That’s a good point. Yeah, if your favorite part of an open world game is “reactive exploration”, CP2077 isn’t that kind of game.
This is my recollection of my playthrough. Once in a blue moon you’d run into something interesting, but mostly it was like wandering into a bandit camp in Skyrim only usually less interesting.
Compare that to The Witcher 3 and it was a huge step backwards. That the main story also sucked, imo, and I’m hard pressed to ever go back. The gameplay wasn’t that interesting, the quests were almost universally not interesting, exploring… also no interesting.
Making the gameplay better isn’t going to solve the other issues. And I suspect the gameplay will also not be anything special. I suspect most builds will end up trivializing combat in short order and then you’ll be left with lackluster narrative.
It’s a matter of what type of game you like best, though. I loved W3 and Cyberpunk both. The Witcher 3 for its well-crafted lore and stories, as well as most characters, and Cyberpunk for some really good FPS combat in a very nicely realized setting (as a FPS arena, at least; some issues with fleshing out the city as an RPG setting). Combat in the Witcher games kind of blows, but the world-building and people/narratives are generally better.
Just saw this on Twitter (I refuse to call it “X”):
Hey, chooms! While you’ll be able to continue the game with your current character on an existing save, we recommend starting a new game after Cyberpunk 2077 Update 2.0. Due to the number of changes, starting fresh will enhance your overall gameplay experience!
That’s probably what I plan to do, even though some of the missions I really don’t like replaying, especially the ones with tons of cutscenes you have to watch (or at least have to repeatedly click through).
Fem V we meet at last!
Hyped af for this patch, will probably play it ahead of the actual DLC. This will be my 4th run, even though I technically only finished it once. Skyrim flashbacks anyone?
Still deciding what I’m gonna run as, my last two runs were full melee and it’s tons of fun once you’re loaded with cyberware, can’t recommend it enough. Right now I’m thinking maybe hacking+monowire.
I’m definitely not starting over. All the content in 1.0 is still there essentially unchanged and they didn’t add much at all over the past 3 years, bunch of new cars, items, apartments, etc, but nothing substantial narrative. No new awesome questlines.
I plan to load-up my ridiculously powerful level 50 dude and try to figure out how to play 2.0 that way, which will probably be annoying for a bit, then take him to the expansion area when it comes out.
Watching CP2077 2.0 previews makes it very clear how far they progressed towards the game being what CDPR originally promised. Those promises were hugely ambitious but many of them exist now and look super fun.
There’s also a stark difference from Starfield, both in the presentation and combat, both of which look to be just vastly superior in CP2077 now. Like I said a couple weeks ago, I betcha this fuels a lot of interest in CP2077 again and rightfully so. It may take the spotlight from Starfield as they’re very similar games but CP2077 is much more mature and has tons of QoL stuff you only get from a couple of years out in the public.
I’ll start over and this time, I think I’ll play a jackass V just to get the bad ending.
I’m probably going the stealth + hacking route (so most points and perks in Intelligence and Cool). But I had a lot of fun in 1.6 with a mostly reflex + blades build, so bullet time ninja is very tempting too. Decisions, decisions…
I’m sticking with cybermagic but switching to smart weapons as that’s in the same talent tree, they incentivize it. Not really my preference, I’m all about stealth sniping, but it’s fine. Stealth takes too long anyway.
Is dunking on Starfield the new hotness right now? Not that I’m complaining… I never liked Bethesda RPGs. It feels like the rest of the world is finally catching up to understand what shallow, wooden, lifeless worlds they create.
I love Starfield, but I do my damndest not to fanboy anything. Games I love have faults too. Games I love can be topped too.
I like Starfield and I like Cyberpunk 2077. They’re very different games with different approaches and I think it’s great we have both.
In fact, visiting Neon in Starfield got me even more excited to go back to Cyberpunk now. So there’s that? :)
I was just thinking Starfield’s run and gun is actually better than CP’s. A typical fight is in some kind of base rather than some kind of alley :)
Definitely femV if I replayed. I despise the maleV voice. Smug bastard.
Starfield has contained dungeons while CP2077 has buildings and alleyways. CP’s combat spaces tend to be smaller and embedded in the open world. I agree it does feel a bit different there. I was talking about the gunplay itself, which looks to be better in CP 2.0.
Cyberpunk’s gunplay was great out of the box, and should be just as good if not better now. Starfield has, by far, the best gunplay of any Bethesda game ever, and it’s quite fun. It’s not quite as good IMO as Cyberpunk, but then, neither game can hold a candle to a dedicated FPS like Modern Warfare II or whatever. Though the gap is narrowing.
I do think though I’ll roll a new fem V, go the street punk origin again, and roll from the beginning on hard. I don’t mind the repetition that much, though the sex scenes with Johnny and his girlfriend the hacker-who-becomes-digital-god lady are a bit hard to stomach.
I just wanted to mention I have a lot of respect for that, because I have never in my life been able to intentionally aim for a bad ending. I’m told that the ending I reached in The Witcher 3 is a bad ending, but that just kind of happened. I don’t think of myself as a min/maxer but I do have difficulty with spending all the time that games like this require and shooting for a “bad” end.
I can’t do it either. Once I finished Alpha Protocol the first time, I tried to do another playthrough by playing an asshole psychopath and I just couldn’t do it, for example.