Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KingseekerCasual t1_jebtmq9 wrote

It’s still pretty mid tier as an open world game. It’s a competent and stylistic shooter, nothing else

103

GBi10ba t1_jebx1te wrote

My first thoughts were: “Wow, this city is big and looks amazing”.

My thoughts after a couple of hours: “So I can’t go in to this building either. Oh shit! Another cut scene!”

62

Lymbasy t1_jedf88l wrote

Cyberpunk was made by inexperienced amateurs. You can't go in all buildings Like any other Game. For example GTA5, Watch Dogs, etc

−26

hollow_child t1_jedi5hu wrote

It seems you joke went over some peoples heads.

0

BornSirius t1_jedykf4 wrote

Check that users comment history. It's not that the joke went over my head, I just don't like the Gschmäckle that accompanies it.

7

DE-EZ_NUTS t1_jeeqayv wrote

Is that German

2

sumpfkraut666 t1_jefjybo wrote

Yes, it means that something has a bad aftertaste. Here, a joke about cyberpunk reeks of GCJ (a toxic anti-nerd subreddit that hides behind a pro-lgbtq mask).

1

Shutter_Ray t1_jedvv1o wrote

I wish this guy was joking. Just look at his comment history.

4

Velvache t1_jed7knm wrote

The strongest part of the game is the story tbh albeit short if you're speed running the main story. The side quests add so much to the game.

21

InternalMean t1_jeecm0l wrote

Do they? I felt like I was basically repeating the same formula 90% of the time and was hoping for a more branched narrative like in the Witcher games tbh.

−6

Ashi4Days t1_jeeo5he wrote

There are a few main side quests that are pretty cool.

The Perelez side quest comes to mind. There's also one where you rescue a fixers kid so they can go to dinner or something which is somewhat amusing.

1

Velvache t1_jeesc1o wrote

The main side quests with named characters all have a lot of depth with full of character building and back story. All of them have sort of a progression. Rivers story comes to mind. I guess they repeat the say formula as much as a story as a beginning middle and an end lol.

1

InternalMean t1_jeeu8mr wrote

I was talking more the contract side quests, a lot of them felt very samey with no real pay off in world. Compare that to the Witcher where you'd have a contract to kill a warewolf and you get a plot with a decision that impacts the world in some way.

1

Velvache t1_jeeunmn wrote

There are some quests like that too like the one about the prisoner shooting a BD. Or going to save a monk.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Withcher, but that game also had a lot of irrelevant side quests where you just hold down witcher senses and do the same thing.

2

pdpi t1_jecpnl5 wrote

It’s a competent, stylish shooter, sure. But it’s also a game with quests like Sinnerman, Coin Operated Boy, Don’t Lose Your Mind. There are some games covering those topics, but not many.

18

ezone2kil t1_jed9sgg wrote

Lol peeps downvoting because they hate good writing?

9

ShadyMondegreen t1_jedy7e1 wrote

It’s plenty more than that and tons of people have enjoyed it immensely. Get over yourself

0

KingseekerCasual t1_jeetyta wrote

They sure have but to pretend it’s anything else but a shooter is bad faith

1

Autumn1881 t1_jee3s2f wrote

Considering „open world“ as a concept has always been boring to me and „stylistic shooter“ sounds great I parse this comment as a glaring review.

0

cubobob t1_jee78n0 wrote

Yeah honestly its annoying that ever my game is doing open world. I dont want to spend 100 extra hours in every game to collect stuff thrown all over the huge fucking map which has absolutely no use in the game aside from prolonging playtime.

2

PunishedKeano t1_jeeaqce wrote

Then don't?

2

Autumn1881 t1_jeeqyk0 wrote

I mean, yeah, I don’t play games I don’t want to. I can still say I don’t like the repetitive nature open world games have to fall back on. I don’t even dislike the idea of an open world, it’s just that filling a 8x8 grid with content is 8 times more work than filling a 1x8 corridor with content. And as we are unwilling to spend 300$ on games the content on the grid is usually less developed than content on the corridor.

3

PunishedKeano t1_jeevx23 wrote

Not arguing in favor of paint by numbers open world games, I just found the statement "I don't want to spend 100 extra hours in every game" hilarious, as if they're being forced at gunpoint to collect every widget on the map.

2

cubobob t1_jeed0nz wrote

But im a completionist and trophy hunter and since the last decade or so games are getting longer and longer. Just because its open world doesnt mean that the world is good, its mostly empty aside from 1 npc for stupid fetch quests. There are not many open world games which use open world in a good way.

−1

cahir11 t1_jefjoyh wrote

If you're a completionist, then playing any open-world RPG is just torturing yourself unless it's like a "best game of the decade" type of thing (Skyrim, Witcher 3, etc.).

2

JohnTheUnjust t1_jeer3hu wrote

Most people I've seen that rag on open world games are almost always of the opinion that they all suck u less there is an activity such as a dungeon every 20 ft.

1

KingseekerCasual t1_jeep5sp wrote

Cyberpunk is set in an open world though. You’re playing an open world game with that as a concept

2

ReignOnWillie t1_jedb1b4 wrote

I’m 100% convinced that subreddit is just bots and shills. How are that many people posting screenshots and comments about such a boring game from years ago.

−14

ShadyMondegreen t1_jedyx06 wrote

Maybe three years of whiny reddit Gamers jerking off onto each other is enough and people just want to have fun.

4

dx2words t1_jec9r94 wrote

I agree. I played the game a few months after it came out and had minimal bugs and the game was mid. You cant even change your character hairstyle FFS

−25

thescriptdoctor037 t1_jecn9jd wrote

You played it like a month and a half after it came out.

You been able to change your hairstyle for almost a full year now?

15

dx2words t1_jecyzqi wrote

that was just an example. Im not going to say the game is awesome now because you can change your hair.

−18

ezone2kil t1_jed9uhv wrote

And yet you had no problems saying a game sucks because you can't.

11

Several_Ebb_9269 t1_jedenvx wrote

Oh! So when it changes for the better that's an admissible point, but because you played it that long ago and it was less content rich, that's the merit to base it off in the current stage of the games life.

Makes total sense /s

5

Flakesy t1_jedmvaa wrote

Thats totally fair to judge a game after it's release. They released it like that after all. Are we already excusing releasing alpha status games again? Pathetic.

−2