Cyberpunk 2077 has quickly become the PlayStation Store's best-selling game | Te...

That's because it's a great game you hating potato.

nnguy2 said

That's because it's a great game you hating potato.

Click to expand...

It's objectively not a great game if it literally had to be recalled from the store due to technical issues. "Great" games don't get sent back to the drawing board for 6 months to try and make them usable on the promised platforms.

Now that we established that we won't let people like you re-write history we can even say that again, objectively, the game still lacks like half the features they were talked about, heavily implied or outright promised and then cut from the game. Anyone actually playing the game can literally experience a great act one for ONE of the character types (Street kid) but any of the other 2 backgrounds or anything starting on act II has a verifiable lack of content. Again whenever or not you like Act II and beyond is not the question but the fact that it's just less detail about everything vs Act I Street kid is a fact, one not even you can get away from.

Dimitriid said

It's objectively not a great game if it literally had to be recalled from the store due to technical issues. "Great" games don't get sent back to the drawing board for 6 months to try and make them usable on the promised platforms.

Now that we established that we won't let people like you re-write history we can even say that again, objectively, the game still lacks like half the features they were talked about, heavily implied or outright promised and then cut from the game. Anyone actually playing the game can literally experience a great act one for ONE of the character types (Street kid) but any of the other 2 backgrounds or anything starting on act II has a verifiable lack of content. Again whenever or not you like Act II and beyond is not the question but the fact that it's just less detail about everything vs Act I Street kid is a fact, one not even you can get away from.

Click to expand...

Played twice on pc on release, corpo and street kid. Over 120 hrs. It's a great game.

Dimitriid said

It's objectively not a great game if it literally had to be recalled from the store due to technical issues. "Great" games don't get sent back to the drawing board for 6 months to try and make them usable on the promised platforms.

Now that we established that we won't let people like you re-write history we can even say that again, objectively, the game still lacks like half the features they were talked about, heavily implied or outright promised and then cut from the game. Anyone actually playing the game can literally experience a great act one for ONE of the character types (Street kid) but any of the other 2 backgrounds or anything starting on act II has a verifiable lack of content. Again whenever or not you like Act II and beyond is not the question but the fact that it's just less detail about everything vs Act I Street kid is a fact, one not even you can get away from.

Click to expand...

I have over 200 hours in 2077, its a great game. Technical issues do not stop it from being a good game especially after they've been fixed. Now that we're talking about this, I think I might give it another go

nnguy2 said

Played twice on pc on release, corpo and street kid. Over 120 hrs. It's a great game.

Click to expand...

You liked the game. You are perfectly capable and even entitled to liking any kind of game, even ones considered mediocre, ones produced by exploiting developers to the point of madness, one that as I pointed out can be demonstrated to be incredibly short of the expectations and promises CDPR themselves promised.

That still doesn't makes it a "great" game and no, it's not a matter of your opinion of it, it's has to do with the way it was excreted into existence to line up the pockets of a few rich bastards in Poland.

It's been almost a decades and people still don't understand you can be critical of a medium while still enjoying it, people still feel obligated to defend any legitimate criticism.

You are not what you like, you are not what you buy, you don't have to defend what you like from people that don't like it or criticize it.

Dimitriid said

You liked the game. You are perfectly capable and even entitled to liking any kind of game, even ones considered mediocre, ones produced by exploiting developers to the point of madness, one that as I pointed out can be demonstrated to be incredibly short of the expectations and promises CDPR themselves promised.

That still doesn't makes it a "great" game and no, it's not a matter of your opinion of it, it's has to do with the way it was excreted into existence to line up the pockets of a few rich bastards in Poland.

It's been almost a decades and people still don't understand you can be critical of a medium while still enjoying it, people still feel obligated to defend any legitimate criticism.

You are not what you like, you are not what you buy, you don't have to defend what you like from people that don't like it or criticize it.

Click to expand...

I agree. Just because you failed to connect with the game doesn't make it mediocre.

I come in peace: it's not a great game and not a mediocre game, but a good/decent game with lots of bugs and missing features.

How about that?

I played it on PC on a Ryzen 3600 and a GTX 1080 and while it was much better than on consoles, I stopped after 100 hours in and 3/4 completion. I did had my share of fun, otherwise I would have not spend 100 hours in it...

I did not finish it and I don't plan to do it anytime soon. Maybe after 1 more year, after enough patches and DLCs and everything gets better.

Will it ever reach it's full hype potential? I don't think so, but by the time is gets actually better I should also have a new GPU capable of RT too, so I don't mind not finishing it.

P.S. I find that most games these days are never they best versions when they launch (v.1.0), but months or mostly years later when they have dozens of patches and DLCs. That's the final game and for that I give my final verdict.

Dimitriid said

That still doesn't makes it a "great" game and no, it's not a matter of your opinion of it, it's has to do with the way it was excreted into existence to line up the pockets of a few rich bastards in Poland.

Click to expand...

According to you, apparently it's not a great game because you didn't like that it had technical issues on certain platforms at first. Apparently it's not a great game because certain features were "talked about, heavily implied or outright promised and then cut from the game". Apparently it's not a great game because you don't like that "it was excreted into existence to line up the pockets of a few rich bastards in Poland".

Here's the definition of a great game according to IGN, which is far more reputable at reviewing games than Dimitriid: Game Review Scoring.

These games leave us with something outstanding to remember them by, usually novel gameplay ideas for single-player or multiplayer, clever characters and writing, noteworthy graphics and sound, or some combination thereof. If we have major complaints, there are more than enough excellent qualities to cancel them out.

Click to expand...

Fyi IGN rated Cyberpunk 2077 as better than a great game; instead it is an amazing game at 9/10.

Let's revisit your insistence on whether or not Cyberpunk is a great game:

Dimitriid said

That still doesn't makes it a "great" game and no, it's not a matter of your opinion of it.

Click to expand...

Now let's look at what IGN says about whether or not something is a great game:

The fact is, while many have tried, you cannot objectively measure how good or fun a game or movie or TV show or comic book is in the same way you can quantify things like temperature or mass or speed. All of these mediums are art forms, and the goal of art is to inspire an emotional reaction in its audience. Therefore, what we’re doing in reviews is talking about how a given work affects us emotionally when we watch or read or play it – and the review is the inherently subjective perspective of an individual critic.

Click to expand...

Can you really claim that IGN is wrong and that yes you can objectively claim Cyberpunk 2077 is not a great game? Fyi, I've never played a single Projekt Red game so don't try that "you don't have to defend what you like from people that don't like it or criticize it" crap on me.

Nothing is remotely interesting for me in this game. And then the performance, it doesn't look at all impressive while running very poorly, with unimpressive AI.

nnguy2 said

I come in peace: it's not a great game and not a mediocre game, but a good/decent game with lots of bugs and missing features.

Click to expand...

I'm ok with the qualifier and I don't disagree: I also felt it had a lot of potential in there, I can definitively see some of what we saw on Witcher 3.

In fact I would even say that Witcher 3 might have set the bar too high for CDPR overall: if the simplest explanation is almost always correct then the simplest explanation is that Witcher 3 was the exception and not the rule: the one game that they were able to push to what they set out to do without outside interference and CDPR could be considered a victim of Witcher 3's success: There's so many people with money wanting more of that and at the same time pushing unrealistic expectations that can't be repeated when they also have pressure from aggressive timelines, multiple console version and other decisions made by excutives that never wrote a single line of code or drew a single line of art in their lives that it probably won't ever get to that place again.

And now some of us that would be ok with a much worst looking game in terms of graphical fidelity but one that spend as much time developing characters and stories well, that's probably not going to be CDPR since they're being groomed into AAA mode as these sales numbers confirm.

And yes it happened to others too like Bethesda.

I've been enjoying the game so far. I initially was skeptical about the game with all the hype over how broken it is. I caved in just wanting to play the game and see it for myself. I've been playing on my Series X and have had very few problems playing the game so far. Yes there are a few bugs, nothing that was game breaking by any means. I've been waiting for the Series X upgrade patch to play through again.

Compared to openworld games with similar scope, I'd say it's a good game, but not great. Playing it there's a definite sense the developers had constructed the *scaffold* of a living, breathing world but had yet to fill it with anywhere near enough content to pull it off.

Other action RPGs such as Fallout (esp Vegas) straight up action games such as GTAV and straight-up RPGs such as Skyrim simply had more stuff *to do*, to see and to read. More characters, more dialogue, more lore, more missions and more general engagement with the world than Cyberpunk.

It's by no means a bad game, but could've been so much more.