Cyberpunk - CD Project Red

DepecheHead101

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't buy CP because I didn't like TW3. I thought the RPG elements of TW were pretty weak, I just saw it as a story based action adventure game. So I held off on CP because of that. I'm glad I waited!

Yeah, Witcher is an odd one. It gets some strange praise.

I enjoyed it, but it seemed to come at the perfect time where PS4/Xbox One games lost their cross generational stink and everyone decided they'd had enough of Bethesda's open worlds. I think it benefitted massively from that, and people really took it to their hearts. Which is fair - it's a great game - but in and around that you saw a game like Skyrim kicked to the curve, with everyone retroactively deciding it was a kiddie pool deep experience and that the Witcher pointed the way forward.

But it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. It's not any great advancement, it's just different. It's weightier than an Elder Scrolls game, sure. Most prominently the characterisation, voice acting etc are all top notch. It's very much a story driven, carefully curated experience in an open world setting, though. Everyone plays virtually the same game. For all its dumbed down limitations, Skyrim characters could be very different from one another. It's an action RPG, sure, but I ignored the main quest for about 50 hours when I got it. Some people never use spells. Some people run around in the nip. Some people just put the thing on to walk around and pick flowers.

Witcher? You're more than likely going to be hacking and slashing, aren't you? Tits and arse. Gerrof me freak! Etc. I don't have a huge amount of 4 AM memories with it, and I'm in no rush to ever play it again.

one armed dwarf

awec wrote: »

Out of curiosity, how many of those disappointed in this, specifically around the the world itself being a bit shallow, played the Witcher 3?

It seems similar to TW3 to me. It's an open world but there's not much to do, the strength comes from the interesting side quests compared to the usual crap in RPGs.

Tbh I played some of the Witcher 3 and did not enjoy it. You're probably right that CDPR's approach here is the same as that game, I commented about that a few pages back I think

The problem is that Witcher 3's world building, vast and lengthy storyline as well as its myriad optional stories and DLC made it a very high quality experience if that's what you're into. The bits where it goes all action are the blemish you put up with to get to the immersive story telling. As someone who didn't take to the game I can still see what makes it a masterpiece for people.

This is where Cyberpunk falls short. It just isn't as strong in that area, it's quite anemic. it ain't Bladerunner or the Matrix, it's not even anime or a graphic novel. It is the most surface level version of cyberpunk as a genre I've seen in a while and the game as a whole has very little that stands out as exceptional in the way that Witcher 3 had such strong characters and writing.

Right now I would compare it to a early 2000s era GTAIII clone, like Driver 3 or True Crime Streets of LA. Just dolled up with ray tracing and SSD streaming tech so you get the next gen experience which is genuinely jaw dropping for the first 7 or 8 hours or so but the paper facade that is Night City falls apart like soggy toilet roll after a while when you notice all the repeated assets, lack of dynamic systemic detail in the city itself and the only 'OK' writing for the different quests you can do

Tbh I would hardly recommend it except for the fact that the game genuinely looks phenomenal, especially on the psycho ray traced setting. But that setting isn't available in all versions of the game

sticker

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't buy CP because I didn't like TW3. I thought the RPG elements of TW were pretty weak, I just saw it as a story based action adventure game. So I held off on CP because of that. I'm glad I waited!

There is a scary video out there of AI comparisions of CP to current GTA5 - and an argument was raised here that CPPR are unfamilair with open world as an excuse... W3 was a perfect example of open world experience. The open world AI is CP is just shamefull currently.

Edit - heres that video again

awec

one armed dwarf wrote: »

Tbh I played some of the Witcher 3 and did not enjoy it. You're probably right that CDPR's approach here is the same as that game, I commented about that a few pages back I think

The problem is that Witcher 3's world building, vast and lengthy storyline as well as its myriad optional stories and DLC made it a very high quality experience if that's what you're into. The bits where it goes all action are the blemish you put up with to get to the immersive story telling. As someone who didn't take to the game I can still see what makes it a masterpiece for people.

This is where Cyberpunk falls short. It just isn't as strong in that area, it's quite anemic. it ain't Bladerunner or the Matrix, it's not even anime or a graphic novel. It is the most surface level version of cyberpunk as a genre I've seen in a while and the game as a whole has very little that stands out as exceptional in the way that Witcher 3 had such strong characters and writing.

Right now I would compare it to a early 2000s era GTAIII clone, like Driver 3 or True Crime Streets of LA. Just dolled up with ray tracing and SSD streaming tech so you get the next gen experience which is genuinely jaw dropping for the first 7 or 8 hours or so but the paper facade that is Night City falls apart like soggy toilet roll after a while when you notice all the repeated assets, lack of dynamic systemic detail in the city itself and the only 'OK' writing for the different quests you can do

Tbh I would hardly recommend it except for the fact that the game genuinely looks phenomenal, especially on the psycho ray traced setting. But that setting isn't available in all versions of the game

People will correct me if I'm wrong, but I am pretty sure TW3 had some major issues at launch and it took an enormous patch after a while to make it into the game that was eventually loved.

weemcd

awec wrote: »

People will correct me if I'm wrong, but I am pretty sure TW3 had some major issues at launch and it took an enormous patch after a while to make it into the game that was eventually loved.

It's still a bit buggy to this day to be completely honest. I remember saying to my friend while playing the Witcher that one of the biggest difficulties CDPR would have is making the game smooth and cutting out the clunkieness the game contained. And that is true.

AlmightyCushion

sticker wrote: »

There is a scary video out there of AI comparisions of CP to current GTA5 - and an argument was raised here that CPPR are unfamilair with open world as an excuse... W3 was a perfect example of open world experience. The open world AI is CP is just shamefull currently.

Edit - heres that video again

How is it scary? A lot of other open world games would have the same limited NPC AI. In Horizon: Zero Dawn, if you stare at an NPC they will do nothing. If you attack them they won't fight back. Is that shameful too? Is it scary as well? Seriously, who actually cares about this a lot of this stuff. HZD is a great game and the NPC AI doesn't detract from it.

Also, this is missing the fact that there are a lot of NPCs in Cyberpunk who will react to the player. If you attack them they fight back (a lot better than the random GTA NPCs) and they are a realistic threat too unlike the NPCs in GTA.

Azza

Honestly I didn't notice any bugs in The Witcher 3 at all and I played most of it at release. Then again I didn't notice many bugs in the likes of Skyrim either.

AlmightyCushion

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

How is it scary? A lot of other open world games would have the same limited NPC AI. In Horizon: Zero Dawn, if you stare at an NPC they will do nothing. If you attack them they won't fight back. Is that shameful too? Is it scary as well? Seriously, who actually cares about this a lot of this stuff. HZD is a great game and the NPC AI doesn't detract from it.

Also, this is missing the fact that there are a lot of NPCs in Cyberpunk who will react to the player. If you attack them they fight back (a lot better than the random GTA NPCs) and they are a realistic threat too unlike the NPCs in GTA.

Which GTA are you talking about? I recall getting shot and killed by some NPC's in GTA... NPC's also fight back...

one armed dwarf

awec wrote: »

People will correct me if I'm wrong, but I am pretty sure TW3 had some major issues at launch and it took an enormous patch after a while to make it into the game that was eventually loved.

It's not bugs which are the problem though, level design doesn't take advantage of the specialties you can spec for and AI is bad. The quests you do are about on the same level of depth as a PS2 game and the writing doesn't come close to The Witcher

They might be able to fix the AI but all the other stuff is fundamentally not all that great

OSI

OSI wrote: »

You've a lot to say for a game you don't, nor ever intend to, own or play.

So I'm not entitled to an opinion on this mess? I didn't buy Fallout 76 but I had plenty to say about how Bethesda handled that. Should I have kept my mouth shut then too?

No, I think I'll express my opinion freely. Thanks.

AlmightyCushion

Deleted User wrote: »

Which GTA are you talking about? I recall getting shot and killed by some NPC's in GTA... NPC's also fight back...

The average NPC does fight back in GTA but not as well as the NPCs that fight back in Cyberpunk. The average NPC in GTA either doesn't fight back or just puts up their hands an throws a couple of punches. That is if you let them, most will die after a couple of punches any way so you can kill them before they even get a chance to hit you back. Is this really so much better than a NPC that doesn't fight back at all? You can't kill most NPCs in Horizon: Zero Dawn just like Cyberpunk. It doesn't make it a bad game, it isn't shameful.

awec

I'm not defending the game, cause what I played so far is a bit of a boring mess, but some of the comparisons with GTA are unfair. GTA is a sandbox game, the whole point of it is the world around you. Cyberpunk is an RPG.

AlmightyCushion

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The average NPC does fight back in GTA but not as well as the NPCs that fight back in Cyberpunk. The average NPC in GTA either doesn't fight back or just puts up their hands an throws a couple of punches. That is if you let them, most will die after a couple of punches any way so you can kill them before they even get a chance to hit you back. Is this really so much better than a NPC that doesn't fight back at all? You can't kill most NPCs in Horizon: Zero Dawn just like Cyberpunk. It doesn't make it a bad game, it isn't shameful.

No, it doesn't. But I understand why people are comparing the city/NPC mechanics to GTA V and not Skyrim.

ahnowbrowncow

The Witcher 3's looting, inventory management, leveling system, horse riding, npc interaction and combat were poor to average at best. It is still seen as a great game despite this. Cyberpunk is quite similar in this regard but people's expectations were far higher, which is partly CDPR's own fault.

I went in expecting an experience similar to the Witcher 3 and and I've enjoyed it despite the flaws.

sticker

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

How is it scary? A lot of other open world games would have the same limited NPC AI. In Horizon: Zero Dawn, if you stare at an NPC they will do nothing. If you attack them they won't fight back. Is that shameful too? Is it scary as well? Seriously, who actually cares about this a lot of this stuff. HZD is a great game and the NPC AI doesn't detract from it.

Also, this is missing the fact that there are a lot of NPCs in Cyberpunk who will react to the player. If you attack them they fight back (a lot better than the random GTA NPCs) and they are a realistic threat too unlike the NPCs in GTA.

Wow - If you honeslty feel the CDPR AI showcased in that video is not 'shameful' then I dont know what to say...

Edit - I've the collectors edition still in clingfilm and I'm really looking forward to playing this on PS5 when they patch it back to a more playable state, but in its curent state there's simply no defending it's AI

sticker

OSI wrote: »

You've a lot to say for a game you don't, nor ever intend to, own or play.

God, the mods here rushing to defend this... The guy has an opinion based on a lot of content avaialable online. Like my post, its opinion based and we're all entitled to it. No need for that sharp retort - especially for a mod in a talkback forum. He gets to have a say...

gimli2112

just to add another comparison to HZD.
HZD released on PS4 almost four years ago and looks fantastic, this released last week and erm doesn't.
I'm not too bothered tbh I only got caught up in the hype late on and am enjoying it but in small stints, as the looks and some of the gameplay put me off, I'll give it another go on next gen but don't see me completing it on last gen.
It certainly hasn't lived up to the hype.

ShadowHearth

Played more last night after work. Almost 12h in and I am just doing side stuff after you see "Title screen" thing.

Really love it and I finally got a proper scope of how big damn place is! Hopefully today after work I will continue hunting Emo cars.

ShadowHearth

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Actually, I've found PC users have been incredibly sympathetic. The general sentiment amongst them seems to be the game is gorgeous but buggy. I was watching Tim Gettys from Kinda Funny talk about his experience on Cyberpunk on the PC and how it makes him sad that most people aren't seeing what he is seeing. The phrase "it's like a different game" has been thrown around a lot.

If anything, it's the next gen players, particularly PS5 users who are blaming people for playing the game on 7 year old hardware when anyone can see with their own eyes that it's the same dumpster fire on current gen consoles only with slightly better textures which, just so we're clear, is literally what it is as it's backwards compatibility mode.

I actually would not point out console or pc gamers, just the people who are "angry in general, and love to moan". I have a decent Laptop that could run Cyberpunk at okay level, but still got the game for Series X and having great crack.

I would agree a lot with other meme: "this game is ****! Stop having fun!! Why are you having fun!?!? Stop!!!

dohboy

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Actually, I've found PC users have been incredibly sympathetic. The general sentiment amongst them seems to be the game is gorgeous but buggy. I was watching Tim Gettys from Kinda Funny talk about his experience on Cyberpunk on the PC and how it makes him sad that most people aren't seeing what he is seeing. The phrase "it's like a different game" has been thrown around a lot.

Yes, that's what the joke is pointing out?

johnny_ultimate

I played Witcher 3 at launch for around 20 hours, and just this year went back to finish it. There were welcome quality of life adjustments over those years in terms of menu, inventory etc, but the fundamental experience has always been the same. Its strengths always shone through from the very early stages - the storytelling in particular was far stronger than Cyberpunk offers up now.

I think W3 is ultimately a really good game rather than an all time favourite. I’m very aware of its limitations in terms of combat systems and the like, and an open world that’s often bigger than needed. But honestly it actually has more going for it than Cyberpunk, and it’s not unreasonable to have hoped CDPR would have refined and evolved their open world ideas over the past decade.

sticker

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I played Witcher 3 at launch for around 20 hours, and just this year went back to finish it. There were welcome quality of life adjustments over those years in terms of menu, inventory etc, but the fundamental experience has always been the same. Its strengths always shone through from the very early stages - the storytelling in particular was far stronger than Cyberpunk offers up now.

I think W3 is ultimately a really good game rather than an all time favourite. I’m very aware of its limitations in terms of combat systems and the like, and an open world that’s often bigger than needed. But honestly it actually has more going for it than Cyberpunk, and it’s not unreasonable to have hoped CDPR would have refined and evolved their open world ideas over the past decade.

Agreed. I played W3 from launch also and whereas there were big improvements made, the fundamentals of quality were there from the outset.

The undeniable dumpster fire of a launch for CP is very dissapointing to me as a big fan of the studios work - setting aside the bugs and Ai but more for the core mechanics on display.

I find it so perplexing and frustrating that even if a given player is enjoying the game, oftentimes there seems to be a lot of toxic defence of any criticism made. I want to enjoy this game, I want others to enjoy this game but lets be objective along the way.

I for one will be delighted to see improvments made to CP on the road ahead but the current state is a far far lower bar than launch W3 and the studio has had pleny of time to improve for a new world - regardless if it is classed as open world or RPG.

AlmightyCushion

sticker wrote: »

Wow - If you honeslty feel the CDPR AI showcased in that video is not 'shameful' then I dont know what to say...

Edit - I've the collectors edition still in clingfilm and I'm really looking forward to playing this on PS5 when they patch it back to a more playable state, but in its curent state there's simply no defending it's AI

Why is it shameful? The generic NPC AI is shít. Why does it matter, it doesn't detract much from the game. Sure, it would be better if the AI was smarter but not being able to rob a shop or start fights with every NPC isn't a big deal to me. I never done that type of thing much in GTA games and I don't miss it in other open world games that don't have it. Do you think Horizon: Zero Dawn is shameful because you can't rob shops and start fights with every NPC?

sticker

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Why is it shameful? The generic NPC AI is shít. Why does it matter

Put simply: yeah, in terms of world immersion it matters :rolleyes:

AlmightyCushion

sticker wrote: »

Put simply: yeah, in terms of world immersion it matters :rolleyes:

Ok, for the same reasons is Horizon: Zero Dawn shameful? You can't fight random NPCs in that or rob shops.

AlmightyCushion

By the way, I'm not defending the AI, I have said it is shít. I just don't think it detracts from the game all that much. Especially some of the things like not being able to rob shops like you can in GTA. It's a good game (dare I say a great game, probably the best game I've played this year despite it's faults and bugs) and very enjoyable but some of the criticism of it is just nitpicky and over the top. A lot of it is justified obviously. This thread isn't that bad for it but the cyberpunkgame subreddit is ridiculous. Over there it is the shítest game ever made, no one can like it and everything it does is awful and no other game does it worse.

sticker

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Ok, for the same reasons is Horizon: Zero Dawn shameful? You can't fight random NPCs in that or rob shops.

Put this to bed.. why are you bringing HZD into this? A game focused in a barren open wildlands with primarily solo gameplay versus a densly population filled city.

By your own admission the AI systems I criticised are ****... so why hang on my description of said mechanics as shameful?

If '****' world Ai does not effect your enjoyment, grand.. it does for me.

J. Marston

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Ok, for the same reasons is Horizon: Zero Dawn shameful? You can't fight random NPCs in that or rob shops.

You're being obtuse. HZD wasn't hyped as a living breathing city with "1000 NPCs who have handcrafted daily routines." CP2077 was.

When those 1000 realistic NPCs don't exist and instead act like placeholders, don't be surprised if people call it bullshít.