OT: The All-Purpose Video Game Thread: Part III
- Thread starter Gardner McKay
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
I might end up getting that for PS5, especially with this patch. I heard the PS4 version of Cyberpunk was not worth getting.
I miss the days of when I played elite single-player games like the GTA series, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3/4/New Vegas, etc.
Just bought a PS5 in late November a few months ago after being eligible for that e-mail invite thing. Recently beat RE8.
MMO games have never appealed to me either.
TheBloodyNine
Pure Bred Soviet Savage
Yeah if you didn't have a PS Pro or Xbox One X at the time it wasn't worth playing (I played it originally on my One X and had little problems with it). I think it would be worth your time now. It IS a good game, I played the shit out of it, even though it is flawed.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
With you on that. I tried to get into Outer Worlds but it just didn't do it for me. Played through single player on Far Cry 5 and New Dawn but that's a bit different than above.
I'd recommend Ghost of Tsushima if you haven't played that yet.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I didn't mind the ending at all. I mean, it wasn't happy but I don't think it was an outcome (either) that didn't make sense.
Kords
Registered User
- Jun 19, 2019
- 7,454
- 12,912
Depends on what you didn't like about BB I guess. It's supposedly a more accessible Dark Souls/Bloodborne type game but with a much bigger scope. Probably compares better to the Dark Souls series in terms of combat.
Outer Worlds is on my backlog. Curious to see how it is.
Ghost of Tsushima was amazing. One of the best PS4 games and overall games I’ve played.
Not to spoil it for those that haven’t played, but I thought the ending was decent, especially with the impending sequel. That said, I can sort of see why some didn’t like the ending.
Not to spoil it for those that haven’t played, but I thought the ending was decent, especially with the impending sequel. That said, I can sort of see why some didn’t like the ending.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
It's the spiritual successor to Fallout, I guess, but, IDK, it's missing something.
UnSandvich
Registered User
- Sep 7, 2017
- 5,862
- 8,961
I’m on the fence on Elden Ring.
Only other From Software game I played was Dark Souls 2 and it was just too much. I was coming back from work and the last thing I wanted to do was play a game that stressed me out. It was also really frustrating to go an entire evening without making progress.
However, it seems like Elden Ring will give you alternatives if you get stuck somewhere. Additionally, there looks to be a bunch of different ways to take down enemies, including stealth. That, coupled with the open world element, has me intrigued.
Only other From Software game I played was Dark Souls 2 and it was just too much. I was coming back from work and the last thing I wanted to do was play a game that stressed me out. It was also really frustrating to go an entire evening without making progress.
However, it seems like Elden Ring will give you alternatives if you get stuck somewhere. Additionally, there looks to be a bunch of different ways to take down enemies, including stealth. That, coupled with the open world element, has me intrigued.
UnSandvich
Registered User
- Sep 7, 2017
- 5,862
- 8,961
Brutananadilewski
Registered User
It does, but they aren't vastly different for the protagonist.
Brutananadilewski
Registered User
Vanilla PS4 and XBO couldn't handle it. CD Projekt Red would have been better off canceling those versions and just releasing the game on newer hardware.
The patch alone took them over a year to release.
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,835
- 12,972
I played Cyberpunk 2077 on Steam with a 2080 Super video card (I've since upgraded to a 3080 Ti).
It obviously ran much better and had significantly less bugs on PC than it did on PS4/Xbox One.
My takeaway is this - as said above, it was not a game for the last generation. They got overambitious and tried to release it for both to increase sales, when they would have been better served announcing it was simply a next-gen title and releasing only for PS5/SeriesX/PC, and releasing it this year. So much of the negative energy around that game revolves around how it ran terribly on last gen hardware.
That also being said, after the Witcher 3, which was a masterpiece in basically every sense of the word, CD Project was hyping, and people were buying, that Cyberpunk was going to be even bigger and better.
But it wasn't. The open world wasn't bigger or more interesting. The main story was inferior. The side quests were all inferior. The writing was inferior. The acting and dialogue were inferior. The romances were cornier and you didn't feel as invested with any of the paramours. The open world activities were all more boring. The map was littered with clear-outs that got old and repetitive real quick. It all felt like that part of the Witcher, in Skellige, where you sailed around to all the question marks out on the ocean, and they were all the same stupid treasure chests that you didn't need, didn't offer any upgrades, and just made you overencumbered.
The combat/gun play might have been better than the Witcher's combat. It did have that going for it. Some of the weapon innovations were really cool - like the smart weapons with targeting bullets. It was super satisfying shooting enemies around a corner. The hacking elements of combat also introduced a concept that was fresh and fun. Fights against enemies/gangs were a real treat, for about 10-20 hours. Until it all became the same. Oh, another drug deal to bust up. Like the one I did two streets over.
Ultimately the game ended up feeling a lot more like the Division to me than the Witcher. This, therefore, was Cyberpunk 2077's other main problem: People were expecting Witcher 3 quality and what they got was The Division quality.
The Division is not a bad game. It's just not a particularly great one. It's fine for a while at which point the shiny graphics excitement wears off and you realize it's basically an updated Borderlands.
That's the final story on Cyberpunk. This patch can introduce less bugs, better menus, better driving, economy balance, etc, all it wants, but it can't change the game's heart. And the game will always be a B- story with solid A, excellent combat.
The Witcher 3 delivered an epic, movie-worthy story that kept you invested in the characters and the conflict down to the very end, even through both DLCs. Within 5 hours of Cyberpunk's story I stopped caring and started thinking, "Who is this again? Why do I care about this person? This group?" They were all generic, un-relatable cardboard cut outs of real, interesting characters.
Ironically, the basis is there for a real interesting game. The combat is good. The city is gorgeous.
But they have a lot of work to do for a sequel in terms of making a compelling story and compelling characters. That, plus the last-gen bugs, is why Cyberpunk enjoys it's hideous reputation.
Take away the hype and you do have an enjoyable B-level game.
It obviously ran much better and had significantly less bugs on PC than it did on PS4/Xbox One.
My takeaway is this - as said above, it was not a game for the last generation. They got overambitious and tried to release it for both to increase sales, when they would have been better served announcing it was simply a next-gen title and releasing only for PS5/SeriesX/PC, and releasing it this year. So much of the negative energy around that game revolves around how it ran terribly on last gen hardware.
That also being said, after the Witcher 3, which was a masterpiece in basically every sense of the word, CD Project was hyping, and people were buying, that Cyberpunk was going to be even bigger and better.
But it wasn't. The open world wasn't bigger or more interesting. The main story was inferior. The side quests were all inferior. The writing was inferior. The acting and dialogue were inferior. The romances were cornier and you didn't feel as invested with any of the paramours. The open world activities were all more boring. The map was littered with clear-outs that got old and repetitive real quick. It all felt like that part of the Witcher, in Skellige, where you sailed around to all the question marks out on the ocean, and they were all the same stupid treasure chests that you didn't need, didn't offer any upgrades, and just made you overencumbered.
The combat/gun play might have been better than the Witcher's combat. It did have that going for it. Some of the weapon innovations were really cool - like the smart weapons with targeting bullets. It was super satisfying shooting enemies around a corner. The hacking elements of combat also introduced a concept that was fresh and fun. Fights against enemies/gangs were a real treat, for about 10-20 hours. Until it all became the same. Oh, another drug deal to bust up. Like the one I did two streets over.
Ultimately the game ended up feeling a lot more like the Division to me than the Witcher. This, therefore, was Cyberpunk 2077's other main problem: People were expecting Witcher 3 quality and what they got was The Division quality.
The Division is not a bad game. It's just not a particularly great one. It's fine for a while at which point the shiny graphics excitement wears off and you realize it's basically an updated Borderlands.
That's the final story on Cyberpunk. This patch can introduce less bugs, better menus, better driving, economy balance, etc, all it wants, but it can't change the game's heart. And the game will always be a B- story with solid A, excellent combat.
The Witcher 3 delivered an epic, movie-worthy story that kept you invested in the characters and the conflict down to the very end, even through both DLCs. Within 5 hours of Cyberpunk's story I stopped caring and started thinking, "Who is this again? Why do I care about this person? This group?" They were all generic, un-relatable cardboard cut outs of real, interesting characters.
Ironically, the basis is there for a real interesting game. The combat is good. The city is gorgeous.
But they have a lot of work to do for a sequel in terms of making a compelling story and compelling characters. That, plus the last-gen bugs, is why Cyberpunk enjoys it's hideous reputation.
Take away the hype and you do have an enjoyable B-level game.
Brutananadilewski
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,835
- 12,972
The other thing, now that I think about it, is that a medieval-style open-world game where the population is supposed to be sparce has a lot fewer "moving parts," so to speak, than an open-world modern city game like GTA.
CD Project delivered a masterpiece in the Witcher 3, but again, it was excellent in terms of it's story and characters. It's not like the world was anywhere near the interactivity-level of GTA5, which had been released 2 years prior to 2015's Witcher 3. In the Witcher 3 you could go up to any number of crates and "loot," them. You could walk up to a plant and "loot," it for it's flower. In what other way could you actually affect the world state via your action? Not really any, and that was ok. The world changed based on plot decisions, not the physics engine. Even most of the NPCs in the Witcher 3, in towns or whatnot, maintained their static posts, and when you re-visited the town, there they were again, telling the same story as when you were there hours before.
GTA/Red Dead are far heavier on the world-details, and always had been, in comparison to the Witcher 3/CP2077. Like localized damage to cars, bullets splashing in water, the char from flames on a building after you throw a grenade, etc. Where the Witcher 3 was better was with it's story, plot, dialogue and acting.
In a CITY-based open world, people were definitely expecting what they had seen in an open-world city before, ie, GTA5, or even better than that, and instead they got worse. On top of that, the writing, story, and acting, as I said before, were all worse in Cyberpunk than in the Witcher.
CD Project delivered a masterpiece in the Witcher 3, but again, it was excellent in terms of it's story and characters. It's not like the world was anywhere near the interactivity-level of GTA5, which had been released 2 years prior to 2015's Witcher 3. In the Witcher 3 you could go up to any number of crates and "loot," them. You could walk up to a plant and "loot," it for it's flower. In what other way could you actually affect the world state via your action? Not really any, and that was ok. The world changed based on plot decisions, not the physics engine. Even most of the NPCs in the Witcher 3, in towns or whatnot, maintained their static posts, and when you re-visited the town, there they were again, telling the same story as when you were there hours before.
GTA/Red Dead are far heavier on the world-details, and always had been, in comparison to the Witcher 3/CP2077. Like localized damage to cars, bullets splashing in water, the char from flames on a building after you throw a grenade, etc. Where the Witcher 3 was better was with it's story, plot, dialogue and acting.
In a CITY-based open world, people were definitely expecting what they had seen in an open-world city before, ie, GTA5, or even better than that, and instead they got worse. On top of that, the writing, story, and acting, as I said before, were all worse in Cyberpunk than in the Witcher.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
When you're a lot more zen on HF these days but somebody on the main boards wants the smoke
Embryo
LGR Check out my music.
Check out some of my vids if you like, I stream on Twitch sometimes, usually Final Fantasy and StarCraft II.
https://www.youtube.com/c/AlvalankerHighwind/videos
https://www.youtube.com/c/AlvalankerHighwind/videos
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Rumor: LeBrun: Flames Remain Interested in Cozens- Latest: Ledge And Dairy
