Official Thread Cyberpunk 2077
- Thread starter Andy
- Start date
I miss the days of reading about games from journalistic sources without having to hear and see whiny, privileged millennials crying about how they deserve the world and go on witch hunts on social media if they don't get all they want.
They don't seem to be all over the place. They are overwhelmingly positive even with it being buggy.
Gamestop's reviewer played the game on a laptop. What happened to this industry?
i think it was an impression after playing for 20 hours. Hightly doubt it's just 20 hours.
Appears so...at least mostly.
Here's a great review from Ars Technica:
Cyberpunk 2077 is equal parts beautiful and messy
20 hours in, Night City is a majestic masterpiece with a lot of rough edges.
arstechnica.com
He said he was 20 hours in and taking his time, but he felt he had another 30 hours to go potentially.
One review said 20 hours for the main story, but easily another 20+ on top of that of side stuff.
Appears so...at least mostly.
Here's a great review from Ars Technica:
Cyberpunk 2077 is equal parts beautiful and messy
20 hours in, Night City is a majestic masterpiece with a lot of rough edges.
I think anyone that has played PC games for awhile knows that as time goes on, the game gets optimized better. I know, in a perfect world, we wish games to come out spotless, etc. but I don't think I'm surprised the bugs reported in reviews (especially after delays). Nothing sounds game breaking and we still don't know if the consoles will have anything similar.
I think the meaningless choices and superficial aesthetics are left to the player to 'roleplay' more or less. I wouldn't necesarily hold that against a game. Albeit, I know very little of the mechanics and storyline; which is the way I want it.
The impressions I shared, the guy played for 20 hours and felt like he was barely starting to break the surface with things. Wasn't even close to being finished. Playtime likely will vastly differ depending on how much exploring, side questing, etc. you do.
So one of the bad things in this game is that it is offensive...so...politically incorrect? I am no SJW so I see that as a positive.
Half the complaints seem to be about silly things like that... kind of funny what gaming journalism has devolved into.
There are no Game Journalists anymore.........just gamers with youtube channels offering their opinions.
I don't know depending on where you look the game is a 7/10 or a 10/10. Seeing alot of diverging opinions especially from the big review sites.
More important to me than a score is the reasoning behind the score. Is the game a 7/10 because of the numerous bugs or is there something fundamentally wrong with the game-play/story? Is the game a 9 or 10 despite the reports of the bugs because the world is so engaging or something else?
Reading a few of them, there are some legit concerns brought up while others are a bit off basis IMO.
Me personally, I don't put too much stock in reviews as some of the best games I've ever played rated poorly and some the games I bounced off of are rated pretty high. Guess it really does depend on the person.
42 Reviews on metacritic with 40 positive and 2 mixed with only 3 below 80 so I would consider that overwhelmingly positive.
There are no Game Journalists anymore.........just gamers with youtube channels offering their opinions.
I had to unfollow a Youtuber I usually like on Twitter because I was annoyed without much he was crying that he didn't end up getting an advance copy. He wasn't going to review or make content for the game now because he didn't get an advance copy.
It's like, dude, you're just some schmo with a Youtube channel. You're not a major outlet, you're not even a major channel. They owe you nothing. None of your followers are getting it early, not sure why you think we should feel bad for you.
Last edited:
Reminds me of playing Gears of War 2 online with a friend. Fell asleep playing it and woke up to him yelling at me.
Wow, talk about a sense of entitlement. And his ranting only makes it worse for him for any potential future relationship with CDPR or any other publisher who views his rant. His shortsightedness will surely do his channel no favors.
I just watched IGN's review and was surprised that he was able to complete the main campaign in about 20hrs. He did mention how side content doubled that amount of time played. I'm not sure I like the idea of such a short story but it looks like there's ample side content to continue the fun in the City.
Sounds like they only allowed reviews to use B-roll that they provided from the PC version, reviewers couldn't use their own gameplay, the game may be great but that's a terrible way to present a review.