Support NeoGAF

[CamHostage]

So, to add some context to this thread, what about 2.0 is it that would have increased the review score?

I have been interested in CyberPunk but never played either version. Mostly I hear people talk about the technical improvements and PC enhancements (while still pointing out that it doesn't have the city life or living feel of the original promotional trailers.) I haven't heard a lot of praise or comparison of the AI or vehicle combat or progression or other major improvements. I've read about the overhaul work and am intrigued by all of the work put in to overhaul the game, but I haven't experienced it and haven't seen much "re-review" opinion pieces on whether the game improved as expected. (I also read a lot of opinion from those who liked the original game for what it was despite its flaws and missed promises, but haven't seen any of those people come by and say that their dedication to a flawed product has been vindicated with the improvements.)

Is it really a night-and-day difference in how fun and deep the game gets, or was it a technical mess that's now playable plus has better content via DLC and patches?

 

[analog_future]

So, to add some context to this thread, what about 2.0 is it that would have increased the review score?

I have been interested in CyberPunk but never played either version. Mostly I hear people talk about the technical improvements and PC enhancements (while still pointing out that it doesn't have the city life or living feel of the original promotional trailers.) I haven't heard a lot of praise or comparison of the AI or vehicle combat or progression or other major improvements. I've read about the overhaul work and am intrigued by all of the work put in to overhaul the game, but I haven't experienced it and haven't seen much "re-review" opinion pieces on whether the game improved as expected. (I also read a lot of opinion from those who liked the original game for what it was despite its flaws and missed promises, but haven't seen any of those people come by and say that their dedication to a flawed product has been vindicated with the improvements.)

Is it really a night-and-day difference in how fun and deep the game gets, or was it a technical mess that's now playable plus has better content via DLC and patches?

In addition to bugs being largely eliminated, performance brought up to par, and visuals improved, the game also has an entirely new progression system (that just came out with 2.0), improved AI, and an excellent DLC.

In the end it still doesn't live up to some of the lofty hopes we had prior to release as far as infinitely complex branching quest lines and the whole "choose your own adventure" vibe, but it's definitely become an excellent game for all intents and purpose in 2023.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

On PC? And assuming that PL DLC would be a part of the main game... 95+, easily.

 

[64bitmodels]

Don't think the review scores would have been affected much but general gamer consensus over the game would have been a lot more positive.

That being said it'd still be a disappointment to many after the promises the game gave out.

 

[Roni]

I don't think it would've broken 90 because there's still a lot of stuff from the 50 min gameplay reveal that was simply missing from the game. Whoever decided that early in development those promises should've been not only made, but shown, should be fired by now...

 

[vaibhavpisal]

In the end it still doesn't live up to some of the lofty hopes we had prior to release as far as infinitely complex branching quest lines and the whole "choose your own adventure" vibe, but it's definitely become an excellent game for all intents and purpose in 2023.

Infinitely complex branching quests ... CDPR ... pfft

What's the credibility here?

They do great graphics, good music, write good characters. No idea why people expected anything more than what they delivered in Witcher 3.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

I don't think it would've broken 90 because there's still a lot of stuff from the 50 min gameplay reveal that was simply missing from the game. Whoever decided that early in development those promises should've been not only made, but shown, should be fired by now...

What are these important features that are missing? I haven't watched this trailer in a long time and the only one I can recall is wall running using Mantis Blades. There was also some fancy building hacking thing/mini game that was stupid and would probably get boring after a couple of times. Honest question, what's missing?

Edit: oh and that bullshit about NPCs having routines... yeah that was bullshit since day 0 as it was never shown in any of the trailers...

 

[Boss Mog]

The extent that this game lives rent free on GAF is astonishing. Every fucking thread lol.


Who knew a big AAA exclusive on Xbox would trigger so many crybabies here

The only one getting triggered here is you, so much so that you felt the need to comment about it.

 

[Roni]

What are these important features that are missing? I haven't watched this trailer in a long time and the only one I can recall is wall running using Mantis Blades. There was also some fancy building hacking thing/mini game that was stupid and would probably get boring after a couple of times. Honest question, what's missing?

Edit: oh and that bullshit about NPCs having routines... yeah that was bullshit since day 0 as it was never shown in any of the trailers...

Important is a term you're adding to the conversation. I'm talking about stuff they showed and talked about, important or not.

• Boosters as a temporary alternative to abilities cyberware grants you permanently;
• Different takedown animations with weapons and personal links;
• Sexual encounters at your apartment with the people of Night City, and other interactions;
• Clothing directly affects your Street Cred;
• Custom ads that change to match V and point the player to stores;
• NPC's living their lives in a full day & night cycle;
• Gangs remember who you are, what you did and procedurally try to get back at you if wronged;
• Item inspection, which would play a role in solving quests;
• Drones being used in gameplay;
• Deeper netrunning gameplay;
• Wall running/climbing with Mantis Blades;
• Companions interacting with the environment during boss fights;

 

[MarkMe2525]

Cyberpunk launch was taken advantage of by reviewers anyway it still sold millions so no.

No? It wasn't a yes or no question.

 

[Griffon]

It was already a great PC game on release.

The 2.0 version has more variety in character builds and combat options, so yes it's a bit better. But not to the point it's completely night and day different, if you like it now, you would've liked it back then too.

 

[TastyPastry]

if phantom liberty was included from the beginning it would have reviewed in the 90s (because now it also feels like it has a satisfying lenght)
as for gamers reception, i think cdpr marketing fucked up big time with those trailers implying that you could do a lot of open world side activities and those night city wire episodes were it was implied you could do car customization and stuff like that. if they would have clearly communicated what cyberpunk 2077 is and what it isn't the reception from the general public would also have been much better

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Important is a term you're adding to the conversation. I'm talking about stuff they showed and talked about, important or not.

• Boosters as a temporary alternative to abilities cyberware grants you permanently;
• Different takedown animations with weapons and personal links;
• Sexual encounters at your apartment with the people of Night City, and other interactions;
• Clothing directly affects your Street Cred;
• Custom ads that change to match V and point the player to stores;
• NPC's living their lives in a full day & night cycle;
• Gangs remember who you are, what you did and procedurally try to get back at you if wronged;
• Item inspection, which would play a role in solving quests;
• Drones being used in gameplay;
• Deeper netrunning gameplay;
• Wall running/climbing with Mantis Blades;
• Companions interacting with the environment during boss fights;

I'm not sure in how many development projects you were involved but it's completely normal that if they show you a product 3 (?) years prior to the release, it's not going to be exactly 1:1. And if they slap a big 'WIP' then you can be completely, completely sure it's going to change.

I don't want to sound like I disagree, there are a few important features that were left on the cutting floor but listing bullshit like "Clothing directly affects your Street Cred" is pointless. The whole Street Creed was a terrible idea and I'm genuinely shocked they kept it in the initial release and even more shocked they kept it with each update (just use the actual player level to level gate certain items, if that's what you want to do). It's a useless stat. Booster that temporarily give you same perks as Cyberware sound ever more stupid. Good that these were cut.

I've stated multiple times in the past that their marketing was deliberately misleading at best but in the end the 2.0 version looks and plays better that that initial showing.

I was playing the 1.0 version from disc on Xbox One X the other day and I'm convinced that they had no game at the time that initial gameplay was showed. They only had this little vertical slice and nothing else. And I mean really like nothing else. If they would turn the other way, the city would not be rendered. This kind of situaiton. They showed it way too early.

 

[Roni]

I was playing the 1.0 version from disc on Xbox One X the other day and I'm convinced that they had no game at the time that initial gameplay was showed.

Whoever decided that early in development those promises should've been not only made, but shown, should be fired by now...

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Roni again, I’m not disagreeing on the principle but these were not promises. WIP, subject to change. And out of the things you listed maybe 2 maybe 3 are actual game features that would add something substantial to the game. Yes, I can’t bang a stranger with perfect butt in my apartment like showed in the reveal. But in the final game I can own multiple apartments. I can watch TV, take showers, browse the web, decorate with key items, adopt a cat and pet iguana, dance, play guitar, play vinyl records, play arcade, smoke a cigarette, talk to Silverhand and so on and on…

Final game looks and play better and offers more options.

 

[SegaSnatcher]

No less than a 92 on Metacritic. The game with 2.0 is absolutely fantastic.

 

[bitbydeath]

I mean, he's got a point. Even threads that aren't about Starfield get derailed to talk about it to some degree. It's not enjoyable for anyone trying to come here and just talk about something else.

That’s just part of GAF’s charm.
Goodbye Volcano High also got teased a lot recently.

 

[Roni]

Final game looks and play better and offers more options.

Never stated the contrary. My point is quite succinct and clear: the game wouldn't have broken 90 because of stuff they showed and talked about during marketing.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Never stated the contrary. My point is quite succinct and clear: the game wouldn't have broken 90 because of stuff they showed and talked about during marketing.

I find it hard to believe as PC version is currently at 86 on Meta. If it would release in 2020 in 2.0 state, it would easily break 90.

 

[Roni]

I find it hard to believe as PC version is currently at 86 on Meta. If it would release in 2020 in 2.0 state, it would easily break 90.

Yeah, we'll never know now, will we? That's sort of the point in a thread of hypotheticals.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Yeah, we'll never know now, will we? That's sort of the point in a thread of hypotheticals.

Yeah, but it's pretty safe to assume that it would and you're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult right now.

I'm just sad that there won't be any more DLC. It deserves more.

 

[Ammogeddon]

I'm just sad that there won't be any more DLC. It deserves more.

Don’t be sad. They’ll be pressing on with a sequel all the more sooner.

 

[Roni]

Yeah, but it's pretty safe to assume that it would and you're just being difficult for the sake of being difficult right now.

Hahaha, sure, I'm difficult.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Don’t be sad. They’ll be pressing on with a sequel all the more sooner.

I’m worried they will fuck it up again by starting development from scratch instead of building upon great foundation that 2.0 is. We’ll see.

Hahaha, sure, I'm difficult.

Yes, and unreasonable at the same time. Game got 86. I played it at release on high end PC. It was an unbalanced mess. My character was T-posing with her ass on full display every time I was on a bike. Palm trees were living plants bouncing up and down. DLSS was disengaging almost non stop when entering the menus. And so on. And it stil got 86. And you’re seriously believe that if it would release in 2.0 state 3 years ago it wouldn’t score 4 points more? OK.

 

[Hugare]

As someone who played lots of it (90h) on release on my old PS4, if the original game was an 8/8.5, its more like a 9 now

They've improved graphics, fixed bugs, improved the AI, police and etc.

But as SkillUp mentioned on his review, what of it actually matters really? The core of the game is (almost) intact. You really wont have a wildly different experience from launch.

What I meant by almost was the progression system. Leveling up is meaningful now. You dont just throw away your points in some useless perk, they add new abilities, animations and etc.

So thats why I would add a 0.5/1 to my initial score

 

[ChoosableOne]

I was gonna ask this too. I'm thinking about playing without DLC first, and if I like it, I'll get the DLC. However, the advertising campaign is running so well that I can't tell if the DLC is really good or if it's the 2.0 version. It was also mentioned that the DLC changes the end of the game, could this be the impact of 2.0? Will I miss out on a lot if I play the main campaign without the DLC? FOMO at it's best.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Better than Starfield that's for sure.

I find it amusing that when Cyberpunk came out, it proverbially slipped on a banana peel, fell on its back and its shoes fell off, but now GAF is practically choking on CDPRs dick while collectively shitting on Starfield for no reason. A game that released in a generally well polished state and fulfilling all the promises that it made in its pre-release coverage, so the reasons to hate it had to be pretty much manufactured.

I enjoy both games a great deal and they both have their problems that make them more or less equals, so the hypocrisy on display here is pathetic, really.

 

[Reaseru]

Above 90.

For example, in PS5 the difference between ray tracing mode at launch and now is abismal.

 

[Ammogeddon]

I’m worried they will fuck it up again by starting development from scratch instead of building upon great foundation that 2.0 is. We’ll see.

Yeah I know what you’re saying. It’s being picked up by their new US studio and on UE5. It has potential to be a completely different experience. for good and bad.

 

[Thaedolus]

I find it amusing that when Cyberpunk came out, it proverbially slipped on a banana peel, fell on its back and its shoes fell off, but now GAF is practically choking on CDPRs dick while collectively shitting on Starfield for no reason. A game that released in a generally well polished state and fulfilling all the promises that it made in its pre-release coverage, so the reasons to hate it had to be pretty much manufactured.

I enjoy both games a great deal and they both have their problems that make them more or less equals, so the hypocrisy on display here is pathetic, really.

I’m not sure there’s really hypocrisy here. I never got far in Cyberpunk when it launched because it was so broken. My buddy was in the same boat because he had the PS4 version which was basically unplayable. Well, they fixed it and now it’s his GOTY on PS5 and while I’m having a great time I wouldn’t go that far. Starfield is definitely more polished than Cyberpunk was at launch, but everything else about it is just boring, and feels old. So if you compare the two now, two huge games of a similar genre, one’s clearly the winner.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I’m not sure there’s really hypocrisy here. I never got far in Cyberpunk when it launched because it was so broken. My buddy was in the same boat because he had the PS4 version which was basically unplayable. Well, they fixed it and now it’s his GOTY on PS5 and while I’m having a great time I wouldn’t go that far. Starfield is definitely more polished than Cyberpunk was at launch, but everything else about it is just boring, and feels old. So if you compare the two now, two huge games of a similar genre, one’s clearly the winner.

I dunno, maybe I just don't see what Cyberpunk does that's so ahead of the curve. Even with all the updates that the latest patch has brought, it's still nothing new and the city still feels a little bit like set dressing for main quests rather than living, breathing world. They still didn't fix the fact that a lot of the areas in the game are these illogically constructed or noticeably less detailed liminal spaces which also breaks the immersion a lot. At least Starfield feels very consistent across the board when it comes to those world building, immersive aspects and the only thing that kinda interrupts it are the loading transitions. Each area of the game feels equally packed with detail no matter how inconsequential to the main plot of the game it is.

 

[DryvBy]

I played the vanilla version and Zi thought it was a 3.5/5 and only held back by bugs. Today? It's a 5/5 easily.

 

[Thaedolus]

I dunno, maybe I just don't see what Cyberpunk does that's so ahead of the curve. Even with all the updates that the latest patch has brought, it's still nothing new and the city still feels a little bit like set dressing for main quests rather than living, breathing world. They still didn't fix the fact that a lot of the areas in the game are these illogically constructed or noticeably less detailed liminal spaces which also breaks the immersion a lot. At least Starfield feels very consistent across the board when it comes to those world building, immersive aspects and the only thing that kinda interrupts it are the loading transitions. Each area of the game feels equally packed with detail no matter how inconsequential to the main plot of the game it is.

I feel like Night City and NPCs feel way more like a real place than anything I saw in Starfield. Even just walking down some random alleyway I found arcade cabinets and played a Contra-like for a bit. NPCs actually react if you point a gun at them. The plot is far more interesting. Graphically it’s one of the best looking games ever made, not that Starfield looks terrible or anything. I dunno I just don’t really see my myself going back to Starfield and I’m having trouble putting Cyberpunk down

 

[Tedditalk]

I find it amusing that when Cyberpunk came out, it proverbially slipped on a banana peel, fell on its back and its shoes fell off, but now GAF is practically choking on CDPRs dick while collectively shitting on Starfield for no reason. A game that released in a generally well polished state and fulfilling all the promises that it made in its pre-release coverage, so the reasons to hate it had to be pretty much manufactured.

I enjoy both games a great deal and they both have their problems that make them more or less equals, so the hypocrisy on display here is pathetic, really.

Alot of it is straight up anti Xbox fanboyism. Embarrassing how many men still carry water over corporate products.

But, some of it is massive disappointment to a product that is in many ways inferior to past Bethesda software titles, and is not up to current modern standards in many ways, and also marketing lies. Planets being nothing but backdrops accessed by loading screens, copius amounts of loading screens that feel antiquated even compared to skyrim and fallout 4, poor npc behavior, weird stare conversations, unsatisfying gun play compared to contemporaries, bad melee combat, poor open world exploration, uninspired weapon designs, alot of bugs, ehh writing, game is branded as "woke", game has slow start, and I can go on. The sad thing is, all of this is because Bethesda keep using their shity engine, so it part of a long legacy of mediocrity, compounding the problems from just nitpicks to Bethesda refusing to evolve, and even taking steps backwards.

Cyberpunk, through the lies and all, always had a revolutionary foundation in many respects, so alot of people now jumped in, realized this, and are now treating the game almost like it released.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Alot of it is straight up anti Xbox fanboyism. Embarrassing how many men still carry water over corporate products.

But, some of it is massive disappointment to a product that is in many ways inferior to past Bethesda software titles, and is not up to current modern standards in many ways, and also marketing lies. Planets being nothing but backdrops accessed by loading screens, copius amounts of loading screens that feel antiquated even compared to skyrim and fallout 4, poor npc behavior, weird stare conversations, unsatisfying gun play compared to contemporaries, bad melee combat, poor open world exploration, uninspired weapon designs, alot of bugs, ehh writing, game is branded as "woke", game has slow start, and I can go on. The sad thing is, all of this is because Bethesda keep using their shity engine, so it part of a long legacy of mediocrity, compounding the problems from just nitpicks to Bethesda refusing to evolve, and even taking steps backwards.

Cyberpunk, through the lies and all, always had a revolutionary foundation in many respects, so alot of people now jumped in, realized this, and are now treating the game almost like it released.

I think the only valid criticisms here is the number of loading screen transitions between areas (loading times shouldn't be a problem if you have and SSD, though), as well as occasionally idiotic writing. I even malded over the latter myself on one occasion so it's not like I'm completely blind to some of the game's shortcomings.

Everything else, though? Eh, I find those things very much subjective. I was completely swept away by almost everything that you listed as "problems" so there you go. For example, you can't really cite pacing as a problem in a game like this because each player will progress through the game and their own individual pace, and while other people kept complaining that the main quest had you zipping around the galaxy at breakneck speed, I was just leisurely taking my time exploring each new location that the main quest was taking me to. And even as far as the "bad writing" goes, I don't find it completely awful across the board. It's just uneven, with some quests being completely stupid and offering very limited player agency, while others being pretty entertaining and featuring interesting characters with a lot of witty dialogue.

Also, the "woke" debate is just some smooth brained bullshit so this shouldn't even be on the list, tbh.

 

[Mobilemofo]

T Poses. I loved em. I haven't installed 2.0. I have no desire to do so sadly.

 

[Topher]

Personally I think CP was rated too high initially. Still isn't perfect as I'm seeing a lot of weirdness and glitches going on, but this time around I'm finding it much more fun to play. Game still isn't a 9+ in my mind so I voted 85-89.

 

[ButchCat]

The stealth in the game is still broken because of inconsistent detection AI. NPC AI doesn't behave as it's supposed to, this is especially jarring during cutscenes set in crowded areas where the short and buggy behaviour loops really diminish the tension some of these cutscenes try to create. The physics detection between some objects and enemies don't register.

I would've preferred OP if you asked how I would've reviewed it instead. Mainstream media would've given it a low 90%. I would give it 80% because the game still does a lot.