Cyberpunk 2077 Grieving Thread

I honestly can't recall anyone complaining about the Witcher 3 being too long, nor can I imagine a reason why someone would complain about a story-heavy game being too long.


CDPR said the reason they made the main quest shorter than Witcher 3 was they could see with trophies/ achievements that not many people completed the main quest. It wasn't because people complained it was too long. Everyone loved how much there was to do.
 
I honestly can't recall anyone complaining about the Witcher 3 being too long, nor can I imagine a reason why someone would complain about a story-heavy game being too long.
For me, it's less that it was long, so much as the pacing was rather wonky at the end.

Basically, that game, after the Battle At Kaer Morhn, I thought was wrapping up at that point. Everything about that mission just screamed "final or penultimate" mission, what with it reuniting all the allies you made and showing down at where the game begins, and after it was finished, I thought that the game was gonna wrap up pretty quickly soon. And honestly, if it did, I think I would've had a far better overall impression of the game.

Except, no, that's not the last mission at all, for there is in fact still 10+ hours of story left to go through. At this point, the game's momentum comes to a screeching halt as you then have to do all these extra story missions that, if I'm being perfectly frank here, I found just needless padding before you can actually get to the last mission. There are also no more new locations aside from one-offs during one of the story quests, which also makes the last 10+ hours of the story feel like they drag on even more. It really put a huge damper on my enjoyment of the game, as it was paced so perfectly and was flowing really well until that point, at which point I was just feeling like Tom Servo from that one MST3K episode, screaming at the screen for the game to just end already.

So yeah, it's not really the length that's the problem, but more how much the pacing and momentum takes a nosedive at the end.

Which is why CDPR's comments regarding the length in Cyberpunk 2077 are very encouraging to me, as it looks like they learned from their mistakes with TW3's ending.
 
Yeah, W3's endgame is rough, I'm impressed that I managed to really finish to be honest.

If Cyberpunk 2077 is a more reasonable length, that encourages replays, which I like.

So on that note I ask, what kind of characters do you plan on creating?

For my first playthrough I want to play as a female cyborg very much in the vein of Motoko Kusanagi , someone well equipped for the world of Cyberpunk, but for my second playthrough I'd like to play as a schlubby male "everyman" character inspired by Harry Canyon from the film Heavy Metal (or at least Bruce Willis in The Fifth Element), someone who maybe has no cyberware at all at the start if the game will allow it, an outsider to the Cyberpunk world who has to start from scratch, I think that'd be interesting.
 
Witcher 3 to me was great to me up until CDRP went full retard in the quest Reason of State, where they completely butchered their best character in the game (Sigi Reuven) by turning him from a calculating, intelligent underminer to a Moviebob-tier tyrant who tried to kill Geralt and the others (despite knowing that Geralt was more than capable of handling multiple swordsmen at once).

I get that it was probably due to crunch and they had to rush, but to fuck up a massive sub plot so brilliantly left a sour taste.
 
Not sure what kind of first character I'll make. But for first playthrough I'm going to make a nomad. Someone from outside Night City.
 
Definitely going to wait for streams to decide if I even want to pirate. I associate with enough people serious about gamedev to where I may have to play it to keep up with the Joneses, but from the announcement there has been plenty of turn offs from not really keeping an aesthetic that says cyberpunk to celebrity endorsements to now woke buzz trying to make a statement with the game. Couldn't be less interested in most of it, but it is the big release of the year so I'm probably going to have to at least understand what is in it.
 
Witcher 3 to me was great to me up until CDRP went full retard in the quest Reason of State, where they completely butchered their best character in the game (Sigi Reuven) by turning him from a calculating, intelligent underminer to a Moviebob-tier tyrant who tried to kill Geralt and the others (despite knowing that Geralt was more than capable of handling multiple swordsmen at once).

I get that it was probably due to crunch and they had to rush, but to fuck up a massive sub plot so brilliantly left a sour taste.
Eh. It isn't too out-of-character. Roche was going to cut a deal with Nilfgaard for a vassalized Temeria, which would cripple Reuven's plan of a united north that could stop Nilfgaard in its tracks, and had been doing so by actively conspiring against Reuven. Nobody gets to out-spy Sigi Reuven and live. As to Geralt... he's been extremely unhappy with Geralt after getting a shattered ankle from him during the books that was only partially rebuilt by Philippa Eilhart, with the end result being he needs to soak it half the day in hot water to keep the pain down. Considering its one of the first things he brings up with you, its definitely a major grudge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GloJojo
My only real hope for the game will be for it to have at least the gunplay quality of Fallout 4 with a world on par with New Vegas, which I think I'll be getting. I don't think this game will be the next masterpiece like Rocket Knight Adventures, but it's not like I'll be paying for the game anyways.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Judge Dredd
Eh. It isn't too out-of-character. Roche was going to cut a deal with Nilfgaard for a vassalized Temeria, which would cripple Reuven's plan of a united north that could stop Nilfgaard in its tracks, and had been doing so by actively conspiring against Reuven. Nobody gets to out-spy Sigi Reuven and live. As to Geralt... he's been extremely unhappy with Geralt after getting a shattered ankle from him during the books that was only partially rebuilt by Philippa Eilhart, with the end result being he needs to soak it half the day in hot water to keep the pain down. Considering its one of the first things he brings up with you, its definitely a major grudge.

That wasn't the problem he's talking about. The problem was he expected Geralt to step aside and let him kill Roche, and if/when he doesn't he attempts to kill him with like two guys despite that he should know he doesn't stand a chance.
 
That's CDPR doing a shit job of setting up a scene (which I will grant you is the case and I myself was extremely unhappy about that finale), not Reuven going full MovieBlob.
 
My only real hope for the game will be for it to have at least the gunplay quality of Fallout 4 with a world on par with New Vegas, which I think I'll be getting. I don't think this game will be the next masterpiece like Rocket Knight Adventures, but it's not like I'll be paying for the game anyways.

I get that you're saying that the gunplay doesn't have to be perfect, but holy fuck is Fallout 4 an extremely low bar to match. If that games gunplay was in a straight FPS, it would be laughed out of town and be on almost everybody's worst games of that year list. The guns didn't feel like they had any weight to them, the enemies didn't react to getting shot for shit, and everything was so damn spongy, even after minmaxing and having a top tier arsenal.
 
My only real hope for the game will be for it to have at least the gunplay quality of Fallout 4 with a world on par with New Vegas, which I think I'll be getting. I don't think this game will be the next masterpiece like Rocket Knight Adventures, but it's not like I'll be paying for the game anyways.
If the modern Fallout titles are your standard for quality, I think you really need to play more games.
 
I get that you're saying that the gunplay doesn't have to be perfect, but holy fuck is Fallout 4 an extremely low bar to match. If that games gunplay was in a straight FPS, it would be laughed out of town and be on almost everybody's worst games of that year list. The guns didn't feel like they had any weight to them, the enemies didn't react to getting shot for shit, and everything was so damn spongy, even after minmaxing and having a top tier arsenal.
Gunplay refers to the way guns handle and has nothing to do with bullet sponges and no shit if Fallout 4's gunplay was in an FPS it'd be considered awful. Good thing for Cyberpunk it's also not a straight FPS so it doesn't need to try to be one.
Anyway, I'm cautiously optimistic about the game and am just waiting until it's out before making any real judgement calls. Have been intentionally avoiding the hype bullshit because CDPR got retarded and decided to go all in on overhype which almost always backfires and makes it hard to know what to really expect.

Even then, I'm in no hurry so I'll probably just get it when it's on sale. I'm hoping for some basic bitch stealth and a fun world to fuck around in.
 
With the amount of hype this game has been generating, it's difficult to foresee it being anything other than a disappointment. I don't recall another game having as many trailers, or as long an advertising campaign. The challenge it now has, is whether or not it will remain in the public eye after it's release for longer than it did while in development. If it fails to do that, then it will have to be viewed as a flop, irrespective of how much money it makes.
 
Last edited:
With the amount of hype this game has been generating, it's difficult to foresee it being anything other than a disappointment. I don't recall another game having as many trailers, or as long an advertising campaign. The challenge it now has, is whether or not it will remain in the public eye after it's release for longer than it did while in development. If it fails to do that, then it will have to be viewed as a flop, irrespective of how much money it makes.
Soooo regardless of the games quality and the money it makes it will only be considered not a flop if its still popular in 7-8 years? That's a low bar to pass.
 
If the modern Fallout titles are your standard for quality, I think you really need to play more games.
I said 'at least the quality of'. That's not a standard that's the minimum, and New Vegas' story is at the very least universally liked
 
Back