Cyberpunk 2077

rojofa said:
GTA IV was way ahead of it's time in a load of this AI/physics stuff, still the benchmark for me in this kind of game. Even GTA V massively downgraded a lot of the aspects shown in that video, there's a similar video comparing IV to V.

These things are the most disappointing and offputting aspects about the game to me rather than any concerns about the performance and bugs. All this time and money spent developing it, and the gameplay mechanics, physics and AI all range from mediocre to piss poor. These aren't bugs or something you would expect to be solved in post-release updates, they are the fundamental design of the game.

But hey, the ray-traced neon lights and puddles look nice, so the game is a 9/10 - IGN.
Click to expand...
I'm familiar with that video you linked (comparing IV to V) :)). I wholeheartedly agree there's a lot of stuff (mostly physics / ragdoll related) that GTA 4 does way better than 5. But hey, the same "nicer-looking-graphics" argument you used in the end of your post is enough for people to argument that GTA 5 is better just 'cause of "some graphics".

There's this one also:



And you're correct again mate: The most disappointing thing about Cyberprank goes WELL BEYOND the performance and bugs. The CORE mechanics of the game are totally flawed: shooting (and covering) = atrocious; driving (and all the physics associated with it) = pathetic; stealth = boring and over-powered. Hell, even the hacking mini-game is beyond ridiculous.
 
crustcyb said:
I'm familiar with that video you linked (comparing IV to V) :)). I wholeheartedly agree there's a lot of stuff (mostly physics / ragdoll related) that GTA 4 does way better than 5. But hey, the same "nicer-looking-graphics" argument you used in the end of your post is enough for people to argument that GTA 5 is better just 'cause of "some graphics".

There's this one also:



And you're correct again mate: The most disappointing thing about Cyberprank goes WELL BEYOND the performance and bugs. The CORE mechanics of the game are totally flawed: shooting (and covering) = atrocious; driving (and all the physics associated with it) = pathetic; stealth = boring and over-powered. Hell, even the hacking mini-game is beyond ridiculous.
Click to expand...

You are completely right that its the core Mechanics. That's why I don't even know if it's fixable by updates. Heck you can even look at gta3 vs cyberpunk and gta3 ai is still way above even for a 18 year older game. Im actually surprised at the ai videos comparing these games,
If this game had been released by any other company other than cdpr it would have been waaay worse score wise (imagine a ubisoft cyberpunk 2077). It's just riding off the witcher 3 name and the perception that cdpr is the holy grail of devs.

However if you start typing cyberpunk in youtube the first matches will be "ray tracing". Yes it looks great but plays terrible.


Spot on @rojofa
 
Last edited:
crustcyb said:
I'm familiar with that video you linked (comparing IV to V) :)). I wholeheartedly agree there's a lot of stuff (mostly physics / ragdoll related) that GTA 4 does way better than 5. But hey, the same "nicer-looking-graphics" argument you used in the end of your post is enough for people to argument that GTA 5 is better just 'cause of "some graphics".

There's this one also:



And you're correct again mate: The most disappointing thing about Cyberprank goes WELL BEYOND the performance and bugs. The CORE mechanics of the game are totally flawed: shooting (and covering) = atrocious; driving (and all the physics associated with it) = pathetic; stealth = boring and over-powered. Hell, even the hacking mini-game is beyond ridiculous.
Click to expand...
To be fair to GTA 5, it did add a lot more content/vehicles and is set in such a large/varied map that it still stands up as a great game in it's own right imo, even with the regression of many details compared to 4. Although I'd put 4 above it, I can see why as an overall package 5 was more highly rated and popular. How they even got GTA 5 to run playably on 360/PS3 is witchcraft to me (probably why many things got downgraded, to run on that gen), especially as it still had a decent amount of traffic/pedestrians around. Not as many as ideal but not a complete ghost town like Cyberpunk seems.

Bad R* physics are still great physics in comparison to the vast majority of other games though. They are one of the only studios to really use physics as part of the experience in pretty much all of their games - look how people react when shot in RDR2 or Max Payne 3, how the animations adapt to it, they don't just act completely normal until their HP reaches 0 and then they become a limp dead weight. People even complain about RDR2 being unresponsive/clunky because the game actually respects momentum and has animations that can't just transition in a millisecond.

This may be controversial, but do CDPR have any history of games that have good gameplay/physics/AI? It looks like The Witcher series is the only other thing developed by them, and I think it has fucking atrocious gameplay with barely any physics and the AI is bog-standard at best. It's an eye candy fest where the writing/characters/setting do the work, with just about serviceable gameplay driven by canned animations. I doubt many people rate TW1-3's gameplay mechanics among the best in any department.

I can't deny that I'm extremely impressed by some of the visuals in Cyberpunk, especially how densely detailed some of the environments are, but this is meant to be a game, not an art project of 3D renders. A map like they made could have incredible potential for a game like this, if paired with actually good gameplay/physics/AI. Imagine this with Mirrors Edge style movement, GTA IV physics and any kind of AI etc...
 
Last edited:
rojofa said:
To be fair to GTA 5, it did add a lot more content/vehicles and is set in such a large/varied map that it still stands up as a great game in it's own right imo, even with the regression of many details compared to 4. Although I'd put 4 above it, I can see why as an overall package 5 was more highly rated and popular. How they even got GTA 5 to run playably on 360/PS3 is witchcraft to me (probably why many things got downgraded, to run on that gen), especially as it still had a decent amount of traffic/pedestrians around. Not as many as ideal but not a complete ghost town like Cyberpunk seems.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well... if only CDPR had took the same path as GTA V, in the aspect of making it first playable on the consoles (and PC's) owned by the vast majority of the world's population (which is absolutely NOT ps5's and 3000 series cards), and THEN worry about new-gen, maybe all this clusterfuck might've been avoided somehow... Both GTA 4 and 5 are masterpiece games on their own. But again, as I believe you think the same: Rockstar is a mogul company. CDPR is a small studio when compared. It's not even fair... I was wondering if all this debacle might end up putting CDPR out of business, and a bigger company might come and buy them out. I sincerely hope this doesn't happen, since there's no way of not loving CDPR's no-DRM policy and all the great stuff they put out on gog.com

rojofa said:
Bad R* physics are still great physics in comparison to the vast majority of other games though. They are one of the only studios to really use physics as part of the experience in pretty much all of their games - look how people react when shot in RDR2 or Max Payne 3, how the animations adapt to it, they don't just act completely normal until their HP reaches 0 and then they become a limp dead weight. People even complain about RDR2 being unresponsive/clunky because the game actually respects momentum and has animations that can't just transition in a millisecond.
Click to expand...
As in both companies, I also believe it's impossible to compare Rockstar's RAGE engine, with this REDEngine used in Cyberpunk. Some people will always complain. In regards of the games you mentioned, I believe there were very few people complaining about the physics. As opposed to Cyberprank, which has a much bigger "posse" of unsatisfied people with LOTS of elements in the game. Unfortunately, I'm amongst those people.

rojofa said:
This may be controversial, but do CDPR have any history of games that have good gameplay/physics/AI? It looks like The Witcher series is the only other thing developed by them, and I think it has fucking atrocious gameplay with barely any physics and the AI is bog-standard at best. It's an eye candy fest where the writing/characters/setting do the work, with just about serviceable gameplay driven by canned animations. I doubt many people rate TW1-3's gameplay mechanics among the best in any department.
Click to expand...
Don't think it's controversial. You pretty much nailed it. Witcher 3 is a memorable game because of the great story, memorable characters and also memorable quests. Even some secondary quests are amazing. There was one particular quest in Blood & Wine that I believe I posted in gabe's W3 thread which is just mind boggling (the quest with the wight and the spoons, for example). Lots of them are unforgettable. The combat is mediocre, but serviceable. The inventory/U.I. is a total mess (and you thought CDPR could've learned from that, but they did Cyberpunk inventory and U.I. even worse, if such thing would be possible). Physics are messed up, but at least the water moves when you cast wind (ward was the name?) into it... Have you checked the water in Cyberpunk? Oh, the humanity...
Witcher 1 and 2 are sub-par games when compared to W3, but then again, W3 is held in high regard by those 3 elements: story, characters and quests. Of those 3, Cyberpunk might only have a good (and only main, not side) story. Something absurd for such a hyped game. I couldn't stop playing Witcher 3. It just sucks you in... I don't feel any desire of playing Cyberpunk, apart from sheer curiosity, really.

rojofa said:
I can't deny that I'm extremely impressed by some of the visuals in Cyberpunk, especially how densely detailed some of the environments are, but this is meant to be a game, not an art project of 3D renders. A map like they made could have incredible potential for a game like this, if paired with actually good gameplay/physics/AI. Imagine this with Mirrors Edge style movement, GTA IV physics and any kind of AI etc...
Click to expand...
Yes, it would probably turn out much better. Especially if you could opt (like GTA V) between 1st person and 3rd person camera, without a hint of hampering the gameplay. Although, as you said it about Max Payne 3 and GTA, there would probably be a few RPG enthusiasts that would complain about it, somehow... who knows? We'll never know it for sure... I believe I'll always see Cyberpunk as a missed opportunity for making a truly memorable game. And now, it will probably be remembered in years to come for all this debacle. Which is truly sad...
 
Last edited:
I only watched part of the video and the bugs are an absolute embarrassment.
The game is completely scripted and very badly, they clearly couldn't do anything they promised.,
 
Seems to me that there was a game they wanted to make and one they ended up making. Whether that was because of design decisions after realising it was never going to be done in time or whether they had to start cutting it back because of getting it to work on last gen who knows?

Hopefully they can patch it into something a lot better then because it will be a shame to destroy the reputation they had built up through Witcher for being a good games company who cared about what they put out including after release.
 
rojofa said:

Who wanted this to be third-person? :D
Click to expand...
C'mon... not fair :LOL: Game was "designed" with only 1st person in mind. To me it only proves they could have easily added 3rd person mode.

But then again, if all that stuff (twitter post --> also posted on reddit --> reposted from gamefaqs) that @Chris Davies posted is legit, there's NO WAY a game that was originally supposed to be 160 GB's in size reduced to barely 60 GB's is going to be any good. EVER.
 
I decided a week ago to halt my playthrough until the first big patch drops but I started playing again today. This game is so addictive despite the obvious problems I can't put it down.
 
Cyberpunk 2077 — Our Commitment to Quality
Dear gamers,
We are committed to fixing bugs and crashes and will continue to work and improve the game via future updates to make sure you are enjoying the game regardless of the platform.

We will use this space to inform you about the progress being made on Cyberpunk 2077’s further development, including information about updates and improvements, free DLCs, and more.

Below, you’ll find CD PROJEKT’s co-founder’s personal explanation of what the days leading up to the launch of Cyberpunk 2077 looked like, sharing the studio’s perspective on what happened with the game on old-generation consoles.

Thank you
CD PROJEKT RED
Click to expand...
72844286b7f6556a3374df207f5d606ebed63a87.jpg

https://en.cdprojektred.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-our-commitment-to-quality/
 
It's perfectly playable on pc. It's just not the grandiose game I thought it would be. Miles wide and an inch deep in terms of playability. I rate the Witcher 3 much, much higher. But it's a perfectly fun shooter, cyberpunk, with a few interesting concepts and a shit load of bugs and jankiness.
 
koningfrikandel said:
It's perfectly playable on pc. It's just not the grandiose game I thought it would be. Miles wide and an inch deep in terms of playability. I rate the Witcher 3 much, much higher. But it's a perfectly fun shooter, cyberpunk, with a few interesting concepts and a shit load of bugs and jankiness.
Click to expand...

I would really love to buy and play it to be honest i have checked out one of the "intros" and it loosk pretty immersive but if its still full of bugs and stupid ai i dont want to pay the current full price for it. Even if its already half of the retail price. As you said i would have rather paid for the Witcher 3 full price and i got that on a discount as well.
 
gabe.paul.logan said:
I would really love to buy and play it to be honest i have checked out one of the "intros" and it loosk pretty immersive but if its still full of bugs and stupid ai i dont want to pay the current full price for it. Even if its already half of the retail price. As you said i would have rather paid for the Witcher 3 full price and i got that on a discount as well.
Click to expand...
I'd view as a nice shooter with some RPG elements and a great vibe if you're into cyberpunk. It's a pretty shallow game and the gunplay is passable but not spectacular. You can tell there were plenty of ideas but just rushed or not implemented well. I'd honestly rate fallout 4's gunplay above this. Overall a 7.5 out of 10 I'd say. The game definitely did not meet my expectations but to be fair those were sky high due to the hype train. Witcher 3 I wasn't expecting anything and it totally took me off guard. I could play that game indefinitely, over and over. I'm guessing once the modding community get their hands on it, it'll get better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom