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

[Elle-Iza]

The story was pretty good. But no fun.

Problem is during gameplay I felt like I wasn't protagonist.
...

Playing a supporting role is not very fun.

Good point, I partly agree. To me it's not the "mind/brain/life taken over by an external force / entity that makes you more of an NPC or supportive character yourself"-aspect; to me it's all about the endings, that pull everything down. Because no matter what you (as V) do: in the end you lose everything. You can only choose between loosing before during or after the finale, and whom you pull down with you.
There should be one ending, that makes you end up in the streets again, where you lost everything you have collected throughout the game, but you got rid of the chip, and have the possibility to maybe move town and start all over again.
Or at least the option to get rid of the chip before leaving town with the Aldecaldos.
Any option that bases on a perspective. A rewarding ending.
Because as it is absolutely nothing in this story matters in the end, and that's why I love everything about this game (the pulse of night city, the visuals, most of the game mechanics, the sounds), but hate the depressing ending and don't want to re-play it.

 

[Mobster100]

I don't think that is true. Been a few months since I played CP77, but doesn't Viktor himself tells you that what you are dealing with is something new and he is not 100% about it (and how deadly it is). But even if Viktor told you 'nope you are going to die kid. It's impossible to stop the process' the whole journey is V trying to find people that may know better than Viktor.

Viktor say that V will die if V does nothing (few week tops). He can't help V because it's way above its knowledge or skills (nothing more). But like Misty, he said to V that he/she have to search a way to save his/her life. As long as there is life, there is hope.
Viktor about Johnny/Relic (dialogue during the first visite after the Heist) :
V : "What I have to do if Johnny want to flatline me ?"
Viktor : "What...?! Anyway, we're not going to wait for him to take your body, find a way to get rid of the chip and quickly !"

So in short, Viktor doesn't have any solution, but also hope that V can find a way to find one (and he really push V in this way).

Its also a bit time since I played it. But as BabaBooey88 said, Vik tells you that you can't be saved. But also I seem to recall that the scientist that you track down also tell you that it can't be done (Not 100% sure). But also V seem to acknowledge it fairly early on.

But nonetheless I do feel that it is a bit of a slap in the face that you can't save V in the end. That would have fixed some of it at least, I think.

Smasher is Johnny "enemy", not V's one. You could say to Johnny that you won't kill him (or promise him to kill Smasher, whatever it happen). As V whish
Like I said, it's just an obstacle to reach your goal (exactly like Oda, Sasquatch,...)

But Rogue and Johnny think in the same way : "You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs".
So the employees in the Arasaka tower (no one "live" in the tower) are Arasaka guys and don't deserve any pity (in their mind). So maybe V could think differently and choose the "bullet in the head" ending to avoid any innocents to die...

I understand that, but I don't think it is presented very well. Obviously real terrorist could use the same argument, that doesn't make it right either. And given that there isn't really an alternative for V, its either follow along with whatever they want to do or simply be passive. I don't think the options or maybe lack of twists support the story very well, especially for V. And I think the issue is that it is simply to short to make room for these things, where you get the player bouncing between Johnny's motivation and whether it is justified or not. Maybe because Arasaka/Smasher did something to him first or whatever.. but I don't recall that being the case, except him being pissed off about something and then he want to blow them up.
And still it would have made for a stronger story had V been involved somehow, besides just being a vessel in the story. Johnny is his own character with goals etc. despite being very weak, but you as V should have your own conflict, which could collide with Johnny's. But the conflict is basically just who should live or die. Its difficult to explain, but I don't feel that the weak story of Silverhand, makes up for the complete lack of Vs story, its simply not strong enough to carry it. It might have worked had the Silverhand story been very fleshed out and well written.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Its also a bit time since I played it. But as BabaBooey88 said, Vik tells you that you can't be saved. But also I seem to recall that the scientist that you track down also tell you that it can't be done (Not 100% sure). But also V seem to acknowledge it fairly early on.

But nonetheless I do feel that it is a bit of a slap in the face that you can't save V in the end. That would have fixed some of it at least, I think.

Yeah, Viktor can't help due to his unsufficiant knowledge/skills. Hellman can't really help or at least, he say there is nothing to do (or doesn't really want because he perfer to save "experience" datas rather than saving V's life...) Alt can help, but for "body&biologic" reasons, at the end, she is unable to save V's life. A little bit the same with Arasaka in Devil ending.
So maybe just after the Heist, it would be "easy" and possible to save V's life, but at the end, it's simply too late.

Through the main quest, that's true, there is "only" a (very) little hope (little chance is better than no chance, but it doesn't guarantee anything).

I understand that, but I don't think it is presented very well. Obviously real terrorist could use the same argument, that doesn't make it right either. And given that there isn't really an alternative for V, its either follow along with whatever they want to do or simply be passive. I don't think the options or maybe lack of twists support the story very well, especially for V. And I think the issue is that it is simply to short to make room for these things, where you get the player bouncing between Johnny motivation and whether it is justified or not. Maybe because Arasaka/Smasher did something to him first or whatever.. but I don't recall that being the case, except him being pissed off about something and then he want to blow them up.
And still it would have made for a stronger story had V been involved somehow, besides just being a vessel in the story. Johnny is his own character with goals etc. despite being very weak, but you as V should have your own conflict, which could collide with Johnny's. But the conflict is basically just who should live or die. Its difficult to explain, but I don't feel that the weak story of Silverhand, makes up for the complete lack of Vs story, its simply not strong enough to carry it. It might have worked had the Silverhand story been very fleshed out and well written.

To write it short, V simply want to survive. If that would mean fighting Arasaka, kill poeple, attack other corpo, so be it.
(If V wasn't dying, he/she wouldn't care about Corpo, Arasaka, Johnny (at least at first) and the all the rest...)

And about Johnny's reasons at the beginning (before Alt "murder", his death and Mikoshi), it's a missable dialogue during tapeworm :
Right Time:

But just a reminder, Arasaka is a corpo who killed a lot of innocents with no pity (with biologic weapons) and Saburo would prefer blow up Night City entirely rather than let the Relic to the "barbarians hands" (so killing everybody in Night City and around, childrens include...). So you can't fight this kind of "corpo" in the "peace" way. It don't make it "right", but Johnny can say that you can't fight the devil with unicorns and rainbows.

 

[lyin321]

you can't fight the devil with unicorns and rainbows.

To be honest you can, but that's in a different game

 

[LeKill3rFou]

And which is interesting about Johnny, it's Yorinobu, in a different way, have the same objective, i.e stopping Saburo's madness. So it's just a guess, but I think it's why it's Johnny who is on the Relic

 

[Mobster100]

Yeah, Viktor can't help due to his unsufficiant knowledge/skills. Hellman can't really help or at least, he say there is nothing to do (or doesn't really want because he perfer to save "experience" datas rather than saving V's life...) Alt can help, but for "body&biologic" reasons, at the end, she is unable to save V's life. A little bit the same with Arasaka in Devil ending.
So maybe just after the Heist, it would be "easy" and possible to save V's life, but at the end, it's simply too late.

Through the main quest, that's true, there is "only" a (very) little hope (little chance is better than no chance, but it doesn't guarantee anything).

But in that case, I think it would have been more interesting, if V wanted to get rid of Silverhand and there were an option for it and Silverhand would obviously fight against it, so there is a conflict. It could also have been made so there were an option to transfer Silverhand into another person, but that would require you to kill them and maybe do something immoral, something that would put the player in a conflict, because on one hand they might like Silverhand and as you know his whole story, he might have been treated badly and unfair. But are you willing to kill an innocent to save him. There could have been a lot of twists and options which could have made for a better story.

To write it short, V simply want to survive. If that would mean fighting Arasaka, kill poeple, attack other corpo, so be it.
(If V wasn't dying, he/she wouldn't care about Corpo, Arasaka, Johnny (at least at first) and the all the rest...)

And about Johnny's reasons at the beginning (before Alt "murder", his death and Mikoshi), it's a missable dialogue during tapeworm

I think that is fine, obviously it doesn't justified what Silverhand is doing. But as I said, it does give him character and goals etc. But V is just there to make a name for themselves and again, had Jackie been murdered it would give V a connection to Johnny and his goals and I think that could have worked. Again some twists and turns could be added, like maybe give V the option of challenging Johnny view on bringing down these people at whatever cost or whatever. But there is nothing of the sort in the game in my opinion, you are helping Silverhand with whatever he want and you are just the vessel that can agree or not, without any goals of your own really.

But just a reminder, Arasaka is a corpo who killed a lot of innocents with no pity (with biologic weapons) and Saburo would prefer blow up Night City entirely rather than let the Relic to the "barbarians hands" (so killing everybody in Night City and around, childrens include...). So you can't fight this kind of "corpo" in the "peace" way. It don't make it "right", but Johnny can say that you can't fight the devil with unicorns and rainbows.

Agree, there is no doubt that this world is fucked up, but still do you solve one problem by doing as they do? These things could have been integrated into the story and challenged or put the question to the player of what they think is right and not. And then maybe twist the story in some way, so Silverhand did something that were very questionable, so you as a player is bouncing between all these different agendas and reasons for why these people did or ended up where they did. In that case, I think the story could have been very interesting, because even though the story might not have been about V especially, you would have taken on the role as the moral judge, which I think could have been fun.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I think that is fine, obviously it doesn't justified what Silverhand is doing. But as I said, it does give him character and goals etc. But V is just there to make a name for themselves and again, had Jackie been murdered it would give V a connection to Johnny and his goals and I think that could have worked. Again some twists and turns could be added, like maybe give V the option of challenging Johnny view on bringing down these people at whatever cost or whatever. But there is nothing of the sort in the game in my opinion, you are helping Silverhand with whatever he want and you are just the vessel that can agree or not, without any goals of your own really.

So maybe it's me, but I think it's rather interesting. V is not a part of the conflict (and don't care at the beginning), so he/she can see that with new regard, disagreeing with Johnny (and ignore him, which is worst for him than fight against, I think), agreeing with Johnny (and fight in his war against corpo) or/and maybe try to change Johnny mind (to try to save him from his own madness, which is the case in "Temperance" ending. He leave behind him all his useless hates and leave Night City in relative peace. Also during the dialogue in the oil fields, where Johnny start to understand how he fuck up all his life...).

And anyway, V is not a hero, he/she can't do anything by him/herself and alone (he/she have no contact, no real friend, nothing...). Whitout Johnny/Rogue, Aldecados or Hanako, trying to save his/her life is simply a lost cause. V simply want to live and take all the help possible (V's goal is to survive if possible, which is more important than the rest, if you ask me). Johnny can simply be a simple way to reach your goal (even if V disagree with him)

For example,
- You can almost ignore Johnny (almost, because you need to contact Alt at least), helping Panam and get ride of Johnny/Relic and leave Night City (At the end, the destruction Mikoshi/Arasaka is just a collateral damage).
- You can go with Hanako, also "almost" ignore Johnny and get ride of the Relic.

But yeah, you're right, the story could be better in different way (like always for almost all stories), but "not fun" isn't the word that I would use anyway

 

[Monkeydust372]

Honestly, I quite like most of the story, the story missions could do with being spaced out a bit, but over all pretty interesting. What I really don't like is the fact that you can't save V.

Two reasons; first, you spend the whole game as V, you see and experience the world through their eyes. It not like a movie where the protagonist dies at the end, you're just a spectator, it's only 3 hours tops, you're seeing the story, you're not living it. In a game, it just feels too bleak to be enjoyable. Second, you spend the game post heist, so most of the game, trying to save your own life, which turns out to be an impossible goal.

I don't think the game needs to end with happiness and rainbows, a melancholic end would suit the tone of the game. But IMO, as I said above, the current endings are all too bleak.

They have left the door open for V to survive in three of the endings, so I really hope the first expansion follows on from there. Your character originally died at the end of Fallout 3, only to get a reprieve with one of the DLC (Broken Steel I think?), so there is a precedent for this.

 

[lyin321]

I was lucky that I had finished a game where no matter what you did you always met with bad end a few months before CP77 so the ending(s) was not a big deal for me. What surprised me was that the time we took to do the MQ (find a cure) didn't change the outcome. To either we getting completely cured as we reach it in time or because we (V) rushed the MQ, V just don't have the correct tools or knowledge and get stuck right before the 'cure'. That would have been one hell of a surprise

 

[Mobster100]

So maybe it's me, but I think it's rather interesting. V is not a part of the conflict (and don't care at the beginning), so he/she can see that with new regard, disagreeing with Johnny (and ignore him, which is worst for him than fight against, I think), agreeing with Johnny (and fight in his war against corpo) or/and maybe try to change Johnny mind (to try to save him from his own madness, which is the case in "Temperance" ending. He leave behind him all his useless hates and leave Night City in relative peace. Also during the dialogue in the oil fields, where Johnny start to understand how he fuck up all his life...).

And anyway, V is not a hero, he/she can't do anything by him/herself and alone (he/she have no contact, no real friend, nothing...). Whitout Johnny/Rogue, Aldecados or Hanako, trying to save his/her life is simply a lost cause. V simply want to live and take all the help possible (V's goal is to survive if possible, which is more important than the rest, if you ask me). Johnny can simply be a simple way to reach your goal (even if V disagree with him)

For example,
- You can almost ignore Johnny (almost, because you need to contact Alt at least), helping Panam and get ride of Johnny/Relic and leave Night City (At the end, the destruction Mikoshi/Arasaka is just a collateral damage).
- You can go with Hanako, also "almost" ignore Johnny and get ride of the Relic.

But yeah, you're right, the story could be better in different way (like always for almost all stories), but "not fun" isn't the word that I would use anyway

Again, Ultimately, I think the biggest issue is simply that the story is to short, I don't think it was the correct solution to shorten the main story over that of TW3, maybe they could have done it a bit, but I think it were to much of a shortening.

If they thought the problem with the TW3 story were that not enough people completed it, because it were to long, which I personally don't think is a weakness, if the story is interesting. But then they should maybe have worked on the phasing instead added more stuff into cutscenes. But I think they are trying to tell a complex story in to short of a time.

If they wanted Smasher to be the big bad guy, they have to add content that really stress this, like him killing one of the "main" characters that you care about like Jackie, Vik etc. And maybe make some missions where he hunts you. Or makes you decide who lives or die, something that makes you really want to kill him or save him if that should be an option as well.

I don't see it as a benefit of being able to ignore Johnny, because in that case he shouldn't be in the game at all, it has to be driven by some sort of conflict, that makes him interesting.

 

[lyin321]

Again, Ultimately, I think the biggest issue is simply that the story is to short, I don't think it was the correct solution to shorten the main story over that of TW3, maybe they could have done it a bit, but I think it were to much of a shortening.

If they thought the problem with the TW3 story were that not enough people completed it, because it were to long, which I personally don't think is a weakness, if the story is interesting. But then they should maybe have worked on the phasing instead added more stuff into cutscenes. But I think they are trying to tell a complex story in to short of a time.

My assumption (which can be wrong ofcourse) is that they wanted to give everyone what they want. Short main quest for the people that don't want very long game, but alot of side content for the people that do want long game. But, as I said, they could have 'fitted' the main quest into the open world (side content) better

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Again, Ultimately, I think the biggest issue is simply that the story is to short, I don't think it was the correct solution to shorten the main story over that of TW3, maybe they could have done it a bit, but I think it were to much of a shortening.

If they thought the problem with the TW3 story were that not enough people completed it, because it were to long, which I personally don't think is a weakness, if the story is interesting. But then they should maybe have worked on the phasing instead added more stuff into cutscenes. But I think they are trying to tell a complex story in to short of a time.

If they wanted Smasher to be the big bad guy, they have to add content that really stress this, like him killing one of the "main" characters that you care about like Jackie, Vik etc. And maybe make some missions where he hunts you. Or makes you decide who lives or die, something that makes you really want to kill him or save him if that should be an option as well.

I can't disagree that the story is too short. I complete 2 times in a row TW3 the last weeks and I confirm, TW3 story is not "too long"
And yeah, the story could be "better" if it was more long but it's like that and anyway it's already better than many "longer" stories in games (for me at least).

I don't see it as a benefit of being able to ignore Johnny, because in that case he shouldn't be in the game at all, it has to be driven by some sort of conflict, that makes him interesting.

I don't think so, exactly like Panam for example. You can ignore her, but the game whitout Panam wouldn't be the same.
It's a little bit the same like without Johnny, your "personnal brain tumor", the game wouldn't be the same. Maybe not for everyone one, but I think it's an interesting character. A real and hateful dumbass at the beginning who can become more like a friend at the end (or maybe someone you can pity, because he screw up his entire life for a foolish ideal when he had everything to have a good life).

 

[Mobster100]

My assumption (which can be wrong ofcourse) is that they wanted to give everyone what they want. Short main quest for the people that don't want very long game, but alot of side content for the people that do want long game. But, as I said, they could have 'fitted' the main quest into the open world (side content) better

I think you are correct. To me it seemed like the idea behind it was a sort of "choose the length" of the experience, if that make sense. So you can rush it drop all the side missions etc. and you can complete the game in 15 hours or so? or you can do all the side stuff and get a bit more context etc. But I think this end up not working in either case, because if you rush the story, I think it would appear extremely weak. But if you extend it by doing all the side missions as I did, you still feel like the main story is rushed, there really isn't that many main story quests. It was worth a shot I think, but I don't think it was the right approach in the end, they should have simply have said, that it is more important to tell the full story the way we want it and if people think its to long etc. then maybe the game is simply not for them.

Post automatically merged: Feb 7, 2022

I can't disagree that the story is too short. I complete 2 times in a row TW3 the last weeks and I confirm, TW3 story is not "too long"
And yeah, the story could be "better" if it was more long but it's like that and anyway it's already better than many "longer" stories in games (for me at least).

I don't think so, exactly like Panam for example. You can ignore her, but the game whitout Panam wouldn't be the same.
It's a little bit the same like without Johnny, your "personnal brain tumor", the game wouldn't be the same. Maybe not for everyone one, but I think it's an interesting character. A real and hateful dumbass at the beginning who can become more like a friend at the end (or maybe someone you can pity, because he screw up his entire life for a foolish ideal when he had everything to have a good life).

What I mean is, that Silverhand as a character and how he is integrated into CP and your character would be pointless and not beneficial for the game, if you could completely ignore him. Then it would have been better with a complete different type of story.
So there is no issue with Silverhand and the idea behind it all.

 

[moonknightgog]

I think the problem is not much with Johnny, but with the fact that quests and dialogues very rarely help the player to establish what kind of character V is. What are their beliefs and desires.

V is simply lame.

Post automatically merged: Feb 7, 2022

If they thought the problem with the TW3 story were that not enough people completed it

Because it's the worst story of the trilogy. Geralt is basically an errand boy doing favours for most of it, and the writing feels very basic compared to The Witcher 2. Expecially dialogues

 

[Mobster100]

I think the problem is not much with Johnny, but with the fact that quests and dialogues very rarely help the player to establish what kind of character V is. What are their beliefs and desires.

V is simply lame.

Post automatically merged: Feb 7, 2022

Because it's the worst story of the trilogy. Geralt is basically an errand boy doing favours for most of it, and the writing feels very basic compared to The Witcher 2. Expecially dialogues

I haven't played the other TW games only the third one, but I enjoyed that story and I think you felt like a Witcher travelling around the land doing quests, killing monsters etc. That you are an errand boy, I think is some what natural in open world games, if they want to have a lot of quests they need to make quests like these, alternatively its quests like go there and kill this, then ill help you.

I have no issue with that at all when its an open world game. But still the story in my opinion need to allow for it or what to say. And where I think it works in TW3, it doesn't really work in CP for me. If you are about to die you wouldn't do 95% of the stuff that V does, it follows the open world recipe but they just forgot the story to go with it. And to me, it still feels a lot like there were 5 teams working on it without any overall direction, some wanted to make a GTA game, some an adventure game, others a RPG, some an action shooter etc. each with their own ideas of what would be awesome and eventually they just combined it all into a somewhat mess of a game

The game is completely carried by the city, setting and how well the quests are delivered in my opinion. Neither of the other parts are especially good, its not a good RPG, neither when it comes to customization and how you look to the weapons, skills or how you use these to interact with the world. Its a decent shooter, but nothing that makes it stand out And as a GTA game its not working at all, as a linear adventure game it works as well, despite having a somewhat weak story.

 

[moonknightgog]

I think you felt like a Witcher travelling around the land doing quests, killing monsters etc.

Yes, but the problem in the main quest was the whole "you want to know about Ciri? Do this other thing for me and I'll tell you". Geralt does the thing and the answer is "yeah, btw, she's not here, left weeks ago". It's stupid and it repeats 3 times in Velen and Novigrad. The only place where you actually look for Ciri is in Skellige, which coincidentally is also the area that was developed first in 2012/13, and it has the more in depth quests

 

[Mobster100]

Yes, but the problem in the main quest was the whole "you want to know about Ciri? Do this other thing for me and I'll tell you". Geralt does the thing and the answer is "yeah, btw, she's not here, left weeks ago". It's stupid and it repeats 3 times in Velen and Novigrad. The only place where you actually look for Ciri is in Skellige, which coincidentally is also the area that was developed first in 2012/13, and it has the more in depth quests

I can't remember that, its to long since I played it, so I take your word for it. But I don't recall it being an issue for me when I played it. In fact I rarely complete games I tend to get bored of them before that. Not meant as they are bad, because I have played Skyrim and Fallout countless times, but never completed them, which is because Ill rather do everything else than what I am suppose to.

I did complete both CP and TW3. My biggest issue with the TW3 were the gear customization, a bit of the same as with CP. You want to use the best gear possible, your character really looks like something out of a circus performance.

Also I think one of the benefits with the TW3 is the monsters, they add variety and makes it fun fighting them. Whereas in CP its just humans and robots, which gets boring after awhile especially because they are as generic as they are and there is no consequence for killing them, meaning the gangs. So even if some of the quests might be slightly mundane, you can still have a fun fight vs a monster at least

Im a huge fan off open world games and did have a lot of fun in CP as well, especially when it was just straight up fire fights or trying to stealth missions and really enjoyed the interaction with the other characters, I know a lot of people hated the mobile ringing, but I think it was an awesome feature, obviously with some improvements like being able to call back, but for me it was a small thing, but it did a lot for the immersion. I did however not like the way you interacted with the fixers or how they made use of Vs apartment.

And I did eventually skip all the "monster" camps and the psycho police mission, I didn't bother completing either as it just felt like grinding. But besides that I like the missions, until you get so OPed that its no longer a challenge to kill anyone even on the hardest difficulty, and that was eventually what caused me to just finish the game. And the fact, that besides missions the world is just dead, there is no interaction with anything.

 

[jbeards]

Unfortunately, totally agree with OP.

 

[MartineDee]

Because the game revolves around Silverhand instead of V

I think that is the thing: my perspective is the opposite of that.

Looking at him, I see a little man with his little feelings and his little robotic arm and sunglasses. I feel sorry for him, even though I am the one dying. Perhaps that is the rule, if I am dying, it is my show. Johnny is cute and all, but he is the underdog passenger. Wait, am I repeating myself? xD

 

[MartineDee]

To all previously said, I should tone it a bit up to make it sound like I feel about the game. And in short. No walls of text.

CP2077 is one of the rare games where I expose my real self and play things the way I would do them if I was over there. I can't in all fairness remember an other game that allowed me to be this open. Not Baldur's Gate (original, ToSC, SoD, SoA, ToB), not the Elder Scrolls from Morrowind to Skyrim, Not Fallout 3/4. Those games felt a bit stiff, and appealed a bit to dit and dat from me. CP2077 doesn't do it. It just gives me a full unjudgy freedom to do as I please, as I also do, only happy to oblige. The game is amazing.

But it could use a 12-round Overture.
And a faster Caliburn.
And it should let me order a regular Jackie Welles at the Afterlife, dammt.