Explosive Zombie
Banned
Look, I'm a little sick of all the whining and complaining. I can't be the only one. The worst part is when I see people say stuff like 7/10 like this shit is the annual CoD campaign or something.
I get it, we take no prisoners when it comes to bad launches even if the game is great, we won't give Cyberpunk 2077 more leeway than Fallout 76 even if one is actually a mediocre game and the other isn't.
So... let's get past the bugs, I mean... let's get one thing straight first off, The Witcher III, winner of GAF's GOTG had a buggy launch as well, so assuming this shit is fixed like Witcher III was the bug argument is TEMPORARY.
Okay, we remove bugs from the equation while admitting yes they are a problem CURRENTLY... now let's get past prior gen consoles and acknowledge PS5 and XSX will perform much better when they get a proper next-gen patch. Personally I'm playing the game on PC, and not a particular advanced one but it performs really well for me all the same.
If we ignore those two big arguments against the game what's left?
1. AI - So, I get the AI complaints mostly. For me AI has never been the strong point of RPGs and it never really had to be. If the challenge came from AI then that would diminish the RPG elements but you don't want 100% braindead AI either. I've seen some arguments I can't tell if they're disingenuous or if I'm just getting lucky or if platforms are different for instance... people say the AI is brain dead... yet for me, one of the first encounters I entered was some place full of goons and once I began attacking I saw some decent AI. As an example enemies would evade my grenade throws, take cover and some of the robot enemies when I kept tossing 'nades actually found a way around behind me, flanking me. With the police AI we're mostly talking about their inability to get into vehicles and chase you, there's some kind of weird problem with traffic AI essentially and yes... this does mean you just need to drive away from police to have things calm down. I get the complaints about that but did I need exciting police pursuits not tied to specific missions? Not really. My needs for this game centered around it being an RPG, not an open world sandbox.
Like, okay, I get where you're coming from if you wanted something more like GTA, one could even argue they tried to advertise it that way. But for ME this game was always going to be an RPG first and CDPR were pretty up front about that in interviews. Compare it to Deus Ex, can you name a Deus Ex game that's more sophisticated with these issues? They're not even proper open worlds, more like open hubs. It's telling that when complaining about this people compare it to non-RPGs, how would you compare it to Fallout 4? Are there any AIs that can give you a good pursuit across the map? Was AI the game's strong suit, is it the strong suit of any Fallout from Bethesda? What about Elder Scrolls? Mass Effect doesn't even have this level of freedom. Again, I come back to the question of what RPG is doing what this game does? Nevermind as well, are they even attempting it?
2. This one is similar to one, the lack of emergent gameplay in the sandbox. It's true, this game's sandbox isn't really a sandbox, it's an open world more for immersion and to cram it with stuff to do. Is that so bad? And what was the last sandbox game that felt truly emergent? Ass Creed, GTA, RDR? Aren't these games now just littered with encounters that are wholly scripted to feel emergent? They may still have more emergent gameplay than this but compared to say early entries in the GTA franchise? Honestly, emergent gameplay has been on a downhill trend in the open world genre and it's a bit hard to deny. Very few open world games have been about placing systems in the game and letting you see how they interact over the past generation, maybe it was those jaguar CPUs, not sure. It's weird it's so expected of this game when Witcher III had none of it. Tell me what was truly emergent in Witcher III? Tell me what wasn't something carefully planned for you? Why is Witcher III GOTG to this forum with all the same "problems" this game has?
3. Loot system - I guess this one bothers people, they don't like loads of useless loot, but honestly you need the materials breaking it all down gives you and you also need the eddies you get from selling them. The game has a pretty strong economy that isn't easily broken from what I can tell, a problem many games like it suffer from lately. My all-time favorite RPG, Fallout: New Vegas has an easily breakable economy, for instance, though with time we may find ways to do it here as well, that said this game will get better support than New Vegas ever did, too.
I don't mean to leave out any big issues people have but most the rest don't mean much to me... so let's move on...
I say this game is everything I NEEDED it to be, this means it's not everything I wanted, though, There's a distinction to be made there.
Why is it everything I needed?
1. Choices matter - Some of the early ones might not but the further you get the more you find your choices do matter. I can see being upset you can't play this a million different ways, that V is to some degree a set character and not entirely a blank slate. While your choices have consequences there's only so far in whatever direction you can go. But did I need more than this? No, I needed a FPS RPG that had more meaningful choices than games like Fallout 4 or Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, I'd even say in some ways it beats Prey 2017 for choices that matter but that's a whole other discussion almost. BTW part of making those choices matter...
2. Story - The Story is stronger than games like Mankind Divided, Fallout 4 and for me... Witcher III. I didn't expect the best story ever, but I expected greatness and I have trouble believing I didn't get it.
3. Characters - Another major component in appreciating the story/choices, these are done exceptionally well. Again much better than this game's actual contemporaries.
4. Visuals - Holy fuck does it hit the mark on PC here. Witcher III was one of the most gorgeous games I'd ever played and this game trounces it soundly.
5. Gunplay - Now, I wasn't expecting Destiny 2 or Call of Duty from this but I was hoping for good stuff and it has it, I can easily say the gunplay is more fun than in the Deus Ex games with real meaty oomph to the gunshot sounds with some neat looking weapons as well. There will be bullet spongy enemies but that fits the RPG aspect of this, to me. The combat is so beyond what I expected considering it wasn't that great for me in Witcher III.
6. The World - You can complain it isn't emergent enough but I wanted IMMERSION and it delivers, this world feels amazing and looks amazing. Mankind Divided annoyed me so much with it's little immersion breaking hubs that didn't feel real enough, games like Fallout 4 didn't feel real enough for me either, it's just a giant map of dungeons with a few small settlements and one big settlement. Witcher 3 felt too sparse in between the areas that mattered, as much as I loved Witcher III the open world felt like padding between stuff that mattered... beautiful padding but padding all the same.
7. Side content - Holy shit, this game delivers. I wanted some Fallout New Vegas level side content and I got it. Didn't you?
I'm gonna be honest, I'm a shooter nut but also an RPG fan and as someone in that position so few games deliver like this one does. If I was more of a sandbox guy I might be more on board with people about this game's problems but even then what other RPGs are providing more engaging sandboxes? I hope the problems are fixed and I want all sorts of things you guys want, too but is the game missing those things really taking away from what it is? It's the most beautiful game on the market, it's an RPG with choices that matter, lots of customization, characters you care about, a great story, tons of side content, a gorgeous open world and shooter combat that's more than sufficient. What should I be playing if not this? When someone says this is 7/10 what are the comparable recent games that are 8, 9 or 10/10? If there are none then how can you blame someone for thinking this is the best there is? It's like when Destiny was out for a few months and people decided it was crap and I'm sitting here like "okay, I get all your complaints but... what else is giving me this experience and better?"
I feel like too many people who are angry at the game are people who weren't quite as hyped as the rest of us and not quite as invested. Like if the new Ass Creed was a buggy mess full of issues I could post about how angry I am but I'm not, because it's not what I need from a game anyways. How many people are like me who genuinely want the beautiful melding of RPG and FPS in an open world setting and actually think this game isn't up to snuff compared to the competition? I feel like when I see someone say they'd rather play say RDR 2 or GTA V there's no question they were coming to this game for a different experience than me. You can talk what this game is missing GTA V or RDR 2 have but what about all the things it has they don't? Non-linear missions, dialogue and other choices, more combat options, upgrade systems, etc. When I see someone give this game crap for the police not chasing you I think "well, why can't I do the GTA heists in different ways?" isn't it just as valid a question? We've become so accepting of games being linear as a style choice even when they're sandbox games we're less likely to critique it but the second a game includes an open world and doesn't feature the sandbox features other games might it's this big problem. But that's the thing, if we have to compare GTA to Cyberpunk there are so many ways GTA comes up short in comparison, it's hard to deny. It's why the comparison is as faulty as comparing Prey 2017 to Doom Eternal. As wrongheaded as comparing Hollow Knight to Sackboy. As thoughtless as comparing Forza to Burnout. As senseless as comparing Civilization to Dawn of War. As problematic as comparing Devil May Cry to Dark Souls.
Maybe I'm hung up on how things relate to each other, but all things are relative and without being able to relate one thing to another where do we even begin? Most complaints are people relating it to something else anyways, it's just often the wrong thing.
And again, to be fair to many of you, I want a lot of the same things you do, but then there is no game that launches with everything I want, is there for you? Besides very specific games that have very specific limited goals what games can you think of that couldn't be improved? What games are perfect as they are? Give me your examples.
I get it, we take no prisoners when it comes to bad launches even if the game is great, we won't give Cyberpunk 2077 more leeway than Fallout 76 even if one is actually a mediocre game and the other isn't.
So... let's get past the bugs, I mean... let's get one thing straight first off, The Witcher III, winner of GAF's GOTG had a buggy launch as well, so assuming this shit is fixed like Witcher III was the bug argument is TEMPORARY.
Okay, we remove bugs from the equation while admitting yes they are a problem CURRENTLY... now let's get past prior gen consoles and acknowledge PS5 and XSX will perform much better when they get a proper next-gen patch. Personally I'm playing the game on PC, and not a particular advanced one but it performs really well for me all the same.
If we ignore those two big arguments against the game what's left?
1. AI - So, I get the AI complaints mostly. For me AI has never been the strong point of RPGs and it never really had to be. If the challenge came from AI then that would diminish the RPG elements but you don't want 100% braindead AI either. I've seen some arguments I can't tell if they're disingenuous or if I'm just getting lucky or if platforms are different for instance... people say the AI is brain dead... yet for me, one of the first encounters I entered was some place full of goons and once I began attacking I saw some decent AI. As an example enemies would evade my grenade throws, take cover and some of the robot enemies when I kept tossing 'nades actually found a way around behind me, flanking me. With the police AI we're mostly talking about their inability to get into vehicles and chase you, there's some kind of weird problem with traffic AI essentially and yes... this does mean you just need to drive away from police to have things calm down. I get the complaints about that but did I need exciting police pursuits not tied to specific missions? Not really. My needs for this game centered around it being an RPG, not an open world sandbox.
Like, okay, I get where you're coming from if you wanted something more like GTA, one could even argue they tried to advertise it that way. But for ME this game was always going to be an RPG first and CDPR were pretty up front about that in interviews. Compare it to Deus Ex, can you name a Deus Ex game that's more sophisticated with these issues? They're not even proper open worlds, more like open hubs. It's telling that when complaining about this people compare it to non-RPGs, how would you compare it to Fallout 4? Are there any AIs that can give you a good pursuit across the map? Was AI the game's strong suit, is it the strong suit of any Fallout from Bethesda? What about Elder Scrolls? Mass Effect doesn't even have this level of freedom. Again, I come back to the question of what RPG is doing what this game does? Nevermind as well, are they even attempting it?
2. This one is similar to one, the lack of emergent gameplay in the sandbox. It's true, this game's sandbox isn't really a sandbox, it's an open world more for immersion and to cram it with stuff to do. Is that so bad? And what was the last sandbox game that felt truly emergent? Ass Creed, GTA, RDR? Aren't these games now just littered with encounters that are wholly scripted to feel emergent? They may still have more emergent gameplay than this but compared to say early entries in the GTA franchise? Honestly, emergent gameplay has been on a downhill trend in the open world genre and it's a bit hard to deny. Very few open world games have been about placing systems in the game and letting you see how they interact over the past generation, maybe it was those jaguar CPUs, not sure. It's weird it's so expected of this game when Witcher III had none of it. Tell me what was truly emergent in Witcher III? Tell me what wasn't something carefully planned for you? Why is Witcher III GOTG to this forum with all the same "problems" this game has?
3. Loot system - I guess this one bothers people, they don't like loads of useless loot, but honestly you need the materials breaking it all down gives you and you also need the eddies you get from selling them. The game has a pretty strong economy that isn't easily broken from what I can tell, a problem many games like it suffer from lately. My all-time favorite RPG, Fallout: New Vegas has an easily breakable economy, for instance, though with time we may find ways to do it here as well, that said this game will get better support than New Vegas ever did, too.
I don't mean to leave out any big issues people have but most the rest don't mean much to me... so let's move on...
I say this game is everything I NEEDED it to be, this means it's not everything I wanted, though, There's a distinction to be made there.
Why is it everything I needed?
1. Choices matter - Some of the early ones might not but the further you get the more you find your choices do matter. I can see being upset you can't play this a million different ways, that V is to some degree a set character and not entirely a blank slate. While your choices have consequences there's only so far in whatever direction you can go. But did I need more than this? No, I needed a FPS RPG that had more meaningful choices than games like Fallout 4 or Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, I'd even say in some ways it beats Prey 2017 for choices that matter but that's a whole other discussion almost. BTW part of making those choices matter...
2. Story - The Story is stronger than games like Mankind Divided, Fallout 4 and for me... Witcher III. I didn't expect the best story ever, but I expected greatness and I have trouble believing I didn't get it.
3. Characters - Another major component in appreciating the story/choices, these are done exceptionally well. Again much better than this game's actual contemporaries.
4. Visuals - Holy fuck does it hit the mark on PC here. Witcher III was one of the most gorgeous games I'd ever played and this game trounces it soundly.
5. Gunplay - Now, I wasn't expecting Destiny 2 or Call of Duty from this but I was hoping for good stuff and it has it, I can easily say the gunplay is more fun than in the Deus Ex games with real meaty oomph to the gunshot sounds with some neat looking weapons as well. There will be bullet spongy enemies but that fits the RPG aspect of this, to me. The combat is so beyond what I expected considering it wasn't that great for me in Witcher III.
6. The World - You can complain it isn't emergent enough but I wanted IMMERSION and it delivers, this world feels amazing and looks amazing. Mankind Divided annoyed me so much with it's little immersion breaking hubs that didn't feel real enough, games like Fallout 4 didn't feel real enough for me either, it's just a giant map of dungeons with a few small settlements and one big settlement. Witcher 3 felt too sparse in between the areas that mattered, as much as I loved Witcher III the open world felt like padding between stuff that mattered... beautiful padding but padding all the same.
7. Side content - Holy shit, this game delivers. I wanted some Fallout New Vegas level side content and I got it. Didn't you?
I'm gonna be honest, I'm a shooter nut but also an RPG fan and as someone in that position so few games deliver like this one does. If I was more of a sandbox guy I might be more on board with people about this game's problems but even then what other RPGs are providing more engaging sandboxes? I hope the problems are fixed and I want all sorts of things you guys want, too but is the game missing those things really taking away from what it is? It's the most beautiful game on the market, it's an RPG with choices that matter, lots of customization, characters you care about, a great story, tons of side content, a gorgeous open world and shooter combat that's more than sufficient. What should I be playing if not this? When someone says this is 7/10 what are the comparable recent games that are 8, 9 or 10/10? If there are none then how can you blame someone for thinking this is the best there is? It's like when Destiny was out for a few months and people decided it was crap and I'm sitting here like "okay, I get all your complaints but... what else is giving me this experience and better?"
I feel like too many people who are angry at the game are people who weren't quite as hyped as the rest of us and not quite as invested. Like if the new Ass Creed was a buggy mess full of issues I could post about how angry I am but I'm not, because it's not what I need from a game anyways. How many people are like me who genuinely want the beautiful melding of RPG and FPS in an open world setting and actually think this game isn't up to snuff compared to the competition? I feel like when I see someone say they'd rather play say RDR 2 or GTA V there's no question they were coming to this game for a different experience than me. You can talk what this game is missing GTA V or RDR 2 have but what about all the things it has they don't? Non-linear missions, dialogue and other choices, more combat options, upgrade systems, etc. When I see someone give this game crap for the police not chasing you I think "well, why can't I do the GTA heists in different ways?" isn't it just as valid a question? We've become so accepting of games being linear as a style choice even when they're sandbox games we're less likely to critique it but the second a game includes an open world and doesn't feature the sandbox features other games might it's this big problem. But that's the thing, if we have to compare GTA to Cyberpunk there are so many ways GTA comes up short in comparison, it's hard to deny. It's why the comparison is as faulty as comparing Prey 2017 to Doom Eternal. As wrongheaded as comparing Hollow Knight to Sackboy. As thoughtless as comparing Forza to Burnout. As senseless as comparing Civilization to Dawn of War. As problematic as comparing Devil May Cry to Dark Souls.
Maybe I'm hung up on how things relate to each other, but all things are relative and without being able to relate one thing to another where do we even begin? Most complaints are people relating it to something else anyways, it's just often the wrong thing.
And again, to be fair to many of you, I want a lot of the same things you do, but then there is no game that launches with everything I want, is there for you? Besides very specific games that have very specific limited goals what games can you think of that couldn't be improved? What games are perfect as they are? Give me your examples.