CD Projekt's Cyberpunk 2077 Update 2.0 + Phantom Liberty Expansion Thread

[Herumor]

Having finished Phantom Liberty and experienced all the endings, I can safely say that they're pretty much shit and I don't like it one bit how the narrative for the DLC tries to slam my head against the wall that is Songbird's fanclub and get me to feel sorry for her or feel bad if I choose to fuck her over for my sake. But then the game goes further into this, by showing how everything fell apart without V in the picture of Night City. The part that I really hated the most was how there was no emergency contact for V when he was in a coma, no one was allowed to know anything that happened to V, he didn't even send anything other than some vague messages, though granted he did think he was gonna be away for a month or two.

 

[lukaszek]

satori katana from emperor now is paired with iconic knife.
Supposedly both exist to support playstyle where you both throw and slash.
Well, whatever bonuses from hemmorage were supposed to be - it aint working. Or bonus is so small that it doesnt matter

 

[Vic]

how are the sidequests in the DLC?

 

[Ryzer]

https://support.cdprojektred.com/en/cyberpunk/pc/sp-technical/issue/2509/patch-2-01-coming-soon

Hey, chooms! We want to give you a heads-up that Patch 2.01 will be coming soon.

Here's a list of most important fixes and improvements that will be included there:

• The distorted effect caused by selecting a specific dialogue option when talking to Johnny at the end of Automatic Love will no longer persist on the screen.
• V will no longer die in The Heist by falling through the elevator when riding to the 42nd floor with low FPS.
• Fixed an issue where the UI could show controller inputs when playing with keyboard and mouse.
• Made it possible to properly switch to arms cyberware by cycling through weapons.
• Gig: Breaking News will be properly triggered after approaching the quest area.
• Vehicle radio volume will be adjusted so it's not too quiet when compared to other sounds in the game.
• Addressed the issue of corrupted saves on PlayStation by increasing the maximum save file size limit. Note: this won't fix the saves corrupted before the update. If you're experiencing the issue, keep a working save (e.g. resave it as manual save) till 2.01 arrives.
• Performance improvements for both PC and consoles, especially in the Dogtown area.

Remember that these are just the highlights, so stay tuned for more details!

holy shit, they fixed Breaking News? does CDPR read this thread? lmao

Nah, they just map the reports sent to their support in drove in a big data center, then reduce them to get the most recurrent bugs.

 

[Hellraiser]

how are the sidequests in the DLC?

More of the same.

The new gigs in dogtown have more talking with NPCs directly before/during the job than the old gigs from the base game have and are more similar to side quests from the base game, as it seems all of the new gigs have a "hard morally ambiguous" choice you can make at the end of the "kill scumbag they paid you to kill and thus let orphans drown" variety. Also they're locked behind progress of the DLC main quest, so you can't just do all gigs in dogtown first, just a few, then DLC main quest, then again gigs, then again DLC main quest.

EDIT: forgot to add, some have scripted unavoidable boss fights that can't be solved with a stealth kill.

 

[Herumor]

how are the sidequests in the DLC?

Some are decent, some are just tedious - like the one with the lawyer and sneaking around in Heavy Hearts.

 

[Gargaune]

Nah, I wouldn't have. It's pretty silly to think you know someone else's opinions better than they do

No reason to get upset, there's nothing silly about thinking someone might not have thought things through when they present an opinion different to your own. If anything, it's rather more charitable than the usual Codexian reaction.

Doesn't help they made some weird choice to make the main character defined while also not written as defined and interesting as Geralt was as a main character, it's in this weird in-between zone where he's too defined as a character for you to believe V is your character, but also written too paperthin to be interesting as his own character you are just along for the ride to observe, ala Geralt. Ironically, it seems to me like you had more freedom to decide how Geralt would react to situations while still being true to his character in the Witcher games, so perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree here and the final conclusion is just that their execution here was qualitatively worse on every level.

This, I suspect, is the bigger impediment to you (and most of us) relating to V and maintaining a sense of engagement, because the problem runs deeper than the extent of the character's definition, it's also rooted in the qualitative substance of that definition:

I don't believe that's the main thing here, I think there's a subtler but more serious conflict. Sure, the cinematic presentation of third-person can help in some respects, and you've got Deus Ex as a good example of striking a balance, but then you've also got titles like Thief, exclusively first-person with no plot agency, and yet Garret's still a more engaging protagonist. The rub, I think, is in the writing...

Consider this - what do Geralt of Rivia, JC Denton, Adam Jensen and even Garret all have in common? No, really, take a moment to think about it before you read on. Okay? Right, well if you answered "they're all stoic types", you're right on the money. The way these characters speak, what they say and how they say it, presents them as reserved, calculated, even-tempered individuals, which creates a fictional space between what they're saying and why they're saying it, a space for the player to insert themselves into. So even as Geralt has far more backstory and established relationships, his measured, often laconic mannerisms allow the player to put their own spin on interpreting the character's inner processes, on "what he's actually thinking."

This is not the case with Cyberpunk's protagonist, who is consistently impulsive and extroverted. While lacking much of a personal history, V's character is right there on the page - Stupid Asshole™. And if you can't relate to that, well, tough luck, there's no room for you to read things differently. And while I can understand that this sort of scumbag archetype goes well with a cyberpunk story in general, it can be a really bad fit for a videogame promising character agency. So even though V's role is well performed, plenty of players will have trouble investing themselves into that role.

To sum up, if you're gonna have a fully-acted protagonist in the context of an RPG, you're best off making them the strong, silent type, because with a stoic PC, less is literally more. Have I already made this argument? I forget. It's a big thread. I'll probably make it again at some point.

 

[Zeriel]

It's both. I just don't think Johnny's existence in your head gives you and the character room to breathe. It's an oppressive presence; for me at least. I can't speak for others. Some seem to love him.

(And keep in mind, I am saying this as someone who usually defends Keanu against accusations he's a terrible actor or whatever. I actually like him in most things. I just think Johnny would have worked MUCH better as a separate antivillain character who you can interact with, not a ghost in your head who is unstoppable.)

It's something I think could have been turned into an interesting plot point if they wanted to. If they offered agency surrounding it. Like what if there was a choice to go directly to Arasaka and make a deal to get him out of your head? That would have been cool. Instead, the writers make it very clear you're supposed to idolize Johnny and suck up to him. They literally call the ending where you don't The Devil. Hard to get much more morally black and white than that. Honestly, this might be the real source of my issue with the game. I hate moralizing writers who constantly rub your face in what you're Supposed To Think.

 

[solemgar]

It's both. I just don't think Johnny's existence in your head gives you and the character room to breathe. It's an oppressive presence; for me at least. I can't speak for others. Some seem to love him.

(And keep in mind, I am saying this as someone who usually defends Keanu against accusations he's a terrible actor or whatever. I actually like him in most things. I just think Johnny would have worked MUCH better as a separate antivillain character who you can interact with, not a ghost in your head who is unstoppable.)

It's something I think could have been turned into an interesting plot point if they wanted to. If they offered agency surrounding it. Like what if there was a choice to go directly to Arasaka and make a deal to get him out of your head? That would have been cool. Instead, the writers make it very clear you're supposed to idolize Johnny and suck up to him. They literally call the ending where you don't The Devil. Hard to get much more morally black and white than that. Honestly, this might be the real source of my issue with the game. I hate moralizing writers who constantly rub your face in what you're Supposed To Think.

Every character in the game sucks it up and idolizes Johnny . It becomes pretty tiresome .

 

[Gargaune]

Instead, the writers make it very clear you're supposed to idolize Johnny and suck up to him.

Maybe this is me reading too much into things, but I'm not convinced that was the case. For example, there's even this bit where you control Johnny in one of his flashbacks and, after Alt is kidnapped by Arasaka, you can choose to say something like "No, this all about me!" I kinda felt like Johnny was meant to embody a romanticised vision of rebellion but that there was also a deliberate subtext that he, or at least the engram, was a dangerous, violent psychopath, severely disconnected from reality. Even in the beginning, when Viktor brings V up to speed, the protagonist's reaction is panic that there's a "dead terrorist" in their head.

They literally call the ending where you don't The Devil. Hard to get much more morally black and white than that. Honestly, this might be the real source of my issue with the game. I hate moralizing writers who constantly rub your face in what you're Supposed To Think.

I can relate, I always felt like the Arasaka path was simply the most sensible one (and it's my preferred ending, stylistically), but isn't that moral position baked into the Cyberpunk setting? Genuine question, I'm not particularly familiar with the source material, but doesn't it almost axiomatically present corpo order as the bigger evil even relative to the entropy of criminals and lowlifes? In that note, I read "The Devil" as making a selfish deal with the Devil, not that V themselves had become the Devil.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

The Devil isn't about you rejecting Johnny though. It's about you giving up the struggle against corporate mandated conformity and becoming just another burnt out husk of a human being, feeding on Arasaka's graciously offered scraps. It's thematically on point.

 

[Zeriel]

Instead, the writers make it very clear you're supposed to idolize Johnny and suck up to him.

Maybe this is me reading too much into things, but I'm not convinced that was the case. For example, there's even this bit where you control Johnny in one of his flashbacks and, after Alt is kidnapped by Arasaka, you can choose to say something like "No, this all about me!" I kinda felt like Johnny was meant to embody a romanticised vision of rebellion but that there was also a deliberate subtext that he, or at least the engram, was a dangerous, violent psychopath, severely disconnected from reality. Even in the beginning, when Viktor brings V up to speed, the protagonist's reaction is panic that there's a "dead terrorist" in their head.

They literally call the ending where you don't The Devil. Hard to get much more morally black and white than that. Honestly, this might be the real source of my issue with the game. I hate moralizing writers who constantly rub your face in what you're Supposed To Think.

I can relate, I always felt like the Arasaka path was simply the most sensible one (and it's my preferred ending, stylistically), but isn't that moral position baked into the Cyberpunk setting? Genuine question, I'm not particularly familiar with the source material, but doesn't it almost axiomatically present corpo order as the bigger evil even relative to the entropy of criminals and lowlifes? In that note, I read "The Devil" as making a selfish deal with the Devil, not that V themselves had become the Devil.

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency. And clearly, if you take the path where you thoroughly repudiate Johhny, not only do you get less material item rewards, they indirectly call your ending "evil".

This is a much deeper topic, but I think there is an inherent tension between the era when Cyberpunk was conceived and the era we find ourselves in now. The world has changed, and thus the "rebellion" of the 80s doesn't make as much sense now. Some people try to hold onto it, including apparently the developers of this game and a lot of anarchist leftists, but it has become really incoherent. What does rebelling against the status quo mean when corporations reflect leftist and anarchist messages? When the institutions are filled with your fellow travelers? Etc.

In a day when society was stable but felt oppressive, rebellious anarchy could feel positive. In an era when society itself is anarchic and tyrannical, it feels like you're being asked to worship evil. That's a deeper question than I think the developers wanted to ponder, though, despite the obligatory inclusions of "fascists are bad!" in random text message shards.

 

[Hellion]

Regarding how everyone sucks up to Johnny, I guess this must be another issue that is a matter of perspective because from my experience 90% of all of V's dialogue towards Johnny is either asshole-y sarcastic or criticizing him for his past or "what do you want from me, leave me alone" in tone. Even the "secret ending" that requires you to have the max possible "reputation" with Johnny has you selecting a very specific set of dialogue options during the course of the game that are not as aggressive in nature as the majority of options.

 

[Gargaune]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

This is not the case with Cyberpunk's protagonist, who is consistently impulsive and extroverted. While lacking much of a personal history, V's character is right there on the page - Stupid Asshole™. And if you can't relate to that, well, tough luck, there's no room for you to read things differently. And while I can understand that this sort of scumbag archetype goes well with a cyberpunk story in general, it can be a really bad fit for a videogame promising character agency. So even though V's role is well performed, plenty of players will have trouble investing themselves into that role.

That's on top of the characterisation overlap. V's clearly a Street Kid punk. Silverhand's... a Street Kid punk. They're the same character, except one is objectively cooler.

It's like the writers wanted to write a pre-set protagonist, but the project lead told them they have to make a DIY one, so they complied maliciously.

 

[Zeriel]

This is not the case with Cyberpunk's protagonist, who is consistently impulsive and extroverted. While lacking much of a personal history, V's character is right there on the page - Stupid Asshole™. And if you can't relate to that, well, tough luck, there's no room for you to read things differently. And while I can understand that this sort of scumbag archetype goes well with a cyberpunk story in general, it can be a really bad fit for a videogame promising character agency. So even though V's role is well performed, plenty of players will have trouble investing themselves into that role.

That's on top of the characterisation overlap. V's clearly a Street Kid punk. Silverhand's... a Street Kid punk. They're the same character, except one is objectively cooler.

It's like the writers wanted to write a pre-set protagonist, but the project lead told them they have to make a DIY one, so they complied maliciously.

I think it ultimately comes down to different people, different ideas, different times. The original storyline was very different, even the chargen was different, Blackhand, Saburo, Silverhand were inspirations for character archetypes, not people you would interact with (apparently). The first iteration of the game was going to be in line with what people expected from the marketing. The second version was the Keanu/Silverhand Love-In Spectacular.

 

[solemgar]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Been able to chose make you witness amazing scenes like "shoot first / do not ask" or Simon Gruber "flying lessons".

Personally I loved having the option to play the good cop with the odd "fuck you" when someone was busting my balls too much .

 

[Zeriel]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Been able to chose make you witness amazing scenes like "shoot first / do not ask" or Simon Gruber "flying lessons".

The asshole was also a lot funnier/more satisfying in ME. I honestly don't know how C2077 fucked it up so bad. It's like your character acts like a douchebag... but never feels like a badass, except in gameplay. Which just makes the gameplay more fun than the story, in a game obsessively focused on story.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Yeah, no way they could have done archetypes well. Not with full VO.

Actually, maybe if they didn't spend Los Angeles money on Keanu, they could have done it...

 

[Zeriel]

Yeah, no way they could have done archetypes well. Not with full VO.

Actually, maybe if they didn't spend Los Angeles money on Keanu, they could have done it...

I think the dazzle in CDPR's eyes over getting Keanu Reeves was more of a problem than however much it cost to get him. They certainly wasted more production hours in throwing away content when they decided on a different direction for the game than Keanu's salary cost in man hours.

 

[solemgar]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Been able to chose make you witness amazing scenes like "shoot first / do not ask" or Simon Gruber "flying lessons".

The asshole was also a lot funnier/more satisfying in ME. I honestly don't know how C2077 fucked it up so bad. It's like your character acts like a douchebag... but never feels like a badass, except in gameplay. Which just makes the gameplay more fun than the story, in a game obsessively focused on story.

ME was really well written to the point that the "rebel" was not "evil" and his choices were in line with the plot. It was more like a Dirty Harry situation. I need what needs to be done.

 

[Zeriel]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Been able to chose make you witness amazing scenes like "shoot first / do not ask" or Simon Gruber "flying lessons".

The asshole was also a lot funnier/more satisfying in ME. I honestly don't know how C2077 fucked it up so bad. It's like your character acts like a douchebag... but never feels like a badass, except in gameplay. Which just makes the gameplay more fun than the story, in a game obsessively focused on story.

ME was really well written to the point that the "rebel" was not "evil" and his choices were in line with the plot. It was more like a Dirty Harry situation. I need what needs to be done.

Yeah, I always loved that point in ME1 where he just cuts off the council and ends the transmission. Very little production effort went into it but it speaks volumes about what makes the Renegade tick. On top of being hilarious.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Which is something that 2077 could have done even better. Had they made Silverhand a silent part of V's personality after the heist, they could have justified pretty much anything coming from the character's mouth based on conflicting elements of the new, composite consciousness - a Blackhandesque pragmatist one moment, a raving rockerboy the next. Wire a counter to those options and then wire different quest endings to that counter and suddenly you have some heavy duty CnC in a game that otherwise has very little of it.

 

[solemgar]

Oh no, I get that. The message is there. But it is not reflected in agency.

Yeah, I'd say that's reasonable, my premise is that Johnny's prevalence would be better served if the character of V had leeway to represent a wider array of reactions to his "wisdom" and to every other NPC's and situation's "wisdom" in general, both in terms of writing and delivery. That's why I brought up the argument about the stoic protagonist in VO'd RPGs, because I think CBP is limiting itself with a V that plenty of players just can't feel at home in and it results in pervasive disengagement.

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Been able to chose make you witness amazing scenes like "shoot first / do not ask" or Simon Gruber "flying lessons".

The asshole was also a lot funnier/more satisfying in ME. I honestly don't know how C2077 fucked it up so bad. It's like your character acts like a douchebag... but never feels like a badass, except in gameplay. Which just makes the gameplay more fun than the story, in a game obsessively focused on story.

ME was really well written to the point that the "rebel" was not "evil" and his choices were in line with the plot. It was more like a Dirty Harry situation. I need what needs to be done.

Yeah, I always loved that point in ME1 where he just cuts off the council and ends the transmission. Very little production effort went into it but it speaks volumes about what makes the Renegade tick. On top of being hilarious.

Classic Shepard!!

 

[Zeriel]

I feel like mass effect played this much better with the paragon/rebel system. You could be the archetypical hero, asshole or something in between.

Which is something that 2077 could have done even better. Had they made Silverhand a silent part of V's personality after the heist, they could have justified pretty much anything coming from the character's mouth based on conflicting elements of the new, composite consciousness - a Blackhandesque pragmatist one moment, a raving rockerboy the next. Wire a counter to those options and then wire different quest endings to that counter and suddenly you have some heavy duty CnC in a game that otherwise has very little of it.

This is giving me ideas that would have made C2077 such a cooler game. Like, what if Arasaka had created simulacrums of all these different famous people for the AI project, and they still had the "pick your role model in chargen" and who you got in the Relic depended on who you picked at chargen? Imagine having Saburo or Blackhand in your head instead, or Johnny if you picked him as your inspiration. Now that would have been awesome. The main thing, I think, with video games, is giving the player a sense of agency. It should be priority #1, even if it's just an illusion and facade of agency. Otherwise... just make a fucking movie or book.