Cyberpunk 2077 was released in such a horrible state that most might have assumed it was forever dead in the water. Look at it now.

  • It’s deserved. The only reason it got negative at the beginning was because of the rushed release. They’ve spent years repairing trust with the community and making it great. I’ve played through oh, five times now because it’s just such a great story.

    The only negative things I hear anymore are things like “it’s too bullet spongy”, which to me is just so nitpicky. If you can’t look at the amazing world they built, the detail, the depth of the characters, the depth of the story, and all you can see is that - well I don’t think you’re going to be happy with many games at all because I don’t think anything can live up to your standards

  •  Senseless   ( @Senseless@feddit.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Replayed it and large parts of the DLC when 2.0 launched. It really is pretty good now.

    I still don’t understand* how nearly every gaming magazine could give this game 90+ at launch with that many (partly critical) bugs and features missing that were announce before launch.

    *Well yes, I do. It’s “write something good or you don’t get samples the next time”

    • The bugs were not experienced by everybody. On my PC I ran into no critical bugs and very few minor bugs on launch week. I was definitely lucky, though.

      It’s possible many review sites were running rigs similar to mine. I personally had a blast with it even at launch and played it 3 times in the first 3 months. Though, it’s definitely much better now, it wasn’t a bad game on its own before, if not for the stability issues must people had.

      • Just the lack of features that were promised in promotion material before launch and the catastrophic, barely even existing police feature were so embarrassing.

        My rig at launch also included 32 GB RAM, a 5800X and a 3080, which was top notch when the game launched, yet I happened to run into two game breaking bugs were I couldn’t progress further into the story. It all seemed very wonky.

    •  orbitz   ( @orbitz@lemmy.ca ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      They probably assumed from Witcher 3 it was mostly fine. I played a fair number of hours on PC, I think the second (maybe 3rd) time it crashed for me was when I was playing the dlc intro, and I don’t think I noticed any horrible bugs. Now I’m not saying they weren’t there of course but this may have all been that reviewers saw as well. Also I think PC was much better on launch than the console so that may have played a big part in it.

      I never read many reviews ahead of time to know what promised features were excluded but I’m sure there were a number, so that should have sunk the score noticably.

      I would say it’s easily a great game now, but mostly I love the attitude and aesthetics of cyberpunk (the genre) and this was one of the recent games that did that part right.

  •  Lad   ( @AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    103 months ago

    I still just don’t like the game, even with all the updates and fixes. It’s missing so much potential customisation that I’d like to see in a cyberpunk game. There’s not much to do in the city outside of missions and I hate the bulletsponge enemies with the RPG style hitpoints system. I also dislike the in game UI.

    I’ve tried to get into it no less than 7 times, but its always felt like a chore and I give up.

  •  kandoh   ( @kandoh@reddthat.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    43 months ago

    I just finished it + the dlc last week.

    Took awhile for me to really get into it. The first half of the game and a lot of the story missions feel like they’re over produced. The gigs were much more enjoyable with plenty of freedom to play like I wanted to.

    Once I got into a good car and learned to have the camera stick to a tight third person view and not move it around - the driving became really fun and enjoyable.

    I really liked the game, i liked the little detail in it. After Starfield especially. I’d still say Bethesda is much better with populating their maps with interesting details and side stories though.

    NPC intelligence and behavior are pretty atrocious, the police in GTA 3 could figure out how to get me if I sat on a roof but the Night City cops just stood there and let me shoot them.

    But a good game. If the NPCs coukd behave like real people i think it would be almost perfect.

    • How’s the gameplay in terms of role-playing and freedom to tackle quests? Any hidden choices or missions with many different solutions? Or is it more like Witcher 3 with clear choices resulting in a small number of quest paths at most?

      •  kandoh   ( @kandoh@reddthat.com ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 months ago

        There’s plenty of quests with multiple outcomes. I would say less clear cut what the ideal outcome is, the game seems to enjoy having negative outcomes no matter what you decide.

        They all kind od boil down to ‘do you spare this person and have them fuck you later, or do you ice them now and look like a psychopath’

  •  Yozul   ( @yozul@beehaw.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    43 months ago

    I guess it’s a good version of what it’s trying to be now, but I was promised a cyberpunk RPG, and what we got was a really terrible Ubisoft game with cyberpunk coat of paint that was eventually patched up to be a good Ubisoft game with a cyberpunk coat of paint. I still feel ripped off.