Silverhand should have come in later in the story and after he was in your head it should have been non-stop, pure madness until the end of the game as you do any and everything to avoid death. I would have done it more...

Act 1 (Open World, Exploration) - Focus on Jackie, romances, fixers and 'becoming a legend' in the city. Would have hidden gigs and even getting to Act 2 behind a certain level of street cred. I would have made Act 1 the biggest chunk of the game.
Act 2 (More Narrative Driven, Linear, Locking Down Places In The World > Warning Provided Like In Witcher 3) - Focus on the big gig that you have worked yourself up to. Getting to know Dex a bit more, going on the gig, having Silverhand lodged into your head and getting to know him. Act 2 would have been shorter than Act 1.
Act 3 (Purely Linear, Though With Choices Still Tied In) - Focus on gathering allies, determining what to do with Silverhand and the assault on Arasaka. Act 3 would have been even shorter than Act 2.

Completely agree with the structure of your take on the act flow.
It is a shame CDPR cut out most of that Act 1 content just a year before release. As I recall, it was intended to be just like you described, doing gigs, rising through the ranks of mercs, hanging out with Jackie a lot more, all that good stuff.
But I am still happy with what they managed to do, what with the changing of ideas all the time, not having strict clear goals on some points and a quick and large expansion of studio personnel. That was the biggest detriment to the game in my opinion.
I mean, through Witcher 1 to 3, they were like 30 to 40 people working on the games (if I remember correctly) with clear visions and goals that they could agree on more easily. But maybe I have some wrong information in my head.

 

[titus37]

Seriously, the more I play of Act 2, the more it is clear that literally everything in Act 2 except the main story missions (and associated sidequests) are filler leftover from when the game had a different focus.

You are simultaneously playing the old idea, that V was rising thru the ranks of mercenaries in NC with Street Cred (an irrelevant stat in the story), weapon upgrades and whatnot, and the new tragic "pretends to be deep and important" story side by side and they have nothing to do with each other.

V has no reason whatsoever to do any jobs, gigs or NCPD missions after Act 1, yet the game is locking you out of 90% of the map in Act 1 for "tutorial reasons".
In fact, they should have scrapped the open world completely and made a short, focused game with the new story. Or kept the old story.

As it is now I am doing what literally all other players are doing: Pretending the main story doesn't exist and playing this other game, "GTA V in NC" I think it's called.

Saying there is no point to doing the side quests and ncpd scanners is a ridiculous argument, each quest has its own reason and pieces of lore, see , you think that all side quests should have story related to the man character and have some story impact, but that would simply be way too linear, the side quests aren’t providing story for your character, they are building and developing the story of the universe this game takes place in, cyberpunk has so many cool concepts and ideas that it would be such an injustice not include quests like these that expand the universe of cyberpunk. It’s the same thing with games like Fallout, most of the side quests are there just to build up and expand the universe of the game, same goes with the elder scrolls, and even non open world games like doom, resident evil, and dead space. Now things like the NCPD scanners (which do sometimes include story) are there to help the player get used to all types of combat and allow the player to level up, upgrade, and get more money, all of which is almost impossible to beat the game without.

 

[exxxed]

It's interesting how people perceive V's predicament differently depending on the dialogue choice or perception in general.

For example, V can literally tell Vic ''bullshit'' towards Vic's diagnosis, also Vic is no expert in these matters explained by Vic himself.

You also take the time to compare this to the Mass Effect series which comprises of three iterations that leads towards a very lackluster ending that indeed leaves Shepard back in the Normandy like it never happened - so they can continue the side missions after finishing the main quest...

Now back to Cyberpunk, V has a choice, they can accept what they heard from Vic or they can deny it and proceed with their life like it never happened, suffering from minor headaches and blood spews every now and then signifying that their condition is getting gradually worse along the line - meaning how many sidequests and stuff you chose to do as V.

It does not break the narrative and the pacing is left to the player at all times, you have no hard requirements at any point except for Rogue's payment, so it's literally up to the player to what kind of V they play, either through dialogue choices or vagueness of the plot itself to serve this kind of multilateral approach.

Peace...

Post automatically merged: Feb 28, 2023

I recall CDPR saying the biggest issue with open world narratives is the dissonance between an urgent plot and allowing the player casual exploration of the world. They said they wanted to solve this problem with TW3. And here they are in cyberpunk giving V the most urgent plot objective ever, lol.

I would actually like to have a source for this, for argument sake.