if the only reason "I" play a game a second time, is for the romances, then the game isn't worth playing a second time anyway.
Our opinions, views and perceptions are valid in as much as it describes our experience but so too are others.
- Status
Our opinions, views and perceptions are valid in as much as it describes our experience but so too are others.
Should be romance among other things, and right now we only have those.
The outcome for the ending sucks anyway.
Can't beleve i've spent 60€ on this game to play 60h of bugged experience and leave it right after my first run ended.
It's been a week since i last started the game and the only thing i do is either scroll the board to check on patch, or play something else.
I am dragging myself though the second run. I want to do River and Panam endings with a nomad. I didn't want to or couldn't do them with my first run through as street kid.
Yeah... I paid $(AUD)99.95. That's like $(AUD)20 to $25 more than US electronic copy but I did get a day 1 CD box. I love the incidental soundtrack though otherwise I'd be so upset with how much I paid for this game and as it is only a bit pissed off.
Yeah... I paid $(AUD)99.95. That's like $(AUD)20 to $25 more than US electronic copy but I did get a day 1 CD box. I love the incidental soundtrack though otherwise I'd be so upset with how much I paid for this game and as it is only a bit pissed off.
There aren't a lot of romanceable characters in the game and they have their own personality and preferences. That seems perfectly reasonable to me. I also don't feel like a romance needs to be part of every playthrough. Some characters just don't meet anyone they click with during their adventure. That's actually the most realistic outcome in today's world.
That's also true... RPG shortcomings aside, far to many people are so totally used to the BioWare model of "everybody gets some" these days, one could be under impression that the simple notion of "Yea, not every compelling video game story needs romance!" is totally incomprehensible to them.
I quite like that they have set sexualities - adds replay value for a start. But also, I actually kinda felt disappointed when Panam rejected my advances as a female V. Exactly as she would have. Rather than other games where the choice is either - everyone for everyone (which I'm ok with) or set sexualities (but the option and romance dialogue isn't even slightly developed for rejection of advance and building a warm friendship instead) I like this approach. I just agree that there should have been more romance options than 1 male and 1 female for each player cis gender.
Post automatically merged:
The games been out for 11 days, how did you spend 60 hours playing it in the first 4 days!?
aaaaand your argument is dead right there.
You're still missing the point. V is whatever you choose him, her, it or them to be at character creation. What is the "real" V? There isn't one. So it's nonsensical to decide that every NPC must be locked out of some Vs but not other alternate reality Vs and they might like this V but they don't like that V IT'S A FRIGGIN GAME AND SHOULD REACT TO THE PLAYER, NOT "REAL LIFE" unless you've replaced your Real Life arms with a Cuisinart lately?
Yea, V should also not... You get it yet? This is not your story, or mine, it's V's story. This is no RPG, it'sa linear, story driven action adventure, with minimal player choice, and sexuality/romance is really only an insignificant factor here... it was great for marketing, though.
EDIT: Do people even see my spoiler tags? I don't...
I think your reply got mangled by the board, I see s chopped up sentence.Yea, V should also not... You get it yet? This is not your story, or mine, it's V's story. This is no RPG, it'sa linear, story driven action adventure, with minimal player choice, and sexuality/romance is really only an insignificant factor here... it was great for marketing, though.
EDIT: Do people even see my spoiler tags? I don't...
Erp, hahah, by quoting it I see what you meant to hide. *reads it* No, that's got nothing to do with it, what do you mean by "should not be?" You're jumping around all over the place. And if you think it has no RPG elements left in it, you haven't done the major - or even minor - NPC storylines yet, where you can not only drive the experience but vastly effect the outcomes. And lastly, if everything you say it true, that's a flaw not a defense. The point, still, remains, that there is no valid game-design reason to still be doing it this way. Again: there is no 'real V' story. And your choices can and will affect who lives and dies, who's happy and who's miserable, who likes you and who hates you, along the way.
Edit: I too thought all RPG elements had been chopped out of the game for the first 10-20 hours. Then I actually delved deeper into the game and its characters and found a metric f!ton of content I did not expect but was pleasantly surprised to encoutner.
Edit to edit: tho FWIW i think the title of this post is a bit hysterical in tone really, the concepts in play are pretty straight(ahemlol)forward.
You are under the silly impression that Cyberpunk is a RPG where the world reacts to you (V) the player. This isn't the case and this is made very clear early on. Maybe you saw the trailers and expected something different as we all did but the reality is we didn't get that game. We got THIS one instead.
It is a linear story driven action adventure in the likes of Mafia or similar games where you have the illusion of choice. That's about it. In a Real RPG like DAO you would have more options but as that is not the case you start to realize where i am going with this.
That's exactly it. Didn't like Judy so what were my options ? NONE, that's why i was part of the crowd upset that we couldn't romance everyone. Too bad my character ended up alone. What a great way it was to end my story.... It made me not enjoy the game. But i guess people want me to accept that just because it's more realistic and it was the dev's vision. Too bad i don't and it was part of the reasons I didn't enjoy the game.
Says a lot about everything BioWare has released in the last decade.
So you are complaining because an NPC rejected your sexual advances?
I think it's more along the lines of choices aren't equal.
Just like most other missing bits, I put the limited number of romance options to the game being incomplete right now. Furthermore, OP is complaining that he cannot romance a specific character/s and throwing -isms and -ists around which is chilidish.
Well, adult players, and adult themed game does not make...
I think this is a bit of the cart before the horse.
The player is who decides. The NPC's should not have any preference. The player should be the one either romancing, befriending, indifferent, or a jerk to the NPC and the result should be based on the player's decisions.
I don't like stereotypes either. Seems like the topic is so "touchy" now that it would have been best to make all possible romance options solely dependent on the the player. River, Judy, & Panam shouldn't have a preference only react according to how the player treats them.
The player is who decides. The NPC's should not have any preference. The player should be the one either romancing, befriending, indifferent, or a jerk to the NPC and the result should be based on the player's decisions.
I don't like stereotypes either. Seems like the topic is so "touchy" now that it would have been best to make all possible romance options solely dependent on the the player. River, Judy, & Panam shouldn't have a preference only react according to how the player treats them.
Gamers learning the hard way that you can't impose a sexuality on someone.
I din't mind NPCs having sexual preferences. It is realistic. But there are no valid bisexual characters in the game, and the only gay option is lackluster.
Meredith should have been flashed out more, and Mateo could have been a perfect choice for a male bi romance.
Post automatically merged:
Meredith should have been flashed out more, and Mateo could have been a perfect choice for a male bi romance.
- Status