I can see your point but I think they made right call the explore transhumanism and consequences of immortality like this. Say we have hope for North Korea to found some civil rights law someday and that hope relies on fact that people change, unless not other way, they at least die. Now there's sociopath on top who has been hell bent to destroy the US since WW2. I don't think this would'v worked so well without establishing Saburo Arasaka's character to player.
I think, overall, death should weigh narratively upon Night City. If Jackie is that significant to V, there has to be a world of members of societies that were integral to something that was broken the moment someone decided to kill a hero. But there will never be that parallel in storytelling here because, frankly, CDProject Red is built around heroism. They do not like building failures and alas, that is what V became. A hero that cannot fail despite narratively being forced to fail. It makes no sense.
There were a lot of parallels to transhumanism but I frankly ignored it because this is not Deus Ex. Cyberpunk is NNNOT supposed to be a setting where we got over the political ties or emotional differences of sticking a cosmetic cybernetic leg on a child who was born without limbs because an art director gave us a new tour based on his own self-image. No, Cyberpunk is the awkward and wicked difference from a more established and careful society. That is why Cyberpunk became a setting at all. Take away control, stability, rules, and you will make for utter fun. To the denerate society of gangs and hackers? That is ammunition. Sigh! Try again, CD Project! Hire me if you want.
If I'm reading you right we see the cyberpunk differently but in this case, creator of tabletop game who was also involved in production Mike Pondsmith said "Cyberpunk was supposed to be a warning, not an aspiration" and game executes that vision.
We may like it or not, but there are things that are not our call.
I can see your point but I think they made right call the explore transhumanism and consequences of immortality like this. Say we have hope for North Korea to found some civil rights law someday and that hope relies on fact that people change, unless not other way, they at least die. Now there's sociopath on top who has been hell bent to destroy the US since WW2. I don't think this would'v worked so well without establishing Saburo Arasaka's character to player.
Yet the tale was held without further background implications. First of all, where does Night City earn its power? As in akin to electricity, batteries? Who controls the logistics? Unfortunately, ten battling corporations cannot control a market so there has to be someone that governs the trade and economy. Someone who has to manage the marketting of Arasaka and their productions?
If I'm reading you right we see the cyberpunk differently but in this case, creator of tabletop game who was also involved in production Mike Pondsmith said "Cyberpunk was supposed to be a warning, not an aspiration" and game executes that vision.
We may like it or not, but there are things that are not our call.
A warning of future parallels, yes, but not one of what might come with the game itself of course. What the original artist or designer of Cyberpunk said does not matter as much, however, as he was not invested in the current project nor should his opinions change the perspective of the story we received.
Yet the tale was held without further background implications. First of all, where does Night City earn its power? Literally POWER, as in electricity. Who controls the logistics? Unfortunately, ten battling corporations cannot control a market so there has to be someone that governs the trade and economy. Someone who has to manage the marketting of Arasaka? A single person responsible for advertisement? Arasaka is not in full biblical control
That's actually explored but it's a bit contrived. Some you can read here on the forums: Countdown to Dark Future. and it's further explained in "The World of Cyberpunk 2077", I'm pretty sure you can find that as PDF.
It's actually quite typical setting for cyberpunk literature, works behind original game.
A warning of future parallels, yes, but not one of what might come with the game itself of course. What the original artist or designer of Cyberpunk does not matter, however, as he was not invested in the project nor do his opinions matter to the scope of Cyberpunk 2077. He did not want to involve himself fully despite opportunities to (think of the artist of The Witcher for a moment), so he can be passive to what comes next. If I may be honest, Cyberpunk can live without the creator if he is going to push ego.
You realize that you are saying that it doesn't matter what cyberpunk creators wanted it to be, but it should be what you want it to be? We are talking about established genre here that's been around for decades, not just a game.
Also, here is just one small example of what was promised versus delivered, according to the narrator every mission wil have choices that will have consequences to the story/game world, and we know that only a few missions do this. So if the game has let's say 200 missions and comparatively only 20 (being generous) do this, only 10% of what was presented is true, another example, if according to the narrator you could have one night stands with NPCs and let's say the city has 1000 NPCs that could offer dialogue options for romance (like the Sims NPCs) but you end up with only one night stand (Meredith Stout) this means only 0,1% of what was presented is true, but since the one night stand was in your apartment and with a cutscene, that means 0% of what was presented was true, also the game tells you the NPCs have daily routines so let's say there is 10000 NPCs in the game, and although none are programed to perform daily routines, let's say one does, this means only 0,01% presented was true.
First thank you for pointing something out. Now we can discuss it in detail. Right at the start the narrator clearly says "EVERYTHING you see is potentially subject to change." Plus then says "Keep in mind what you see here is not final." So right at the start they give multiple notices about the 2018 reveal not being the final word.
I'll take the easier one first. One night stands. The narrator said according to you "you can have one night stands with NPC's". The narrator never said how many, what percentage etc. And there are joytoys and Meredith. So this was met. It was YOU that inferred with all NPC's or some percentage.
Now for the big one. "every mission will have choices that will have consequences to the story" is what you wrote. But what was ACTUALLY said? At 45:30 the narrator talks about this. The narrator actually talks about the quest and other possibilities like not talking to Militech, buying the bot ourself or going in guns blazing. And then says:
"So many options, so many possibilities. And each will have consequences that will ripple through the game world and your story. And that's just one quest."
This is what was really said. let's look at it in detail. The quest in the game was almost identical to the demo at least for the options. Some minor changes in sequence but I can make the same choices. So the options, possibilities is accurate.
The next part is much more subjective in nature, "consequences" being an important word. First off there were consequences in the mission. I can keep the money, I can meet Stroud later and of course I can save Brick and that impacts a later quest. So there is no denying that there are consequences. Are the large or very important. NOPE. Not at all.
And here is the strongest point you have. The narrator implies that they can by using the word "ripple". However, it is still the user that infers this. Nowhere does the narrator actually say that the consequences will change your story. I've said it before no game is like Fallout 2. Nothing will ever come close to that again. But I realized that over 15 years ago. What was done here is no different from "consequences" as using in games like RDR series, ME series, DA series, Witcher etc. etc. In other words every game today has the level of consequences that they referred to. problem is you took it to mean FO2 level when they meant 2005-present day level.
BTW for the "daily routines" what does the video show? Nothing different than what the game has now it seems. So this one comes down to you got what you saw and what the narrator said is up to major interpretation. He talks about day/night and in that case it was net as the people disappear. What they do no one knows. We don't stalk them.
So you listed three things here. The first (one night stands) was 100% an inference by you. You can visit the joytoys as often as you like. I wouldn't call these lasting relationships after all.
Next is the big one and I showed you what was said was NOT what you wrote. And choices are there. The question is consequences. Consequences that impact the endings, no. But that was never claimed. Consequences do exist and in every main quest and many side quests there are consequences. None of the open world stuff have consequences.
Finally, daily routines are there. Have you followed anyone? I can see them get something to eat, leave go to a different building etc. And there is much less people at night. Targets (people you can attack) are always there and in fact respawn. But the demo showed what we see today for the NPC's of Night City. This also falls into your assumption vs. what was shown and delivered.
Its been over a month since release and people are still angry. Ive seen much worse launches than this.....why is this one so different now. Is it because of the deceit? Perhaps for many thats a justifiable reason....but why carry it so long on your shoulders.
Good logic > Emotions. Thats my only recommendation.
Some people for lack of a better term have nothing else to live for. They put all their hopes for happiness in a video game and build it up in their head and buy into any and all hype and let it consume them. When the game doesn't live up to this impossibly perfect game in their head they come crashing down to earth and it hurts.
The game isn't perfect, its missing a lot of features but at the end of the day its still just a video game. Maybe there's something carthartic even still to making posts like this. People are disproportionately hurt and can't seem to let it go.
Some of the biggest issues in Cyberpunk can be traced directly to Witcher 3 - which also suffered from a complete lack of believable immersion features....
For whatever reason, the vast majority of the GAMING audience found the NON-GAMING aspects (story and production values) good enough to warrant 10/10 scores almost across the board.
I never quite understood that. Then again, I'm a game type of gamer - and I really enjoy intricate game mechanics and challenging gameplay - as well as game-related features involving immersion and a compelling open world worth exploring.
It sounds like you're playing the wrong type of games. Maybe stay away from open world and narrative based games. They're rarely "game" games. I can't really think of any open world game that's challenging, but that's not why I or anyone should play them.
Nothing went wrong. This is the perfect example of the state of marketing in today's world and why you shouldn't take marketing as gospel.
A bit like the burger ads on TV and what you actually get when you buy one. I don't see anyone suing the fast food chain industry or making a fuss about it.
I've been thinking about this and I'll agree that i think CDPR over-reached, and over-hyped.
They've sold this idea of the Messiah of games that will be all the things to all the peoples on all the platforms ... and as much as that technically should be possible ... I don't think it's realistic.
CDPR should have, and should for future game releases, focus on development for PC. "Make it, and they will come"; if the game is good enough folks will actually buy/upgrade their PCs to play it.
Port games to those budget gaming consoles ... later, MUCH later.
Another thing too, comparing game release culture today compared to decades past, over-hyping, and building anticipation with a game trailer 7 years before a game is out ...that can stir all the little gaming bros into a rabid frezy of such fantastic expectation that even relatively minor quirks will make them do the rage quit hair on fire way over the top damning reviews.
It's a little ridiculous some of the news that seems pretty sensationalized and click-baity about CDPR fumbling this game.
Granted, I'm on PC.
I certainly have a bias. Still, I'm not some top-end rig gamer. My GPU is a GTX 760 and the minimum required GPU is a GTX 770 ... sooo, I'm actually a hair below minimum requirements on PC, but, I really don't have any problems with the game, nothing game-breaking, and nothing that I'm not open to expecting and accepting with my system specs.
... but, yeah, too much marketing with promises for all the platforms, I think, was a a big mistake. It blew way too much air up way too many skirts with wishes and dreams that could not be realistically realized ... at least in the time expected.
Going forward with future games ... The Witcher 4 (or whatever might come next in the series, maybe a prequel?), Cyberpunk 2078 (... or a prequel back to the 2020s) ... or something entirely new, whatever comes next, I think CDPR should focus on PC first and ONLY ... at least until PC launch is done and successful where then, and only after that, budget gaming consoles can get a little love.
CDPR is still, in my opinion one of the best consumer-friendly game companies. Some mistakes were made with this game out of top management, but, that's suits for ya, and they seem willing to learn from these mistakes and avoid this in the future.
I think there's also a lot of frustration built up over the last year or few from several other sources where some people might be over-reacting and channeling/compounding theirfeelings about lots of other things into their disappointments here. "Noooooo, NOT THIS toooooooo!!!" ... or something like that.
It sounds like you're playing the wrong type of games. Maybe stay away from open world and narrative based games. They're rarely "game" games. I can't really think of any open world game that's challenging, but that's not why I or anyone should play them.
Are you seriously telling me you have the authority to tell people why they should be playing open world games?
That's a little arrogant, wouldn't you say.
As for challenging open world games, you should check out games like Gothic or Elex.
Anyway, there's zero excuse for the kind of utterly broken mechanics of CP2077. If you want to pretend that there was never any intention of a challenge on, say, "very hard" difficulty - that's your choice.
I think that's a very poor interpretation of game concepts and words, but there it is.
I've been thinking about this and I'll agree that i think CDPR over-reached, and over-hyped.
They've sold this idea of the Messiah of games that will be all the things to all the peoples on all the platforms ... and as much as that technically should be possible ... I don't think it's realistic.
I totally think it's realistic. They had the money. What they failed with, is time and management. You can make a game, even this large, have choices. It's been done in ME2. Of course certain things must be fixed for the story. But if you work on a script for several years. The writers could give alternate options that satisfy this area of the game. The rest is a failure to properly flesh out areas of the story.
CDPR should have, and should for future game releases, focus on development for PC. "Make it, and they will come"; if the game is good enough folks will actually buy/upgrade their PCs to play it.
Port games to those budget gaming consoles ... later, MUCH later.
Another thing too, comparing game release culture today compared to decades past, over-hyping, and building anticipation with a game trailer 7 years before a game is out ...that can stir all the little gaming bros into a rabid frezy of such fantastic expectation that even relatively minor quirks will make them do the rage quit hair on fire way over the top damning reviews.
... but, yeah, too much marketing with promises for all the platforms, I think, was a a big mistake. It blew way too much air up way too many skirts with wishes and dreams that could not be realistically realized ... at least in the time expected.
Going forward with future games ... I think CDPR should focus on PC first and ONLY ... at least until PC launch is done and successful where then, and only after that, budget gaming consoles can get a little love.
I'm also on PC with an underspec'd system. GTX 970. I've had very few issues. THe game has crashed a couple times and i've noticed other bugs/poor AI but nothing preventing me from playing on a regular basis. (That said i've put the game aside until patches come out).
I've also been thinking since the day this game came out and realized the state it was in, they should have focused on polishing the game and completing it on PC and then worry about porting to consoles later. I don't know that MUCH later is necessary, but it sounds like a smart idea to get a game like this working well on PC before even looking at consoles.
CDPR is the reason the game is in the state it is, but the capabilities of consoles have held the game back from being what it should have been.
DKDArtagnan said:
Are you seriously telling me you have the authority to tell people why they should be playing open world games?
I wasn't telling you with any authority, I was just making a suggestion. Sounds like you want a challenging game and i've never known an open world game to be all that challenging. Bullet Hell games are challenging, and so are rhythm games. Puzzles games can be difficult sometimes and there's the classic Dark Souls type games.
First thank you for pointing something out. Now we can discuss it in detail. Right at the start the narrator clearly says "EVERYTHING you see is potentially subject to change." Plus then says "Keep in mind what you see here is not final."
With that rationale it could be defended if they released a text-only game.
You are aware that you are defending a game which does not even allow you to walk on PC and has no water physics, e.g.. *shakes head* There are so many things missing in this product, which should be taken for granted in 2020, which weren't even mentioned in the video.
Please note we are talking about what was "promised" or shown back in 2018. Neither water physics or even walking was mentioned. You might want something, another game might have it, you might even say it's necessary. None of that matters. The topic is not what should have or should not have been in the game but what was said to be in the game and not.
For example one of my personal issues with the game is the multi-levels of Night City. I felt it would have been better with a flat surface and a few overpasses instead of their current road system. But that is not relevant to this topic.
I've also been thinking since the day this game came out and realized the state it was in, they should have focused on polishing the game and completing it on PC and then worry about porting to consoles later. I don't know that MUCH later is necessary, but it sounds like a smart idea to get a game like this working well on PC before even looking at consoles.
I read somewhere that Sony didn't want the PC version any better than the PS version. Which, having pulled the game from their store anyway, doesn't seem like it would have made much difference between the CDPR and Sony relationship.
The narrator said: "Cyberpunk is a visceral and mature experience and as such it will let you explore a variety with the game world and as you just saw it's PEOPLE."
All this was said while showing a non-character one night stand leaving the apartment. So this right there was not true, because having sex in your apartment is not an option and even less so with a random NPC like it's displayed on the video. So although there are joytoys and Meredith, what was displayed, said, and implied was not met.
It's true you can't have sex in your apartment. And they showed someone naked leaving your bed. Other than that we have no idea what any of that means. You implied it meant you can have sex with randome people but there is no evidence for that. That could have been a quest that never went anywhere. They probably didn't want to show the UGLY choices you have now. Who knows. But it doesn't mean random sex with NPC's. That was 100% your interpretation.
Mature means naked and language, along with violence. Yes but that could have been a romance option where instead of at River's place you go to your apartment. Bottom line is this did not state ramdom NPC sex as you claim.
Yes, and I said in my previous posts that the first mission is indeed in the game but the problem is the rest of the game doesn't seem to have the same quality of branching (consequences) except in a few rare occasions/missions, and if a gameplay demo is to be a sample of the rest of the game, then once again what was displayed, said and implied was not met, unless you consider the first mission to be the full game instead of a sample, and the rest of the game just an extended DLC.
OK consequences which is something real. I've previous stated that the open world junk has no consequences outside of pay. So we agree there but I doubt if they meant that. Instead it's the gigs, side quests and main quests that should have consequences. Now you claim that only the mission shown in the 2018 video has choices/consequences. So my job is easy. Point to one or two more quests that do.
First up is I Walk the Line. There are many choices here and consequences just like in the quest The Pickup. You can side with Voodoo Boys, side with Netwatch, sneak through, fight the mini-boss, side with Voodoo Boys and still kill them afterwards. You can kill the animals or leave them in charge. So basically just as many choices on how to do the quest as The Pickup.
Now here is a side quest with many interesting choices to make. Actually it is a string of side quests. It starts out with I Fought the Law where you do some investigating for them. This then leads to Dream On. There are many choices here from not doing it to what you say to Elizabeth to what you say to Jefferson.
In Pisces quest you can agree or not with Maiko. This is an actual interesting choice as there is some interesting consequences. If you don't agree you kill the bosses and usually Maiko. But if you agree you actually get additional work from the bosses. You can even take money and kill any relationship with Judy. Choice yep. Consequences yep.
Now that is three. Do I really have to mention more? I can but your claim was there were none. I just pointed out two so that means you "none" statement is false.
If a game that is being promoted since 2012 from the company that made The Witcher "as something never seen before" like it is shown in the below video at 7:19...
I honestly have no clue where you are going with this. The clip at 7:19 syas "I think it's a really bold statement but if you don't believe me play our witcher games". Yea so? What is the context?
I think it's safe to say that, at bare minimum everyone was expecting all quests to have some branching choices and how it affects the world around the players, instead of the mmo Ubisoft style quests. Instead the narrator justs uses careful wording and subjective statements to mislead what should be a given, and unless you think misleading advertising is okay, because it can be done "legally" and they didn't say it "ad-verbum", this behavior is still not morally acceptable, and all consumers should feel offended.
The quest as shown in the demo is the basis of the choices/consequences involved. Anything more is the watcher creating and thinking something that is simply not there. Many quests (outside open worlds) have this level of choice and consequences with more for main, then side and then least for gigs. Sometimes the choice is just how you complete a quest. Sneak, guns blazing or some other method. Sometimes the choice is in you responses to the quest giver. But art some level a choice is there. The problem is you want world shaking choices. But the demo never showed any world shaking choices. So you got what they actually showed. Your expectations were due to things you inferred or wanted and not what was shown.
Consequences. People claim they want them. But do they?
In a quest to find Evelyn you can punch a ripperdoc. It's a choice that is given. Now if you do you lose him as a ripperdoc and lose what he sells. I've read many a post where people got upset about this because he has some good tech that is no longer available.
Just one example where a real consequence results in plenty of complaints.
Post automatically merged:
Here's a consequence that I bet very few ever found.
It's true you can't have sex in your apartment. And they showed someone naked leaving your bed. Other than that we have no idea what any of that means. You implied it meant you can have sex with randome people but there is no evidence for that. That could have been a quest that never went anywhere. They probably didn't want to show the UGLY choices you have now. Who knows. But it doesn't mean random sex with NPC's. That was 100% your interpretation.
Mature means naked and language, along with violence. Yes but that could have been a romance option where instead of at River's place you go to your apartment. Bottom line is this did not state ramdom NPC sex as you claim.
OK consequences which is something real. I've previous stated that the open world junk has no consequences outside of pay. So we agree there but I doubt if they meant that. Instead it's the gigs, side quests and main quests that should have consequences. Now you claim that only the mission shown in the 2018 video has choices/consequences. So my job is easy. Point to one or two more quests that do.
First up is I Walk the Line. There are many choices here and consequences just like in the quest The Pickup. You can side with Voodoo Boys, side with Netwatch, sneak through, fight the mini-boss, side with Voodoo Boys and still kill them afterwards. You can kill the animals or leave them in charge. So basically just as many choices on how to do the quest as The Pickup.
Now here is a side quest with many interesting choices to make. Actually it is a string of side quests. It starts out with I Fought the Law where you do some investigating for them. This then leads to Dream On. There are many choices here from not doing it to what you say to Elizabeth to what you say to Jefferson.
In Pisces quest you can agree or not with Maiko. This is an actual interesting choice as there is some interesting consequences. If you don't agree you kill the bosses and usually Maiko. But if you agree you actually get additional work from the bosses. You can even take money and kill any relationship with Judy. Choice yep. Consequences yep.
Now that is three. Do I really have to mention more? I can but your claim was there were none. I just pointed out two so that means you "none" statement is false.
I honestly have no clue where you are going with this. The clip at 7:19 syas "I think it's a really bold statement but if you don't believe me play our witcher games". Yea so? What is the context?
Post automatically merged:
Consequences. People claim they want them. But do they?
In a quest to find Evelyn you can punch a ripperdoc. It's a choice that is given. Now if you do you lose him as a ripperdoc and lose what he sells. I've read many a post where people got upset about this because he has some good tech that is no longer available.
Just one example where a real consequence results in plenty of complaints.
Post automatically merged:
Here's a consequence that I bet very few ever found.
My point isn't that some person may or may not be at the end of a side quest, or that later in the game you can find someone who was alive now dead. It's that the story for the side quest is 99% the same no matter how you play it, let alone tying into other side quests and that small detail that is in there is really bland an unimaginative.
I know me personally and I believe most people complaining about meaningless choices/ lack of consequences is we expected a completely different story to the side quests depending on choices you made. Just like they did in TW3.
