100% this is my point. There are always going to be sacrifices in open world games it just depends on what sacrifices are worth it for you. Some prefer gameplay specific games like just cause, some prefer sandbox style like gta, some prefer narrative etc.
Gaming Cyberpunk 2077 (PC, PS4/5, Xbox One)
- Thread starter DWelbz19
- Start date
100% this is my point. There are always going to be sacrifices in open world games it just depends on what sacrifices are worth it for you. Some prefer gameplay specific games like just cause, some prefer sandbox style like gta, some prefer narrative etc.
This so much, if there was a mod for better weapon durability, I would enjoy BotW immensely more!
I think we are looking at gameplay as different things, I mean more how the character moves and controls and fights, not the story or the hook which are things I also think BotW lacks. Along with that stupid weapons breaking.
Serious pet-peeve of mine in games.
Oh, you've fired a gun 40 times? That'll need repairing. Piss off.
Cooking and the weapons being made of paper are very much gameplay mechanics though.
You can do some inventive and creative things in combat in BotW but the basic mechanics of how the character moves and controls I didn't think it was anything special.
There's also a difference in giving a game you want to love in a genre you love a free pass because it's "open world" (which I'd argue Cyberpunk falls into numerous categories so even strictly speaking, that's wrong) and actually looking at why others disagree. Again, you've completely missed the point I'm making because you have overlooked so many parts of my posts, including a direct answer to the question you asked (then inexplicably asked again whilst quoting my very post!!!)
Also this:
dude...seriously...isn't that what I already said to you near the start? That people get different things out of games and I'm coming at this from the gameplay angle?
And for the last time, the developers themselves clearly disagree with you, they haven't made the same excuses you seem to keep making for them, so how come you know more than them!
Mate I'm not arguing with you, I'm coming from a different angle which I clearly said and I think you've just defaulted to the opposite stance instead of actually debating. If you really want a specific list of what gameplay elements in what open world games I like, then I can provide you a long one. It doesn't change the actual point that, and I have to shout this, CDPR THEMSELVES SAY THE GAMEPLAY ELEMENTS IN CYBERPUNK ARE NOT WHAT THEY feckING WANTED! They removed elements completely, toned down others, they even call one a "bug"
For christ sake, at least understand the difference before you reply with the same thing over and over mate!Let's change tact here, since I've been giving detailed answers and you haven't: You say the A.I is better than in Valhalla, I've just been watching my Mrs play that to see what you might mean...so can you explain exactly what you mean there?
Indeed. Once again people weigh in and lump everything in to one general term, it's annoying and basic as feck
Yeah, I can't think of a game which was actually enhanced by a durability mechanic. I can sort of understand it in MMOs as a timesink/money sink but in single player games it's just so unnecessary. Yeah, yeah, weapons break in real life, too. I also take shits in real life but I'd prefer not to have that as gameplay mechanic.
I don't think he said those mechanics weren't though?
Anyway I found the cooking aspect to be excellent fun, it certainly wasn't broken, it worked as planned and if even if you aren't into that, the mechanic itself can't be described as mediocre given the shear volume of things to create and find for yourself.
There's a difference between not liking a mechanic and finding a mechanic you DO like not up to scratch in a particular game. Have I explained that right?
Sure, I'm just not sure there's necessarily an objective measurement/criteria. I mean, yeah, it's clearly not broken in that it works as intended. I think the intended way is still shite though. Is that better than something not working as intended, thus rendering the mechanic less than fun? I dunno, maybe. If it's working as intended, there's probably a better chance that someone will be into that particular thing, I suppose.
Have you played Death Stranding? Your shit and piss is converted into grenades in it.
I don't know what goes through Hideo Kojima's head.
First thing I did in Zelda was grind some shrines and get the master sword so I didn’t have to deal with it anymore
But it's not even a comparison, you like a mechanic or you don't. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
What we were talking about here are specific gameplay mechanics and if a game does them well or not. Take fps style shooting for example: It's a mechanic I love in games and I don't even think it's that bad in Cyberpunk. Do I expect it to be the level of Tarkov? Of course not, but do I expect it to work and be functional and at least fun? Of course. Now as I said above in a detailed explanation (which was ignored), there's a reason it's not that great in CB, one they will hopefully fix. Same with the driving, same with the police, same with every single aspect.
Am I explaining it right? It's not about other games, or elements you just don't like, it's about a specific game and problems with the elements in it that you SHOULD like. I simply don't understand how someone can claim the AI is good enough, for example, because it's apparently better than some other game (classic whataboutism) ignoring that it's so broken the developer called it a bug! I love getting chased by the police in games, from Need for Speed to Driver to GTA, all with varying results...the mechanic in Cyberpunk? Do I need to even say another word?
That's the discussion. They aimed for all sorts of mechanics in this game, and failed to achieve any kind of greatness with any. They know that, we know that, and the point I was merely making was that it's fine to expect better when they clearly wanted to make it better and are still trying.
The genre someone wants to pigeon hole it into IS NOT a valid excuse for everything being mediocre at best. Forza Horizon nails the driving, Botw nails the actual combat and possibilites, hell I even like the actual fighting in the Witcher 3 (it's the sum of the parts around it I have a problem with), they all have strengths and weaknesses. Cyberpunk clearly has strengths, but it's weakness are in ALL the actual gameplay elements, even the parkour (which I used endlessly) is stripped and needs refining.
And as I've said all along, there's nothing wrong with hoping they fix it and maybe even living up to THEIR vision, not my own. I fail to see why that's such a controversial statement to make
Well, what I was talking about was Breath of the Wild, responding to Snowjoe. Your debate is none of my business
I did not, for a moment, deny that the AI is less than great in Cyberpunk and that the police is straight-up broken (at this point they should just remove it as a short-term fix, honestly). Whether a mechanic works WELL in a game is an interesting question though. There are obvious cases where it's broken, like the police in Cyberpunk. But let's stick with cooking in BotW. You enjoyed it, I hated it. What's the criteria to determine that it works well? Is it that it works as the developers intended? That you can do lots of stuff with it that fits into the rest of the gameplay?
I'm definitely not the right person to srt objective criteria to determine whether a game does crafting well, of course, as I almost always loathe it. The only game I recall enjoying crafting in was Kingdoms of Amalur and that was so long ago that I couldn't tell you why (shame the rest of the game was so average). But I'm curious what others think.
Well, what I was talking about was Breath of the Wild, responding to Snowjoe. Your debate is none of my business
This is a forum dude, I was bringing you in and explaining why we were talking about gameplay aspects and would help to explain what Snowjoe meant. It's relevant
It is interesting, and as I said it certainly partially depends on what your preference is. But also if a game does, let's say magic and it's clearly more basic and feature lacking than a game 10 years ago, shouldn't people at least rightfully be allowed to question why? And the same goes to a game that clearly has fps/driving/fighting elements, sure it can be given leeway for trying all things at once, but why should it be allowed to be terrible in every aspect?
I don't expect every game that has driving to be Gran Turismo, ever shooting game to be Halo or every fighting game to be Streetfighter. But I do expect them to be at least competent at those things otherwise I don't have fun. Which has been my point consistently, I'm a gameplay man so that would matter to me just as I completely understand when someone doesn't like Zelda for the lack of story structure for example. The difference is, I don't then start making excuses for it.
As for the cooking in BotW it's deep and works as intended, if you like it you can love it. I often dislike the crafting aspect in games, but I found at least in this it made sense to the situations you face or for just making money. At least you can experiment if you so wish. On the flip side in something like Witcher 3 it's largely irrelevant as you never need to think or experiment with creations, you can't get do that if you tried. That's the sort of difference I see.
I often hate crafting, though I didn't mind the enchanting in Skyrim. The last game I actually bothered to do it properly was Morrowind I think. But different games pull it off in different ways, but there's simply no point in just adding it in as a side show with no depth, that's what gets me with stuff like Cyberpunk. None of the food matters, none of the scrap matters, building weapons is a click with no thought. For me that's tedium, and half arsed design in the guise of depth at it's finest.
Open world games need to evolve, too many of them end up being formulaic icon chasing.
Most open world games bore me after the intial burst of exploration, Witcher 3 was different, there was something about that world that was so engaging, the simple act of traveling through the world was satisfying, the music, the rugged landscape, the weather cycles, it felt like a lived in world that was ambivalent to you. The core game-play, the combat, is mediocre to put it mildly but I have 140+ hours in that game and will happily replay it, it had so much character.
Starting Cyberpunk tonight, hope it has some of those qualities amid all the bugs.
Most open world games bore me after the intial burst of exploration, Witcher 3 was different, there was something about that world that was so engaging, the simple act of traveling through the world was satisfying, the music, the rugged landscape, the weather cycles, it felt like a lived in world that was ambivalent to you. The core game-play, the combat, is mediocre to put it mildly but I have 140+ hours in that game and will happily replay it, it had so much character.
Starting Cyberpunk tonight, hope it has some of those qualities amid all the bugs.
What on Earth was the point of that? Anyone? Boring, boring quest line!
I haven't played it because it looked like the main mechanic is... balancing boxes on my back. I'll try it once it's really cheap though. Loved the little Hideo Kojima Easter egg in Cyberpunk. So apt.
Heh
There's also a difference in giving a game you want to love in a genre you love a free pass because it's "open world" (which I'd argue Cyberpunk falls into numerous categories so even strictly speaking, that's wrong) and actually looking at why others disagree. Again, you've completely missed the point I'm making because you have overlooked so many parts of my posts, including a direct answer to the question you asked (then inexplicably asked again whilst quoting my very post!!!)
Also this:
dude...seriously...isn't that what I already said to you near the start? That people get different things out of games and I'm coming at this from the gameplay angle?
And for the last time, the developers themselves clearly disagree with you, they haven't made the same excuses you seem to keep making for them, so how come you know more than them!
Mate I'm not arguing with you, I'm coming from a different angle which I clearly said and I think you've just defaulted to the opposite stance instead of actually debating. If you really want a specific list of what gameplay elements in what open world games I like, then I can provide you a long one. It doesn't change the actual point that, and I have to shout this, CDPR THEMSELVES SAY THE GAMEPLAY ELEMENTS IN CYBERPUNK ARE NOT WHAT THEY feckING WANTED! They removed elements completely, toned down others, they even call one a "bug"
Let's change tact here, since I've been giving detailed answers and you haven't: You say the A.I is better than in Valhalla, I've just been watching my Mrs play that to see what you might mean...so can you explain exactly what you mean there?
Indeed. Once again people weigh in and lump everything in to one general term, it's annoying and basic as feck
Mate I know what you are arguing I'm telling you there is no open world game out there that doesn't have the same issues. Loads of half baked mechiacs that are never fully realised. It's just what happens since there's so much they try to cram in. CDPR are just normally a very honest developer they have always been like that and they know they will continue to work on the game for years so they can and will say there are things they aim to improve or change if possible. Whether as other developers know they will be moving on to the next project so there's no point ubisoft coming out and talking about changing the absolutely broken loot game of assassins creed vahalla for example.
I understand your point but it is a very clear symptom of open world games.
Probably the entire contents of a pharmacy every night. Babies in jars, peeing on ghosts, eating floating grubs, I'm Fragile but I'm not fragile...
That line was like nails on a chalkboard.
Again, a happy new year to you! Let's just hope if we get stuck indoors again, with have plenty of new games to play eh?
And they kept repeating it! I thought Lah-Lee-Loo-Lay-Loh couldn't be topped but Hideo must have found a way into the fabric softener and bleach cupboard again.
Oh there's alot of that type of dialogue in Kojima's work.
Has anyone got the plat yet? It's hard work.
Slightly off topic, Death Stranding was brilliant I thought because it kind of played with the traditional fetch quest of open worlds. The journey, rather than the destination/plot advancement, was the focus and there was something weirdly nice about planning a route and carefully ensuring cargo was in the best shape. It shouldn't work as a game but it did. CyberPunk has a lot of the same issues of the open world genre but it's original enough to not be brought down too much by them. That being said the trophy hunting side missions are becoming a pain just like most other games of this sort.
Slightly off topic, Death Stranding was brilliant I thought because it kind of played with the traditional fetch quest of open worlds. The journey, rather than the destination/plot advancement, was the focus and there was something weirdly nice about planning a route and carefully ensuring cargo was in the best shape. It shouldn't work as a game but it did. CyberPunk has a lot of the same issues of the open world genre but it's original enough to not be brought down too much by them. That being said the trophy hunting side missions are becoming a pain just like most other games of this sort.
Happy New Year, cnuts.
Edit: shit wrong thread. I've not even had a drink yet.
Edit: shit wrong thread. I've not even had a drink yet.
Game has so many faults, but I enjoy the storyline and the graft.
one issue I kind of have though, is the ability to do majority of side quests so early. I’ve not started Act 2 at all really, think it’s Ghost Town is my mission to start, yet I’m able to get to max street cred already, upgrade my cyberdeck and attachments to a fairly decent level early on in the storyline. And I still have plenty of side quests to do. Just banging out the “moderate” ones, but as I do that a good few “high” or “very high” reduce to moderate quick enough as I gain XP and level increases.
maybe it would have been nice to release them more slowly and steadily. I haven’t even bothered with the reported crimes/gang activity ones at all - so if I do those too I’d imagine I could be max level as well before Act 2 has even started. In the end you can make the storyline a piece of piss by the looks of it.
one issue I kind of have though, is the ability to do majority of side quests so early. I’ve not started Act 2 at all really, think it’s Ghost Town is my mission to start, yet I’m able to get to max street cred already, upgrade my cyberdeck and attachments to a fairly decent level early on in the storyline. And I still have plenty of side quests to do. Just banging out the “moderate” ones, but as I do that a good few “high” or “very high” reduce to moderate quick enough as I gain XP and level increases.
maybe it would have been nice to release them more slowly and steadily. I haven’t even bothered with the reported crimes/gang activity ones at all - so if I do those too I’d imagine I could be max level as well before Act 2 has even started. In the end you can make the storyline a piece of piss by the looks of it.
That’s a CDPR thing rather than this game. It was the same in the Witcher 3.
Its a pity missions dont scale tbh. I have about hundred gigs and other missions left but they're all low or very low difficulty.
never played Witcher 3. Shame though, I think they have done that wrong.
The qualifying races with Claire on a base console are really easy but I nearly failed two of them because the map didn’t load in time and I either went through a wall so slowed down or I hit an invisible wall.
Yeah, it's one of my biggest gripes with the Witcher and obviously now this, the balancing and levelling is all wrong. It is so bad in the Witcher that even the mods couldn't fix it properly. Worse still is their idea of ramping difficulty remains simply making enemies bullet sponges, and that's it. It's all just so basic on the design front.
It was the main thing I hoped they learned from in Cyberpunk. However some seem to find fun in being stupidly over-levelled and having no challenge, so each to their own on that front I guess!
that reminds me of The Division. Loved that game - then they tried to “balance” the game and just made NPCs take truckloads more bullets.
Game has finally broken me until it is next patched. I’m fed up of having to reload missions to try and perfect them because of poor loading speeds, glitches, frame rate drops, invisible enemies, characters looking like they were created by a designer using a potato. Feck it.
Anyone heard anything from sony about refund?
The Division was horrible for that. Headshots would mean feck all, just have to shoot until you’re empty. That was their way of making it difficult
I disagree, I think its a cardinal sin for RPGs to have enemies scale with you. It completely takes away the tension of stumbling across a high level area, or coming back to enemies that have kick your arse hours back only to satisfyingly hand their arses to them once you've levelled up. I hated it in Oblivion, it was ridiculous having critters spam fire attacks at you just because you were high level.
I agree with you, I prefer this kind of levelling system. You have to have tangible rewards for your efforts and that includes coming back to previous areas and trouncing everyone. The key thing is to make sure that in other parts of the game you still get a challenge and having got 80 hours deep into Cyberpunk I can say that there are challenges even at the end of the game.
But that's the problem, it's about how they level not that they do. It's great to have higher level areas, that's not what we are saying to take away! But the scaling should never be flat, it should never merely be them adjusting to your level and just becoming bullet sponges, that absolutely terrible and cheap design.
The Witcher 3 was notorious for a terrible levelling system (Oblivion was too but for two different reasons) especially the weapons found for example. You can still have the player feeling all powerful without the levelling leaving behind the joy of finding new weapons to use and a challenge, it's a case of balancing it. Cyberpunk would have been the ideal game to use a system where the level doesn't just scale, but the enemies adjust tactics to suit the player depending on the build, for example. But obviously thanks to the many huge flaws that won't be happening on any great scale.
Like I say, there's an in between to be found. Flat scaling is trash, but so is bullet sponging at high levels.