I understand a lot of the criticisms, and I think they're valid... However most of the time playing Cyberpunk, I'm not following NPC's around, or getting in gunfights with the police, I'm playing...
I understand a lot of the criticisms, and I think they're valid... However most of the time playing Cyberpunk, I'm not following NPC's around, or getting in gunfights with the police, I'm playing missions. Furthermore, if I want to go around playing small minigames, I play something like Yakuza. I understand that these are issues, however I guess they just don't feel that important to me, and I don't find it hard to get immersed when these features are subpar, because in the end that's not what I'm playing the game for.
Regarding the subjective experience of the gameplay, personally I do enjoy the gunplay and stealth quite a bit (haven't had any issues with hit detection either). Also, I like the weapon churn, as it encourages me to try new and cooler weapons as I level up. Nor have I had issues with driving, and I do find it pretty immersive (I haven't actually used the fast travel system, I just drive everywhere).
I do empathize with some of the other minor nitpicks, such as the crouch button being bound to the skip chat dialogue button, the cosmetic issues, or the level gated random encounters.
EDIT: Also, I disagree with the comment that the main story doesn't engage with Cyberpunk themes. It may not be as direct as in Deus Ex, but it's definitely there. I don't want to spoil anything though.
I agree on the point of it feeling a bit more like GTA style game than an open-world RPG. I didn't follow it all that closely (although it was impossible to not be aware of it at least a little)....
I agree on the point of it feeling a bit more like GTA style game than an open-world RPG.
I didn't follow it all that closely (although it was impossible to not be aware of it at least a little). I bought it on a whim on release day, and after a few hours of playing it just made me want to play Saints Row 3 again. I wasn't sure why at first given the entirely different genres of the games, but after thinking about it... I guess both have a large city map inhabited by simple randomly-generated NPCs and dotted with various missions, mostly of the "eliminate all the red pips here" variety. Both have gangs and you can gain notoriety with individual gangs who will get more aggressive with you as you progress. Both have character customization (with SR3's having way more variety aesthetically, although not mechanically, aided by its more cartoony art style). Both have a wanted system, spawning in cops when you do enough crime, and then acting like the crime never happened if you manage to evade them.
But Cyberpunk wanted to be more of an open-world RPG that just kind of ended up like that, whereas SR3 is that way on purpose and fully committed to its irreverence. It made the simple, over-the-top world work with its mechanics and tone, whereas with Cyberpunk I feel like the tone and mechanics of the game are at odds with the world and how it's filled.
After ~8 hours of playtime, I started feeling like Night City is just a means of spacing out marked mission POI. This is fine for many games, but for something that was marketed as an immersive experience I'm a bit disappointed. I like to have the experience of having finished a quest or mission and, while travelling to the next quest, seeing something interesting enough to sidetrack me: a building or structure, a situation, an NPC. That did happen a couple times, but the problem was that it was never all that interesting to stop - I was never rewarded either mechanically or with an interesting event or story. All that happened was it took longer to get to the POI, so I became less invested in exploring the in-between spaces.
I'm willing to give it another shot once some of the technical issues are worked out, as I think that also contributed to my lack of patience with the game, but in meantime I think I'd rather use the space on my hard drive for other stuff. I'd put it at like, a 7/10 for now.
Not having played the game yet, what you're describing sounds to me like the problem of having a boring traversal system. Exploration should be intrinsically rewarding independent of the skinner...
I was never rewarded either mechanically or with an interesting event or story. All that happened was it took longer to get to the POI, so I became less invested in exploring the in-between spaces.
Not having played the game yet, what you're describing sounds to me like the problem of having a boring traversal system. Exploration should be intrinsically rewarding independent of the skinner box mechanics (side-quests, collectibles, etc.) attached to them. The way to make it that is to provide interesting things to look at and wonder about and to make the act of simply getting around the world an engaging challenge.
GTA and Saints Row manage this by having the driving and mayhem be fun by itself, so you have something to do while exploring. Breath of the Wild does this by just making it interesting to get around and putting a bunch of interesting stuff on the map every step of the way so you're always like "Oh what's that over there!?" Spider-Man does this by just making it super fun and satisfying to web sling around New York.
It's sounding like traversal in Cyberpunk isn't that fun and is just kind of a passable way to get from point A to point B. That's not going to be enough to encourage exploring. In Witcher 3 they tried to do this by putting crafting supplies and random shit all over the map, but that was deeply boring and annoying and a general waste of time.
A spoiler-free critique of Cyberpunk 2077 from one of my favourite Youtube channels. The first ~8 minutes or so is a rant on the state of the game review industry but there are timestamps provided...
A spoiler-free critique of Cyberpunk 2077 from one of my favourite Youtube channels.
The first ~8 minutes or so is a rant on the state of the game review industry but there are timestamps provided in the description if you want to skip that.
I understand a lot of the criticisms, and I think they're valid... However most of the time playing Cyberpunk, I'm not following NPC's around, or getting in gunfights with the police, I'm playing missions. Furthermore, if I want to go around playing small minigames, I play something like Yakuza. I understand that these are issues, however I guess they just don't feel that important to me, and I don't find it hard to get immersed when these features are subpar, because in the end that's not what I'm playing the game for.
Regarding the subjective experience of the gameplay, personally I do enjoy the gunplay and stealth quite a bit (haven't had any issues with hit detection either). Also, I like the weapon churn, as it encourages me to try new and cooler weapons as I level up. Nor have I had issues with driving, and I do find it pretty immersive (I haven't actually used the fast travel system, I just drive everywhere).
I do empathize with some of the other minor nitpicks, such as the crouch button being bound to the skip chat dialogue button, the cosmetic issues, or the level gated random encounters.
EDIT: Also, I disagree with the comment that the main story doesn't engage with Cyberpunk themes. It may not be as direct as in Deus Ex, but it's definitely there. I don't want to spoil anything though.
I agree on the point of it feeling a bit more like GTA style game than an open-world RPG.
I didn't follow it all that closely (although it was impossible to not be aware of it at least a little). I bought it on a whim on release day, and after a few hours of playing it just made me want to play Saints Row 3 again. I wasn't sure why at first given the entirely different genres of the games, but after thinking about it... I guess both have a large city map inhabited by simple randomly-generated NPCs and dotted with various missions, mostly of the "eliminate all the red pips here" variety. Both have gangs and you can gain notoriety with individual gangs who will get more aggressive with you as you progress. Both have character customization (with SR3's having way more variety aesthetically, although not mechanically, aided by its more cartoony art style). Both have a wanted system, spawning in cops when you do enough crime, and then acting like the crime never happened if you manage to evade them.
But Cyberpunk wanted to be more of an open-world RPG that just kind of ended up like that, whereas SR3 is that way on purpose and fully committed to its irreverence. It made the simple, over-the-top world work with its mechanics and tone, whereas with Cyberpunk I feel like the tone and mechanics of the game are at odds with the world and how it's filled.
After ~8 hours of playtime, I started feeling like Night City is just a means of spacing out marked mission POI. This is fine for many games, but for something that was marketed as an immersive experience I'm a bit disappointed. I like to have the experience of having finished a quest or mission and, while travelling to the next quest, seeing something interesting enough to sidetrack me: a building or structure, a situation, an NPC. That did happen a couple times, but the problem was that it was never all that interesting to stop - I was never rewarded either mechanically or with an interesting event or story. All that happened was it took longer to get to the POI, so I became less invested in exploring the in-between spaces.
I'm willing to give it another shot once some of the technical issues are worked out, as I think that also contributed to my lack of patience with the game, but in meantime I think I'd rather use the space on my hard drive for other stuff. I'd put it at like, a 7/10 for now.
Not having played the game yet, what you're describing sounds to me like the problem of having a boring traversal system. Exploration should be intrinsically rewarding independent of the skinner box mechanics (side-quests, collectibles, etc.) attached to them. The way to make it that is to provide interesting things to look at and wonder about and to make the act of simply getting around the world an engaging challenge.
GTA and Saints Row manage this by having the driving and mayhem be fun by itself, so you have something to do while exploring. Breath of the Wild does this by just making it interesting to get around and putting a bunch of interesting stuff on the map every step of the way so you're always like "Oh what's that over there!?" Spider-Man does this by just making it super fun and satisfying to web sling around New York.
It's sounding like traversal in Cyberpunk isn't that fun and is just kind of a passable way to get from point A to point B. That's not going to be enough to encourage exploring. In Witcher 3 they tried to do this by putting crafting supplies and random shit all over the map, but that was deeply boring and annoying and a general waste of time.
A spoiler-free critique of Cyberpunk 2077 from one of my favourite Youtube channels.
The first ~8 minutes or so is a rant on the state of the game review industry but there are timestamps provided in the description if you want to skip that.