The reason why the cyberpunk story I felt was not fun.

[LeKill3rFou]

I get your point. Although I was talking primarily about the main quest line as opposed to any side quests and possible romances.

Which was the issue for me. The main story is rather vapid, and the game relies on side quests to give it some purpose. And I tended to concentrate on the main quest primarily because that death clock is given so much focus anything else comes over as unrealistic to pursue. End result, not much changes.

What Cyberpunk is a little bit different, it's because most of the side quests could be in the main quest line (like in most of other games).

But I think Pawel have mentioned that in his streams :
In the little time you have left, you want to do everything to try to save your life (and nothing else) and probably not to succeed (Vik thinks it will be difficult/impossible, Hellman says that it's not possible, you will die anyway).
Or try to live "normally" instead, like helping people. So meet River/Kerry/Panam/Judy and maybe start a romantic relationship... Or help a possible future mayor of Night City. It's a bit like Athur who go saving John at the end while he is on the verge of death in RDR2 (like he say to Dutch "I tried at least").

So yeah, in main quest, not "many" changes. But even before and after endings, the world have a little bit changed (except in one ending). Like Araska is no longer the first Corpo in the world, Mikoshi and all the engrams are destroyed/disappeared, the Soulkiller is no longer active, the Aldecaldos take a "good" new start elsewhere, Hanako/Goro/Hoda are dead, Saburo is "really dead" (after 150 years), V is the new boss of the Afterlife...

On that point though; I'm unclear as to why Arasaka even 'saved' Johnny by storing him on the relic, other than as a plot setup.

The bomb it's after Alt death. Johnny doesn't really say it, but it feels like it turned his brain
And they keep him as engram, exactly for the same reasons as the guys from Arasaka questioned Johnny, but like Saburo said "the dead don't lie, it's not in their nature". So Saburo could "extract" easily all the informations that Johnny know (Like "Who work with him" for example, to destroy/anihilate the Altantis and all the mercs/fixers except Rogue...)

 

[hjfrrfjh]

I hate that someones call my feelings as "Power Fantasy".
It seems a bit arrogant to me.
Because this sounds feels like saying "you are childish!"
Such behavior hinders the active exchange of opinions.

In my view, "I'm nothing" is a common topic that exists in many other contents.
There doesn't seem to be special about it .

 

[CS554]

I hate that someones call my feelings as "Power Fantasy".
It seems a bit arrogant to me.
Because this sounds feels like saying "you are childish!"
Such behavior hinders the active exchange of opinions.

That's just if you want to take it like that. In literature, not everything is a classic, something we used to read when we were teens were all sorts of spy and action thrillers, Clive Cussler was popular for a while, then at some point we came to realizations, that reading one of them was like you read all of them and second, many of them were really power fantasies for middle aged men.

Fast and Furious movies are power fantasies, way before them, James Bond movies are power fantasies. Nothing wrong with them being what they are but it's very refreshing that there's something else to experience too.

In my view, "I'm nothing" is a common topic that exists in many other contents.
There doesn't seem to be special about it .

Can you name something comparable to CP 2077?

 

[OnyxCore]

What Cyberpunk is a little bit different, it's because most of the side quests could be in the main quest line (like in most of other games).

But I think Pawel have mentioned that in his streams :
In the little time you have left, you want to do everything to try to save your life (and nothing else) and probably not to succeed (Vik thinks it will be difficult/impossible, Hellman says that it's not possible, you will die anyway).
Or try to live "normally" instead, like helping people. So meet River/Kerry/Panam/Judy and maybe start a romantic relationship... Or help a possible future mayor of Night City. It's a bit like Athur who go saving John at the end while he is on the verge of death in RDR2 (like he say to Dutch "I tried at least").

So yeah, in main quest, not "many" changes. But even before and after endings, the world have a little bit changed (except in one ending). Like Araska is no longer the first Corpo in the world, Mikoshi and all the engrams are destroyed/disappeared, the Soulkiller is no longer active, the Aldecaldos take a "good" new start elsewhere, Hanako/Goro/Hoda are dead, Saburo is "really dead" (after 150 years), V is the new boss of the Afterlife...

There's a few issues here, from my perspective, and I'll preface this by saying that I'm not making an argument with what you personally are saying, but with what the game itself is doing. Also, these are my own personal feelings. If anyone else feels different for specific reasons, then that's also just as valid.

If one is dying because of some medical state (and to a certain extent I'm basing this on the experiences of my mother dying of cancer a few years back), you are either committed to finding a 'cure', whatever it takes, or you're not and are resigned to your fate. There's no halfway house with it. But the game tries to justify both. It continually pressures you along the 'cure' route, but, at the same time, tries to distract you with other things that won't help you at all.

If you commit to the 'cure' route, you can actually complete the game. If you commit to the resigned route you cannot do so, not unless you force continue through the 'find a cure' story far enough to commit suicide, which you don't at any earlier stage know exists as an option.

It doesn't really work. And there's nothing definitively satisfying to be had from either route. Yes, you could potentially find something 'satisfying', if you're willing to grub around in the leftovers, piece something together and convince yourself that the Frankenstein object you managed to create is at least something you can take away from the experience. But it's hardly something that most people would consider a reasonable reward for $60/£50 and 20-30 hours of time investment. Unless, of course, you're just into gameplay and not really bothered with story anyway.

Satisfaction is key to enjoyment. If you don't provide a satisfying experience, then it isn't enjoyable, no matter how much smoke and mirrors you employ.

The other issue is the method of end story delivery. The infodump/speculation process of storytelling.

In TW3 that infodump worked. One, because there were events bigger than Geralt's quest occurring within the game world. And, two, because there was no way to encompass all of the wide and varied changes that could occur within any playable narrative. It was effectively the only way to go. Also, you had a definitive conclusion to Geralt's own game story path within the context of the game's events.

It was satisfying, with little reason to fill in 'blanks' with speculation.

With CP77 the story is focused on a very much smaller area, and one that is possible to cover in a satisfying playable narrative. This is where the infodump/speculation method doesn't really work, and it feels cheap. That and the fact that it places a heavy emphasis on the player doing the legwork to piece together some kind of coherent picture by playing multiple endings, and then adding random speculation on top, which is horrible. And lazy.

The end result is that, whereas with TW3, a single main questline orientated playthrough could be a satisfying self contained experience (unless you got the bad ending). CP77 felt very distant and vague with nothing of any definitive value achieved.

Now, you could quite rightly say that a lot of this was a result of it's 'dev hell', and some surely is. But, that's no excuse for lazy writing and the fundamentally unsatisfying story that we got.

Anyway, just my personal thoughts...

 

[CS554]

If one is dying because of some medical state (and to a certain extent I'm basing this on the experiences of my mother dying of cancer a few years back), you are either committed to finding a 'cure', whatever it takes, or you're not and are resigned to your fate. There's no halfway house with it. But the game tries to justify both. It continually pressures you along the 'cure' route, but, at the same time, tries to distract you with other things that won't help you at all.

That is saying nothing at all. That happened in our family too, our mother died to cancer. Looking for possible cure was one part of it, but then when she knew, way before she told us, she kept living as full life as possible. Resigning to fate, that can mean different things to different people and I say that also from perspective from someone who has seen more than couple of people facing 50/50 chance.

 

[OnyxCore]

That is saying nothing at all. That happened in our family too, our mother died to cancer. Looking for possible cure was one part of it, but then when she knew, way before she told us, she kept living as full life as possible. Resigning to fate, that can mean different things to different people and I say that also from perspective from someone who has seen more than couple of people facing 50/50 chance.

I would appreciate you not being directly dismissive of my comments, irrespective of your own experiences. Thank you.

Quality of life is one thing. Spending time doing superfluous stuff at the expense of actively looking for a solution is something altogether different. That's the point.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

I like a lot the idea of a "no super hero protagonist" that tries (and fails) to save their life, I just don't like the realization of it in cp77.

It's a bit like Athur who go saving John at the end while he is on the verge of death in RDR2

Not really, Arthur has no hope, the whole plot in RDR2 is not about finding a cure to TBC. Also, TBC could take years to kill you, not a couple of weeks. It took few years to kill my dad's grandfather.

 

[CS554]

I would appreciate you not being directly dismissive of my comments, irrespective of your own experiences. Thank you.

Quality of life is one thing. Spending time doing superfluous stuff at the expense of actively looking for a solution is something altogether different. That's the point.

No, I'm not here for you or anyone particular to begin with. You made the generalization based on your own experience, that is understandable. I told you about mine from personal and to some extent professional point of view.

How V spends his/her time is up to player. Some players V focus on main storyline, which is about finding the cure. That includes getting in position where V can speak to relevant people. V's story line with chip in his head starts from him being a mercenary with a botched job. For me it makes perfect sense that it takes a bit of doing this and that before getting to point where he can talk to relevant people.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

There's a few issues here, from my perspective, and I'll preface this by saying that I'm not making an argument with what you personally are saying, but with what the game itself is doing. Also, these are my own personal feelings. If anyone else feels different for specific reasons, then that's also just as valid.

If one is dying because of some medical state (and to a certain extent I'm basing this on the experiences of my mother dying of cancer a few years back), you are either committed to finding a 'cure', whatever it takes, or you're not and are resigned to your fate. There's no halfway house with it. But the game tries to justify both. It continually pressures you along the 'cure' route, but, at the same time, tries to distract you with other things that won't help you at all.

If you commit to the 'cure' route, you can actually complete the game. If you commit to the resigned route you cannot do so, not unless you force continue through the 'find a cure' story far enough to commit suicide, which you don't at any earlier stage know exists as an option.

It doesn't really work. And there's nothing definitively satisfying to be had from either route. Yes, you could potentially find something 'satisfying', if you're willing to grub around in the leftovers, piece something together and convince yourself that the Frankenstein object you managed to create is at least something you can take away from the experience. But it's hardly something that most people would consider a reasonable reward for $60/£50 and 20-30 hours of time investment. Unless, of course, you're just into gameplay and not really bothered with story anyway.

Satisfaction is key to enjoyment. If you don't provide a satisfying experience, then it isn't enjoyable, no matter how much smoke and mirrors you employ.

The other issue is the method of end story delivery. The infodump/speculation process of storytelling.

In TW3 that infodump worked. One, because there were events bigger than Geralt's quest occurring within the game world. And, two, because there was no way to encompass all of the wide and varied changes that could occur within any playable narrative. It was effectively the only way to go. Also, you had a definitive conclusion to Geralt's own game story path within the context of the game's events.

It was satisfying, with little reason to fill in 'blanks' with speculation.

With CP77 the story is focused on a very much smaller area, and one that is possible to cover in a satisfying playable narrative. This is where the infodump/speculation method doesn't really work, and it feels cheap. That and the fact that it places a heavy emphasis on the player doing the legwork to piece together some kind of coherent picture by playing multiple endings, and then adding random speculation on top, which is horrible. And lazy.

The end result is that, whereas with TW3, a single main questline orientated playthrough could be a satisfying self contained experience (unless you got the bad ending). CP77 felt very distant and vague with nothing of any definitive value achieved.

Now, you could quite rightly say that a lot of this was a result of it's 'dev hell', and some surely is. But, that's no excuse for lazy writing and the fundamentally unsatisfying story that we got.

Anyway, just my personal thoughts...

I suppose it's entirely matter of tastes/opinion, because I really prefer the "story" in Cyberpunk than TW3 and by far.

And for me, in most of games there is always some sort of urgency somewhere.
- TW3, Ciri is in danger, Geralt must find her as quick as possible.
- Skyrim, Alduin will destroy the "world", so you have to do something against him.
- Fallout 4, your "unic" son was kidnapped and wife/husband murdered by unknow poeple).
I can quote "most" of games in fact

But in Cyberpunk, you really feel "the urgency" and maybe that's why many poeple who have felt it so much that they could ignore all of the side contents for try to save V's life (and rush the main story, then were desappointed because V can't be "saved", as Hellman/Viktor already confirmed this fact). And for me, it don't seem to be "cheap" at all, maybe not at the taste for everyone and "satisfying" for many, but a really good work anyway in my opinion

But I suppose if you "rush" the main quest line and was disappointed by the end, it's difficult to come back in the side quests after

 

[OnyxCore]

I like a lot the idea of a "no super hero protagonist" that tries (and fails) to save their life, I just don't like the realization.

Agreed. I think that can work well, depending on the implementation, when dealing with passive experiences, like a book or film. However, from a personal perspective, I don't think it translates well to an interactive experience.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Agreed. I think that can work well, depending on the implementation, when dealing with passive experiences, like a book or film. However, from a personal perspective, I don't think it translates well to an interactive experience.

I see your point. But I also liked (loved) the infamous the last of us part 2, so what can I say?

Post automatically merged: Oct 2, 2021

And for me, in most of games there is always some sort of urgency somewhere.
- TW3, Ciri is in danger, Geralt must find her as quick as possible.
- Skyrim, Alduin will destroy the "world", so you have to do something against him.
- Fallout 4, your "unic" son was kidnapped and wife/husband murdered by unknow poeple).
I can quote "most" of games in fact

I see it as a big flaw in all those games, actually

None of those is as urgent as cyberpunk though. You literally have a countdown popping on the screen quite frequently here.

Post automatically merged: Oct 2, 2021

But I suppose if you "rush" the main quest line and was disappointed by the end, it's difficult to come back in the side quests after

And also not intended by Devs since they designed missions with a specific level requirement. Spoiler: it makes both flaws even bigger.

 

[OnyxCore]

How V spends his/her time is up to player. Some players V focus on main storyline, which is about finding the cure. That includes getting in position where V can speak to relevant people. V's story line with chip in his head starts from him being a mercenary with a botched job. For me it makes perfect sense that it takes a bit of doing this and that before getting to point where he can talk to relevant people.

Naturally, the player is free to do whatever is possible within what is provided in the game. But if it steps outside the bounds of what is reasonable in the circumstances then, for me anyway, the 'story' loses cohesiveness and simply becomes a random collection of events that take place.

 

[northwold]

Johnny is a parasite in your head. What V chooses to do with the parasite is up to you. That's, for me, what makes the setup interesting.

 

[tru3story]

Interesting take.
Possibly it also depends on the story your character is given and how he/she is pre-defined.
For me it's on the contrary - I never was Commander Shepard, but I definitely was Pathfinder Ryder.
Am definitely not Geralt, but would rather play as Yennefer, or Ciri, e.g. etc.

V's story is different yet again. You take on an unexpected "passenger" and it happens so that the story revolves around them - Johnny, because let's face it - V was really nobody in whichever path you choose for V.

Spoiler

And as the story goes we learn that Johnny didn't make any significant change during his lifetime either. At least referring to what his beliefs and ambitions drove him to do: "Blew 'Saka tower to smithereens, and it's still standing there. Just the same."

The dread of 'insignificance' and protagonist's struggle to be a legend, or simply matter is something that V's story can be built on, anyone's story. Not a hero's story, really. And yes there's Johnny - neither of you want to just disappear (again). Weird a55 symbiotic relationship.

What I'm probably trying to say is that whether the story of a given character is for your liking, or not. And it just builds from there.

 

[Liquidcyberpunk]

What should have happened frequently in Night city

Game mechanics that are fun with an A.I. Companion

 

[CS554]

The dread of 'insignificance' and protagonist's struggle to be a legend, or simply matter is something that V's story can be built on, anyone's story. Not a hero's story, really.

Actually....

In narratology and comparative mythology, the hero's journey, or the monomyth, is the common template of stories that involve a hero who goes on an adventure, is victorious in a decisive crisis, and comes home changed or transformed.

A lot of that's out there is based on bastardization of original idea, sort of fast food that entertainment industry delivers. Sometimes hamburger and fries can be just fine, but for video game medium to progress this had to happen some day. The Outer Worlds got there first but that game sort of does two things. There are all the insights available for player that sum up in close to end game and for some players that revelation, something to do with actual history, pattern repeated many times, is the real end game, though game also has end battle possibility and some actions have quite a big effect to game world player can observe from ending slides.

CP 2077 is quite a few ways more grounded and things we experience through V can offer us quite a few insights about our world. And it isn't that player needs to be old to enjoy it. It's a world where everybody tries to be something more, they have this technology which allows people to look young even when they are not. Plastic surgery available today but how far but who can afford it? What happens to youtube media-influencers when they get old? That and many things, how domino pieces fall in each player heads, I have no way of knowing, but at least game enables possibility for that.

Those games, movies and novels, with spaceships and that. Those products have right to exist. Ridiculous amounts of money has went to graphical detail that enable adventure, yet these products always hand wave what sort of material requirements there would be to survive on hostile environment like space, what would be cost to ecosystem for building those machines. It's okay, but it's good that there's something else too.

 

[moonknightgog]

There are no relevant choices to make during the game, that actually matter. Which is a great sin from a "supposed" RPG.

 

[tru3story]

Actually....

really tried to avoid looking for definitions. Let's just say - I don't like heroes.

1.
a person who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.

This thing ^

Actually, no. I'm done with this. I wrote and deleted what was written 3 times now. Do not want to elaborate about it. In fact, how do I delete this post
[for the context - it got posted before it was ready and then it was ..never ready. please, nuke it, those with powers to do so. ]

 

[CS554]

really tried to avoid looking for definitions. Let's just say - I don't like heroes.

This thing ^

Actually, no. I'm done with this. I wrote and deleted what was written 3 times now. Do not want to elaborate about it. In fact, how do I delete this post

Oh come on! I'm not mocking you. Just think about this, how many games are there where discussion about original definition of Hero's journey would be relevant. Anyway, for CP 2077 it is and that is kinda saying something itself.

 

[hjfrrfjh]

Can you name something comparable to CP 2077?

These are the things that comes to mind with "I'm Nothing".

1. Movies : No Country for Old Men, The Mist
2. Books : 1984, Most of dystopian and horror genre.
3. Game : Most multiplayer games(You have no influence on the world.), LOU2, Papers, Please, so many indie games
4. Comic : Wahtchman and other dark concept comics
5. Real life : (There are very few people who can influence the world and other peoples)

In fact, these are very easy to find.

I think the story of the CP2077 is good.
But The reason CP2077's story is good isn't because "I'm nothing"
That's not the interesting part of cp stroy.

it's just seems like a side effect.