Cyberpunk 2077 [split from video games]

[Slurktan]

11 hours ago, Kalbear Total Landscaping said:

I emphatically love this game - which likely means I would have loved rdr2 and gta5 - and this game also makes me desperately long for shadowrun set in Seattle with this level of detail and rpg mechanics. 

Out of curiosity... why didn't you play those two?

[Werthead]

I'd say that Red Dead Redemption 2's story, characters, map, soundtrack and emotional response are all easily on a par with CP77, although its combat is distinctly less impressive and it has that Rockstar thing about offering this amazing open world and then going absolutely apeshit if you try to finish missions other than in the very narrow way the game deems acceptable (i.e. the game tells you, "do this mission in stealth" or "do this mission as an all-out gunfight" and will sometimes auto-fail missions if you try another attempt, even if it's perfectly reasonable). It's well worth playing if you enjoyed CP77, although on PC it's possibly even jankier than CP77. It's also a fair bit shorter (I completed it at around 60 hours, or a good 40 hours shorter than CP77).

GTA5 is a knockabout lark with an interesting but not particularly deep story or characters, and some funny missions. It does have some great gameplay moments, but it's not remotely on CP77's level for story. It does have much, much better vehicle handling through, far superior traffic AI and a real attention to detail that doesn't really exist in CP77's worldbuilding. GTA5 also has some very unfortunate attempts at humour which don't really land, including a string of transphobic jokes that are much worse than CP77's perceived issues (which were more in the marketing than the game itself, apart from those awkward adverts). It's also really short by CP77 standards, at around 35-40 hours if you're not interested in the online stuff (although the online stuff has recently added solo activities you can do by yourself, which may be interesting).

Both Rockstar games have pretty crap UI though, to the point of them sometimes actively working against what you're trying to do as a player. RDR2 had a thing where another character forced me to use an awful sniper rifle in a cut scene and somehow that rifle replaced my own, far superior sniper rifle which just vanished into the ether, never to be seen again. Both games's controls are pretty much optimised for controllers (though even there, there are problems) and make few concessions to PC controllers. In particular, both games' challenge seems to be designed around combat using controllers; with a mouse and keyboard combat becomes trivially easy even on the hardest difficulty.

[Ran]

After taking some time off because I didn't feel like playing (had to put our older Boxer, Breeze, down very unexpectedly  on New Year's Day due to a brain tumor we had had no inkling of), I decided to distract myself by resuming towards the secret ending, as well as a handful of hidden missions that I learned about (The Highwayman, Coin Operated Boy, The Prophet's Song) after I had finished with my "canonical" ending earlier.

Spoiler

Got the secret ending and after I remembered I was a netrunner extraordinaire I managed to blow through it pretty well, though my trusty silenced pistol gave way to an Ajax assault rifle with the Countermass mod to remove vertical recoil when aiming. Lots of Contagion (which isn't enough to kill anything but they get stunned from it), some system resets and short circuits later, Adam Smasher was nuked by Short Circuit, Weapon Glitch, and Cyberware Malfunction, and I sliced him to ribbons with a legendary katana I had picked up somewhere. Really satisfying to tell him that Johnny sends his regards.

Now decided to start over, Nomad rather than Corpo this time, and a female V just to get whatever differences it makes in line delivery, etc. Will probably try to be a bit more focused, not run through all the gigs and side content, although I did completely miss

Spoiler

the Sinnerman quest chain

last time so I think I'll try and do that one now.

I do wish you could have a dog in CP2077 (I learned that there's a 1000 eddie a month Canine Ownership Tax in Night City when watching one of the Gillean Jacobs news broadcasts!)...

... but apparently you can get a cat, so I'm definitely going for that.

[Luzifer's right hand]

 

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

I'd say that Red Dead Redemption 2's story, characters, map, soundtrack and emotional response are all easily on a par with CP77, although its combat is distinctly less impressive and it has that Rockstar thing about offering this amazing open world and then going absolutely apeshit if you try to finish missions other than in the very narrow way the game deems acceptable (i.e. the game tells you, "do this mission in stealth" or "do this mission as an all-out gunfight" and will sometimes auto-fail missions if you try another attempt, even if it's perfectly reasonable). It's well worth playing if you enjoyed CP77, although on PC it's possibly even jankier than CP77. It's also a fair bit shorter (I completed it at around 60 hours, or a good 40 hours shorter than CP77).

GTA5 is a knockabout lark with an interesting but not particularly deep story or characters, and some funny missions. It does have some great gameplay moments, but it's not remotely on CP77's level for story. It does have much, much better vehicle handling through, far superior traffic AI and a real attention to detail that doesn't really exist in CP77's worldbuilding. GTA5 also has some very unfortunate attempts at humour which don't really land, including a string of transphobic jokes that are much worse than CP77's perceived issues (which were more in the marketing than the game itself, apart from those awkward adverts). It's also really short by CP77 standards, at around 35-40 hours if you're not interested in the online stuff (although the online stuff has recently added solo activities you can do by yourself, which may be interesting).

Both Rockstar games have pretty crap UI though, to the point of them sometimes actively working against what you're trying to do as a player. RDR2 had a thing where another character forced me to use an awful sniper rifle in a cut scene and somehow that rifle replaced my own, far superior sniper rifle which just vanished into the ether, never to be seen again. Both games's controls are pretty much optimised for controllers (though even there, there are problems) and make few concessions to PC controllers. In particular, both games' challenge seems to be designed around combat using controllers; with a mouse and keyboard combat becomes trivially easy even on the hardest difficulty.

I gave up on both games because of the console port controls myself. It is a shame especially for RDR2 because the world and how NPCs and animals act is just awesome. The autofail stuff if you try a different approach is also really annoying. 

[Werthead]

5 minutes ago, Luzifer's right hand said:

I gave up on both games because of the console port controls myself. It is a shame especially for RDR2 because the world and how NPCs and animals act is just awesome. The autofail stuff if you try a different approach is also really annoying. 

RDR2 did make me headdesk a lot because of the way it divides stuff between your character and your horse. More than once I ran into battle only to find I basically had a water pistol because my character had left his shotgun and rifle back on the horse and now I couldn't go back and get it because the cut scene had moved me two miles away.

There's the pursuit of realism and there's utter pedantry to the point of spoiling enjoyment of the game, and that issue went over the line, I think. CP77's simple weight limit is less realistic (V walking around with 25 shotguns hanging off their shoulder) but so much easier to deal with.

[Mexal]

This Access Point bug where I'm unable to get any Legendary Quichacks (or any at all) is pissing me off. So much time wasted. 

*Edit - I'm also stupid in thinking I needed to get Quickhacking to 20, rather than Intelligence to open Bartmoss Legacy perk. So uh, yea.

[Martell Spy]

24 minutes ago, Mexal said:

This Access Point bug where I'm unable to get any Legendary Quichacks (or any at all) is pissing me off. I didn't really want to have to grind my quickhack skill level to 20 to get Bartmoss' Legacy without any Legendary's. Beyond frustrated right now. Wasted so many hours trying to get some.

It's 20 Intelligence to get Bartmoss' legacy, not 20 hacking. Which is fortunate as hacking levels are much harder to get. It is kind of annoying, I want to craft Legendary Overheat and don't have it. I got very lucky though and one of the few Legendary hacks I did get was Ping and that was the one I really wanted. I think there is a perk to make it more likely you get hacks off Access points. I probably have that perk, but I've only got around 4 legendary hacks so far.

[Mexal]

17 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

It's 20 Intelligence to get Bartmoss' legacy, not 20 hacking. Which is fortunate as hacking levels are much harder to get. It is kind of annoying, I want to craft Legendary Overheat and don't have it. I got very lucky though and one of the few Legendary hacks I did get was Ping and that was the one I really wanted. I think there is a perk to make it more likely you get hacks off Access points. I probably have that perk, but I've only got around 4 legendary hacks so far.

I have the perk (Datamind Virtuouso) and have gotten zero Legendary hacks cause there is a bug in the Access Points. But yea, 20 in Intelligence makes more sense. Should have realized that cause I've been sitting on 18 for a bit. Getting last level now.

[Werthead]

The ending of the story was pretty excellent.

Spoiler

I picked the Nomad ending. Finishing the story by tearing out of Dodge with my BFF Panam and partner Judy felt pretty good and it seemed the best all-round ending...until Takemura calls you up to yell abuse at you before committing suicide. Oops. Also, you still have the fucking tank!? I was sure that was going down in a blaze of glory.

I'm pondering redoing the final missions to check the other ending options (at least the Arasaka ending, which seems quite fascinating) and to try to crank up my achivements (currently at 75%, which is the highest for a new game I've managed to do for a long, long time).

Was it just me, or was the Adam Smasher boss fight absolutely way too easy?

It was also a bit odd that we had no real 3rd person cut scenes until the very end of the game, when we suddenly got a proper 3rd-person shot of V. It did feel a bit odd that only Panam gets to share that moment with V, rather than Judy. I suspect some of the story makes a bit more sense if you play with a male V and choose Panam as your romantic partner, but Judy is a reasonable other choice; I don't see any logic at all in choosing Kerry or River, especially since you apparently automatically break up with them at the end of the game if you do choose them.

Something interesting is that so far 21% of Steam players have completed the game despite it being out less than a month, so the short length seems to have paid off: somehow only 26% of people have completed The Witcher 3 (well, on Steam, but the sample size is probably large enough for it to apply to all formats, give or take) despite it being out for almost 6 years, so I guess that issue with TW3 being "too long" does seem real.

Interesting odd bit of trivia: most people seem absolutely 100% convinced that Milt Nauman is played by Mike Pondsmith. It seems pretty likely, he sounds just like him, he's not in the game very long, and his appearance in both a 2013-set flashback (referencing the original P&P game's setting) and being a "father figure" to Johnny makes it seem pretty likely. Nauman also doesn't have a voice actor listed.

[Werthead]

Wow. Someone managed to get a 3rd person mod working. Kind of. It's very iffy and there's a lot of stuff in the base game code that wasn't designed to work like this (i.e. people just clip through you if you bump into them).

I note they don't show combat or anything else too hectic.

[sifth]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

The ending of the story was pretty excellent.

  Hide contents

I picked the Nomad ending. Finishing the story by tearing out of Dodge with my BFF Panam and partner Judy felt pretty good and it seemed the best all-round ending...until Takemura calls you up to yell abuse at you before committing suicide. Oops. Also, you still have the fucking tank!? I was sure that was going down in a blaze of glory.

I'm pondering redoing the final missions to check the other ending options (at least the Arasaka ending, which seems quite fascinating) and to try to crank up my achivements (currently at 75%, which is the highest for a new game I've managed to do for a long, long time).

Was it just me, or was the Adam Smasher boss fight absolutely way too easy?

It was also a bit odd that we had no real 3rd person cut scenes until the very end of the game, when we suddenly got a proper 3rd-person shot of V. It did feel a bit odd that only Panam gets to share that moment with V, rather than Judy. I suspect some of the story makes a bit more sense if you play with a male V and choose Panam as your romantic partner, but Judy is a reasonable other choice; I don't see any logic at all in choosing Kerry or River, especially since you apparently automatically break up with them at the end of the game if you do choose them.

Something interesting is that so far 21% of Steam players have completed the game despite it being out less than a month, so the short length seems to have paid off: somehow only 26% of people have completed The Witcher 3 (well, on Steam, but the sample size is probably large enough for it to apply to all formats, give or take) despite it being out for almost 6 years, so I guess that issue with TW3 being "too long" does seem real.

Interesting odd bit of trivia: most people seem absolutely 100% convinced that Milt Nauman is played by Mike Pondsmith. It seems pretty likely, he sounds just like him, he's not in the game very long, and his appearance in both a 2013-set flashback (referencing the original P&P game's setting) and being a "father figure" to Johnny makes it seem pretty likely. Nauman also doesn't have a voice actor listed.

I remember reading that Mike Pondsmith played one of the DJ's on the radio, I'm not sure if he played anyone else in the game. I too loved the Nomad ending, granted I'd probably have loved it more if my character had a head for the final scene, lol

[Fez]

59 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The ending of the story was pretty excellent.

  Hide contents

I picked the Nomad ending. Finishing the story by tearing out of Dodge with my BFF Panam and partner Judy felt pretty good and it seemed the best all-round ending...until Takemura calls you up to yell abuse at you before committing suicide. Oops. Also, you still have the fucking tank!? I was sure that was going down in a blaze of glory.

I'm pondering redoing the final missions to check the other ending options (at least the Arasaka ending, which seems quite fascinating) and to try to crank up my achivements (currently at 75%, which is the highest for a new game I've managed to do for a long, long time).

Was it just me, or was the Adam Smasher boss fight absolutely way too easy?

It was also a bit odd that we had no real 3rd person cut scenes until the very end of the game, when we suddenly got a proper 3rd-person shot of V. It did feel a bit odd that only Panam gets to share that moment with V, rather than Judy. I suspect some of the story makes a bit more sense if you play with a male V and choose Panam as your romantic partner, but Judy is a reasonable other choice; I don't see any logic at all in choosing Kerry or River, especially since you apparently automatically break up with them at the end of the game if you do choose them.

Something interesting is that so far 21% of Steam players have completed the game despite it being out less than a month, so the short length seems to have paid off: somehow only 26% of people have completed The Witcher 3 (well, on Steam, but the sample size is probably large enough for it to apply to all formats, give or take) despite it being out for almost 6 years, so I guess that issue with TW3 being "too long" does seem real.

Interesting odd bit of trivia: most people seem absolutely 100% convinced that Milt Nauman is played by Mike Pondsmith. It seems pretty likely, he sounds just like him, he's not in the game very long, and his appearance in both a 2013-set flashback (referencing the original P&P game's setting) and being a "father figure" to Johnny makes it seem pretty likely. Nauman also doesn't have a voice actor listed.

Spoiler

 

I think River and Kerry stay with you if you do the Johnny/Rogue ending; and maybe also the Arasaka ending (not sure). It sorta makes sense, even though it sucks for anyone who is romancing them. Both of them have reasons to stay in Night City, especially River; rather than leave town.

Likewise, Judy (and I think Panam) break up with you if you do the Arasaka ending; though they stay with you, albeit kinda unhappily, if you do the Rogue/Johnny ending. They want to leave Night City.

The Adam Smasher fight was definitely too easy; even in my kinda broken build I still easily beat him (whereas I had to turn down the difficulty against Oda).

 

I've beaten The Witcher 3 twice, and I agree that its too long. The fact that the Kaer Morhen battle isn't the climax of the game remains kinda astounding to me. That said, I think CDPR took things too far in the opposite direction for CP2077. I kinda like what they did, with making major side quest chains that can influence the ending, but I think the core critical path is too short even so. I'd have liked the prologue and Act I to be opened out more (and I remain convinced that there is a lot of content that was there at one time) and a whole other Act focused on confronting Arasaka prior to the point of no return.

Spoiler

The fact that you never see Yorinobu again, unless you do the Arasaka ending is kinda rubbish.

 

[sifth]

15 minutes ago, Fez said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I think River and Kerry stay with you if you do the Johnny/Rogue ending; and maybe also the Arasaka ending (not sure). It sorta makes sense, even though it sucks for anyone who is romancing them. Both of them have reasons to stay in Night City, especially River; rather than leave town.

Likewise, Judy (and I think Panam) break up with you if you do the Arasaka ending; though they stay with you, albeit kinda unhappily, if you do the Rogue/Johnny ending. They want to leave Night City.

The Adam Smasher fight was definitely too easy; even in my kinda broken build I still easily beat him (whereas I had to turn down the difficulty against Oda).

 

I've beaten The Witcher 3 twice, and I agree that its too long. The fact that the Kaer Morhen battle isn't the climax of the game remains kinda astounding to me. That said, I think CDPR took things too far in the opposite direction for CP2077. I kinda like what they did, with making major side quest chains that can influence the ending, but I think the core critical path is too short even so. I'd have liked the prologue and Act I to be opened out more (and I remain convinced that there is a lot of content that was there at one time) and a whole other Act focused on confronting Arasaka prior to the point of no return.

  Reveal hidden contents

The fact that you never see Yorinobu again, unless you do the Arasaka ending is kinda rubbish.

 

See I'm of the opposite mindset when it comes to the Witcher 3 and it's length.

 

I love the adventures and side quests Geralt and Ciri go on towards the end of the game. It made the whole journey to finally find her feel so worth it. I also fully agree with you when it comes to Yorinobu.

[Kalbear]

Huh. It sounds like I wouldn't like gta or rdr2 as much. I thought I would given how much I enjoy running around and doing side missions and just exploring the city, but the gameplay is also important and being able to beat missions my way is a lot of fun. 

I think it's still more like dxhr than gta. Just with a whole hell of a lot more to do. I still dream of a plot as awesome as the original dx, with decisions that matter that much, but that probably just isn't possible given how much it costs to make those plotlines in the first place. 

[Ran]

7 hours ago, sifth said:

I remember reading that Mike Pondsmith played one of the DJ's on the radio, I'm not sure if he played anyone else in the game. I too loved the Nomad ending, granted I'd probably have loved it more if my character had a head for the final scene, lol

Yep. Morro Rock station DJ, throwing out the occasional conspiracy theory. I am 100% certain that Milt is based on him and that he voices him as well.

3 hours ago, Kalbear Total Landscaping said:

Huh. It sounds like I wouldn't like gta or rdr2 as much. I thought I would given how much I enjoy running around and doing side missions and just exploring the city, but the gameplay is also important and being able to beat missions my way is a lot of fun. 

Yeah, GTA has never interested me, but I like Westerns and the way people talked about RDR 2 made me think ... yeah, maybe. But then the very tight mission constriction and also some of the simulationist stuff  I've seen people go on about (e.g. doing chores when camping) just don't appeal to me. The Witcher 3 sounds maybe more like it.

 

[sifth]

3 hours ago, Ran said:

Yep. Morro Rock station DJ, throwing out the occasional conspiracy theory. I am 100% certain that Milt is based on him and that he voices him as well.

Yeah, GTA has never interested me, but I like Westerns and the way people talked about RDR 2 made me think ... yeah, maybe. But then the very tight mission constriction and also some of the simulationist stuff  I've seen people go on about (e.g. doing chores when camping) just don't appeal to me. The Witcher 3 sounds maybe more like it.

 

The Witcher 3 and RDR2 are both great games, all be it in very different ways. To be honest, I think RDR2 is the longer of the two games, but that's mostly because fast travel kind of sucks in that game, so you have to ride a lot.

[Relic]

20 hours ago, Werthead said:

CP77's simple weight limit is less realistic (V walking around with 25 shotguns hanging off their shoulder) but so much easier to deal with.

Bag of holding hand waves all of that away =P 

[Werthead]

3 hours ago, sifth said:

The Witcher 3 and RDR2 are both great games, all be it in very different ways. To be honest, I think RDR2 is the longer of the two games, but that's mostly because fast travel kind of sucks in that game, so you have to ride a lot.

RDR2 is about as long, or maybe marginally longer, than The Witcher 3 by itself (~60 hours), but it's not as long as The Witcher 3+all DLC (which in turn is not as long as Cyberpunk 2077, albeit that's all for exhaustive play-throughs with all quests completed; CP77 has the shortest main quest of the three if you focus just on it).

Quote

Yeah, GTA has never interested me, but I like Westerns and the way people talked about RDR 2 made me think ... yeah, maybe. But then the very tight mission constriction and also some of the simulationist stuff  I've seen people go on about (e.g. doing chores when camping) just don't appeal to me. The Witcher 3 sounds maybe more like it.

Ha, you spend maybe 10 minutes doing chores out of the 60+ hours of RDR2. I think you can do more of it to push up the camp's loyalty rating to you (which unlocks more supplies and things from the camp for free, which saves a bit of money you'd spend in shops) but it's utterly unnecessary.

RDR2 is certainly a superb game, but it's tighter and a bit more restrictive than CP77, and it's not an RPG in any meaningful sense (the character improvement stuff is very minimalist compared to CP77). The environment though is utterly jaw-dropping, and the attention to detail goes far beyond anything in CP77.

Kalbear is right, in that if you want more stuff that's similar to CP77 (apart from driving brick-like cars), the best option is by far Deus Ex: Human Revolution (the remastered edition) and Mankind Divided, or if you want the open world city and hacking, Watch Dogs 2 (and possibly Watch Dogs: Legion, which I haven't gotten to yet). You can't hack people in that, but you can hack the environment in a very similar way, set up some cool environmental traps and even complete mission objectives without going anywhere near the enemy location (you even have drones which can do the physical interaction stuff for you). Or just for the same philosophical approach to the game, the story and the characters, obviously Witcher 3.

[Fez]

15 hours ago, sifth said:

See I'm of the opposite mindset when it comes to the Witcher 3 and it's length.

  Reveal hidden contents

I love the adventures and side quests Geralt and Ciri go on towards the end of the game. It made the whole journey to finally find her feel so worth it. I also fully agree with you when it comes to Yorinobu.

 

Spoiler

I like those sections a lot too; but it feels like such a let down that the big climax isn't actually the climax. Especially after how long it took to get there. I think a better solution would be that Geralt and Ciri don't go directly to Kaer Morhen after he finds her, but rather they are on the road for a bit doing those things together; and then have the Kaer Morhen battle. Or cut the battle, and have all your allies from across the game show up for the fleet fight at the actual end. It's just weird pacing as is.

 

8 hours ago, Ran said:

Yeah, GTA has never interested me, but I like Westerns and the way people talked about RDR 2 made me think ... yeah, maybe. But then the very tight mission constriction and also some of the simulationist stuff  I've seen people go on about (e.g. doing chores when camping) just don't appeal to me. The Witcher 3 sounds maybe more like it.

Rather than GTA, I'd strongly recommend Sleeping Dogs. It's certainly GTA-style gameplay. But it's got better writing (IMO), and, it feels a bit cyberpunk-y simply by virtue of being set in Hong Kong; even though its in our 2012.

Also better than the GTA games are the Saints Row games; especially III and IV. But they go far enough into a superhero-but-not style, especially IV, that the gameplay is rather different from anything in CP2077.

The three latest Assassins Creed games are basically The Witcher 3-lite in writing, and are maybe actually slightly closer to CP2077 gameplay. Since in all 3 stealth and ranged fighting is somewhat viable builds, whereas Geralt is in-your-face melee all the time.

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

RDR2 is about as long, or maybe marginally longer, than The Witcher 3 by itself (~60 hours), but it's not as long as The Witcher 3+all DLC (which in turn is not as long as Cyberpunk 2077, albeit that's all for exhaustive play-throughs with all quests completed; CP77 has the shortest main quest of the three if you focus just on it).

I think your understating just how long The Witcher 3 is. Just doing the main story and side quests took me 80 hours, and that was ignoring all the monster contracts and nearly all the random ?s on the map. CP2077 took me 60 hours to main story and side jobs. I'm sure doing all the gigs and NCPD side hustles up the time a lot, but so would TW3 monster contracts and points of interest.

[Kalbear]

Apparently Yakuza: Like a Boss is pretty amazing in a lot of ways.