Potential Bloat: Is this game going to be too big

+
Over the past few years I have noticed that open world titles are getting bigger and bigger. It used to be something I loved undoubtedly in the Skyrim, GTA V era. I loved the fact that high quality open worlds were being made with great AI, graphics and gameplay but in recent years they have sometimes gotten too big for their own good. Assassins Creed Odyssey was a lot of fun but the Cultist system made the story drag out far longer than it needed to plus the open world was given far too many points of interest that it became disorientating. RDR2 was smaller in content size but the attention to detail, obsession with realism and open world went too far and felt like a chore and was not enjoyable at all. Keep in mind this is fairly recent but I am worried that Cyberpunk 2077 may take the cake in terms of size. It is great that CDPR is pushing for an open world full of verticality and dense scale. It is great that they are pushing for freedom of choice and branching narratives. Its even great that they have allowed us to create our characters for the first time in their history as a company. The potential problem here is, with all the verticality, complex narrative and dialogue choices and skill trees, what if Cyberpunk 2077 is so big, that it becomes a chore to manage every single aspect of the experience. Games should first of all be fun but if CDPR can keep it fun, fast paced and engaging it shouldn't be a problem at all
 
You can generally cut to the chase and finish the main story line quickly if you want, or enjoy the time in the dense world and all its possibilities. As opposed to an empty, threadbare, husk of a game.
That's an issue of how mission paths are handled, not the world itself.

World being too big/dense is absolutely the wrong thing to complain about. Whats 99% of it all amount to anyway? NPCs rattling off repetitive lines or a fishing mini game....
Its currently all smoke & mirrors and we have a LOOONG way to go.
 
Last edited:
The devs have dropped a number of hints that Cyberpunk will be smaller than TW3. They still refrain from mentioning a total play time while they were touting TW3 as being up to 200 hours well before its release. They've said the scale of the map might be smaller, even if there's more verticality. They've mentioned how many players petered out on TW3's main quest and thought the end should've been soon after the battle of Kaer Morhen. They've also played up the non linearity of Cyberpunk. So of course I'm speculating, but to me this sounds like a return to TW2's structure - smaller game, bigger branching paths.
 
are you saying this as a completionist? because i have no qualms about not doing everything. i'd rather have spaces be more dense so i can do what i need to without too much downtime in between, but also there be enough in the wings of the space so that it's there when and if i do want it.

They still refrain from mentioning a total play time
i remember the creative lead (?, it may have been another lead) stating that it would be their standard approx 40hr story with a few hundred hours of side missions (citing the side mission length of TW3). to me that means that the number of combat encounters and chases might inflate that length a little, but still, it's optional. there might be side missions i don't even do until my 4 playthrough. which to me is fine.
 
are you saying this as a completionist? because i have no qualms about not doing everything. i'd rather have spaces be more dense so i can do what i need to without too much downtime in between, but also there be enough in the wings of the space so that it's there when and if i do want it.


i remember the creative lead (?, it may have been another lead) stating that it would be their standard approx 40hr story with a few hundred hours of side missions (citing the side mission length of TW3). to me that means that the number of combat encounters and chases might inflate that length a little, but still, it's optional. there might be side missions i don't even do until my 4 playthrough. which to me is fine.

Its more about mechanics and how that ties into player freedom. I find that if I have too much freedom it becomes overwhelming especially with an overabundance of mechanics. I don't want my hand held but I don't want to have to plan my moves all the time. A mixture of both would be ideal so I don't get too lost in the open world
 
Witcher 2 and 3 weren't a chore for me and they didn't feel bloated (unless you make yourself go through every bloody loot stash on the maps in The Witcher 3, and even then it wasn't a big deal), so I'm not worried. CDPR made sure that every little quest has something to it.

Besides, it seems CP77 will be shorter than TW3, but with more branching and replay value due to backgrounds and builds. So, like it was mentioned above, it will be closer to The Witcher 2 structure-wise. Which I, as a fan of TW2, really appreciate.
 
i liked the fact that a decision i made locked me out of a completely different storyline. consequences, major ones. i'm about that shit.

never played the imperial storyline, but i appreciated it was there, truly.
 
Witcher 2 and 3 weren't a chore for me and they didn't feel bloated (unless you make yourself go through every bloody loot stash on the maps in The Witcher 3, and even then it wasn't a big deal), so I'm not worried. CDPR made sure that every little quest has something to it.

Yes, speaking from experience this adds quite a bit to the timeframe for the game. For TW3 anyway. I'm pretty sure on one TW3 run I looted the game world. Probably not everything. It was close though :).
 
Odyssey felt like a chore to me because there was nothing there to make the slog good/bearable. Combat gets boring, story loses steam quickly and pacing is all over the place. Game world is pretty but not every interesting to explore.

I absolutely adored RDR2. I get that it's not everybody's cup of team but that attention to detail completely immersed me in the game and I loved it. Loved the story too. Mission design felt like your typical Rockstar missions they've been doing for decades, nothing too exciting there.
Also the gameworld was fun to explore because you had no magical map markers telling you where to go.

TW3 had its issues with the exploration aspect being designed around the points of interest markers instead of organic exploration. Combat while serviceable was nothing to write home about. But the world is beautiful and the writing and quest design is what kept be going and feel emptiness when I reached the end of my 250+ hour journey through the game. Empty because I had nothing else to play that seemed as good. I didn't want to play other games, I wanted to play more Witcher 3.

The potential problem here is, with all the verticality, complex narrative and dialogue choices and skill trees, what if Cyberpunk 2077 is so big, that it becomes a chore to manage every single aspect of the experience. Games should first of all be fun but if CDPR can keep it fun, fast paced and engaging it shouldn't be a problem at all

I don't see how it's a chore to manage all that.
You mean it could get boring? TW3's writing kept me going and I don't have any reasons to doubt CP2077 won't do the same thing. Gameplay looked fine for the most part so I don't have any big causes for concern personally.

Do you mean it's too complex? It's a very high budget mainstream AAA game, it won't be too mechanically complex or difficult. I'm not expecting Dota 2 here.
 
I'd think the bigger concern would be CDPR biting off more than they can chew, so to speak. That is, the game is so ambitious and ends up with too many individual elements to have them done well within the development timeframe. I could see having concerns there.

The game being too long is a different matter. I don't get those type of complaints. It's like saying being given too much content is a bad thing. This is never true if the content is good and keeps the player engaged all the way throughout, IMO.
 
Places available vs places you need to visit for the main story line.

No one HAS to do side missions, they're (relatively) optional, if you don't want to need to travel all over the city don't do then.
 
i liked the fact that a decision i made locked me out of a completely different storyline. consequences, major ones. i'm about that shit.

never played the imperial storyline, but i appreciated it was there, truly.
Played Witcher 2 once when it came out. Chose Roche. Thought the choice was mostly cosmetic (picking a sidekick and a few sidequests that go along).

Went for another playthrough a year later. Chose Iorveth.
Found out that basically the second half of the game is totally different due to that choice.

Kudos to CDPR.
 
Last edited:
I don't get those type of complaints. It's like saying being given too much content is a bad thing. This is never true if the content is good and keeps the player engaged all the way throughout, IMO.

I agree.
In a open world, you can easily skip the content you don't want to do and tailor your experience that way.
I don't understand either why someone would complain an experience is too long unless the open world forces you to grind to progress like AC Odyssey.
 
I sank about 600 hours into New Vegas and about another 600 in the Witcher series. If CDPR creates something with similar level of greatness, I will be happy.
 
Top Bottom