lukaszek
the determinator
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2015
- Messages
- 13,156
we are one wild bd awayIt obviously lacked the most important of #currentday rpgs: wild, sweaty bear sex.
we are one wild bd awayIt obviously lacked the most important of #currentday rpgs: wild, sweaty bear sex.
Do tell what is it about this game that makes it worse than classic GTA (not to meantion modern R* games and Starslop)I'm confident to say that anyone who praised this game (and/or still does) is a shill or a young millennial/genZ that has not experienced gaming for more than half a decade.
The average Codexer uses "RPG" as an indicator of quality rather than a structural descriptor. Didn't you know that if you concede that Cyberpunk's an Action-RPG, Temple of Elemental Evil will stop working on your computer?Of course CP2077 wasn't an RPG. [...]
"Builds" were still a flavor thing. Style over substance. Choose in what way you would be awesome. Imitate nolifer youtuber X's "style of playing the game". Because rushing an enemy base by jumping from a bike and knifing enemies in slow-mo requires much more skill than headshotting them CoD-style without slow-mo. And makes... zero difference.Yeah, but you go in with different expectations.
I mean, W3 was hardly some super deep RPG. If anything, post-2.0 CP77 is substantial improvement in terms of mechanics and build options and overall gameplay variety.
especially since knife throws are homing on enemies heads. You can run around with regular mo and just throw in general directionsknifing enemies in slow-mo requires much more skill
Do tell what is it about this game that makes it worse than classic GTA (not to meantion modern R* games and Starslop)I'm confident to say that anyone who praised this game (and/or still does) is a shill or a young millennial/genZ that has not experienced gaming for more than half a decade.
Yeah but I'm kinda regretful I didn't do a combat build. Seems to be much more fun than at release.Been playing this over January into Feb. I'm basically unstoppable now. Hit max level somewhere in the DLC. Completed all the gigs, sidequests, killed all the cybercodexians, etc. Just making my way through the critical path now.
I think I'd say it's GTA mixed with Deus Ex. The ones outta Quebec. There's something to be said though how I can sit in a van outside a building, hack the camera network and basically kill everyone inside just through the feed without moving an inch.
Lol nigger what difference does using big guns or unarmed have in Fallout 1 or 2? Game plays the same just target the eyes rinse and repeat till the end of the game I guess Fallout is trash then."Builds" were still a flavor thing. Style over substance. Choose in what way you would be awesome. Imitate nolifer youtuber X's "style of playing the game". Because rushing an enemy base by jumping from a bike and knifing enemies in slow-mo requires much more skill than headshotting them CoD-style without slow-mo. And makes... zero difference.
Right. You can choose cut or uncut.character creation
Via a mindless and stupid flow chart, surecharacter development
Uh, you mean V or Fem V?several different builds
This is true. So does Half-Life. And hundreds of other non-RPGs.lots of exploration
stat based action combat
I can't deny there is C&C involved in this game, but I'll be damned if I've ever noticed my choices really fundamentally affecting things. I guess I'll just have to take your word for it because there's no way I'll ever replay it.choices and consequences that affected the story in numerous ways
Sounds so familiar. Where have I heard this before?5 main endings with dozens of variations based on how you dealt with different quests...
I had wild, sweaty sex with Panam in a hover tank. What's your point?wild, sweaty bear sex
Yeah it's weird but even though PL has some quite big choices in it at key moments, I never really found them interesting and still felt overall that i was just along for a ride that I wasn't too invested in.The average Codexer uses "RPG" as an indicator of quality rather than a structural descriptor. Didn't you know that if you concede that Cyberpunk's an Action-RPG, Temple of Elemental Evil will stop working on your computer?Of course CP2077 wasn't an RPG. [...]
That said, you don't wanna go too far in the other direction, and I'm taking issue with those "numerous" choices that affected your story here. Twelve instances of something might be called numerous absent context, but you wouldn't see it that way if you said "twelve out of a million." And CBP's examples of having player agency pale in comparison to all those when it could and should've had it but didn't. The game has the odd meaningful choice along its main plot, but most of the rest is fluff and fake yellow dialogue along linear progressions.
Yeah but I'm kinda regretful I didn't do a combat build. Seems to be much more fun than at release.
Yup. CP's and especially PL's characters aren't exactly likable, not to me anyway. The favorite is probably Johnny (out of major ones) and he's technically a colossal asshole. And yet the whole time PL was expecting of me to really, really care, especially about this lying cunt Songbird. Which was just bizarre at times. And then they pull that twist with the redheads, basically the only likable characters in the whole expansion. For fuck's sake, man.What's strange is that I never felt this way with the Witcher games, even though I'm sure they do the same thing, maybe it's because I actually like the characters and writing of those games I dunno
Right. For example the Baron in TW3 is an asshole, but through the course of the quest you end up sympathizing with him a bit probably... or not, and that's cool too, but I seriously doubt most players finish that quest feeling apathetic about the whole situation.Yup. CP's and especially PL's characters aren't exactly likable, not to me anyway. The favorite is probably Johnny (out of major ones) and he's technically a colossal asshole. And yet the whole time PL was expecting of me to really, really care, especially about this lying cunt Songbird. Which was just bizarre at times. And then they pull that twist with the redheads, basically the only likable characters in the whole expansion. For fuck's sake, man.What's strange is that I never felt this way with the Witcher games, even though I'm sure they do the same thing, maybe it's because I actually like the characters and writing of those games I dunno
I think with a way more talented writing crew they could have pulled it off, but yeah it does seem like they just bit off more than they could chew with all those characters.I think the conflict between Hansen and Myers could have been very interesting - why did a weapons dealer who runs a shitty neighborhood take a shot at the president of a big, fairly powerful country like the NUSA? He had to have some reason to think he'd get away with it, right? I mean, revenge was part of it, but it couldn't be the only part. Was there some ideological conflict with Myers that led to this beef in the first place? The story doesn't really get into this and we don't get the chance to find out, because both characters are sidelined in short order to make way for the much less interesting Songbird and Reed, and who gives a shit about either of them? I think the problem is that Songbird's story is just a cheap knock off of V's - it would have made more sense for the expansion to focus on bigger picture stuff like politics and AI, because the main game is already about a character trying to stave off a painful death caused by advanced technology.
I did feel the gigs and side missions were an improvement over the main game, however. They offered some level of interactivity and C&C even if the leadup to some of them felt really contrived. My main complaint there is that they brought back the Voodoo boys. It sounds petty but I vastly preferred the notion that you could just wipe them out after Transmission and that would permanently change something about the setting. Now, clearly, there are just an infinite supply of Voodoo boys to be antagonists in various side missions and no matter how many you kill it won't make a difference.
Can't comment on PL's main plot as I haven't gone through it yet, but I'd be surprised if it made a much different impression from the main campaign.Yeah it's weird but even though PL has some quite big choices in it at key moments, I never really found them interesting and still felt overall that i was just along for a ride that I wasn't too invested in.
Ah, but there I might be able to offer a hypothesis! Are you familiar with my authoritativeWhat's strange is that I never felt this way with the Witcher games, even though I'm sure they do the same thing, maybe it's because I actually like the characters and writing of those games I dunno
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...There is another fundamental disadvantage that CP77 suffers from, and that can't be compesanted. The player can't ever develop the same kind of attachment to V as he could to Geralt, because the game is first-person and the character himself is a blank slate. This is so huge that I can't understand how CDPR have overlooked it when they decided to make Cyberpunk first person.
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.
It's an unpopular position around here, but I think Johnny's well written and well executed. He's pretty much a sociopath, but it's a compelling portrayal.The favorite is probably Johnny (out of major ones) and he's technically a colossal asshole.
That's interesting, it might well be the explanation.Can't comment on PL's main plot as I haven't gone through it yet, but I'd be surprised if it made a much different impression from the main campaign.Yeah it's weird but even though PL has some quite big choices in it at key moments, I never really found them interesting and still felt overall that i was just along for a ride that I wasn't too invested in.
Ah, but there I might be able to offer a hypothesis! Are you familiar with my authoritativeWhat's strange is that I never felt this way with the Witcher games, even though I'm sure they do the same thing, maybe it's because I actually like the characters and writing of those games I dunnoblogCodex post on the superiority of stoics among voiced protagonists in RPGs?
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...There is another fundamental disadvantage that CP77 suffers from, and that can't be compesanted. The player can't ever develop the same kind of attachment to V as he could to Geralt, because the game is first-person and the character himself is a blank slate. This is so huge that I can't understand how CDPR have overlooked it when they decided to make Cyberpunk first person.
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.
It's an unpopular position around here, but I think Johnny's well written and well executed. He's pretty much a sociopath, but it's a compelling portrayal.The favorite is probably Johnny (out of major ones) and he's technically a colossal asshole.
Johnny Silverhand and that girl at the beginning, Evelyn Parker, were great characters. I did not like Silverhand, the person in the story, but I really liked the character. Others, like Jackie in particular, felt like goofy Disney sidekicks to force you to like them.It's an unpopular position around here, but I think Johnny's well written and well executed. He's pretty much a sociopath, but it's a compelling portrayal.The favorite is probably Johnny (out of major ones) and he's technically a colossal asshole.
I did not like Silverhand, the person in the story, but I really liked the character.