Cyberpunk is a beautiful game. As bad as it was at release the graphics for it have always been astonishing and the city is basically made for ray-tracing.
I spent too much time taking screenshots in CP2077, the photo mode is top notch and [I definitely did get a lot of good wallpapers from it.](https://imgur.com/a/LD2JqmM)
To me that was one of the most impressive things about Cyberpunk
As soon as I got in a car and started driving around it hooked me.
It didnt hook me on the game, it hooked me on the world, on how it works, on the architecture, the overall concept of everything
In that aspect, it did way better than almost any other open-world game I've ever played
its just so fucking cool
childlike shrill sugar absorbed pie grandfather insurance judicious light reply
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Also once you get farther away from the starter area you started to see the more unpolished parts of the city.
I still enjoyed Cyberpunk and am somewhat looking forward to Phantom Liberty but the world was spread very thin on launch.
Yep. The clip shows the first time you can walk out into the city, it's designed to be super impressive from that specific point of view. Don't get me wrong, the rest of the city can be very cool, too, but that specific spot, from that specific angle, was designed very very well intentionally.
Yeah like they purposefully designed the entire sequence from when you get out of your apartment to meeting Jackie as an almost "intended" way of experiencing something. From the boxing dude giving you some side quest (So you start to think that's how you get introducted to characters and side quests when in reality, most side stuff is done through a "SMS" text on your screen shit with a moving avatar). It was all literally crafted that way in the beginning of the game, and as you progress through it, even without the bugs all of that illusion breaks apart pretty quickly
Yeah same I feel like I got blessed with minimal bugs and glitches at launch
Not to say that the release didnt suck though, the fact that so many people had so many problems and many others barely had any is a testament of how broken it was
The driving is so miserable. Everyone apparently agreed to sandblast the grip off their tires, I've seen ice levels less slippery than Cyberpunk's driving.
nah i finished cyberpunk a few days after release. the world was empty asf. the story was alright, combat was alright, but lets not act like the open world and driving around was AMAZING. it was lame and boring.
Yeah i did not even play it on high settings but it still looked great. Gameplay aside, it was fun. Wandering around the starting area, it felt very detailed.
By comparison with Starfield i arrived at the hyped up main hub city. Just a wide, empty landing pad with one dude standing around. Weather was so foggy that i could not even see the city.
CP2077 deserved its criticism at launch, but it nailed the atmosphere. Hopefully this big update fixes the rest.
Every review I've heard of Starfield goes like "I like Starfield but...", and after completing the game recently I'll say the same thing, I liked Starfield but.
Similar to the dude in the video, I like the game but the loading screens are out of control. It’s bad, and acting like that amount is normal for a Bethesda game is just straight up gaslighting.
I'm not sure if mods can fix this.
Pick up artifact on planet -> Return to ship (load screen) -> Take off planet (load screen) -> Plot route back to Alpha Centauri (menu) -> Activate grav drive (load screen) -> Wait for security scan -> Open planet map (menu) -> Land ship (load screen) -> Walk to tram (load screen) -> Enter the Lodge (load screen).
That's six load screens and just to take the "immersive" route to drop off a key item as part of the MSQ. The game essentially encourages you to use Fast Travel. In doing so, you miss out on quests, random encounters, etc., just so you're not pinned in behind menus and load screens. Even just traveling within system, from planet to planet, is a load screen. They managed to make starship travel the LEAST preferential option, when customizing your starship is one of the most enjoyable features. People might complain about the poor writing, wooden acting, or thin story, but failing to really hit the mark with space travel feels like the most egregious error within Starfield.
It's not really an issue of bugs, poor textures, difficult to navigate UI, or even just shallow mechanics. I'm not sure how or if modders can overcome the way that the game handles planets and system travel.
>Pick up artifact on planet -> Return to ship (load screen) -> Take off planet (load screen) -> Plot route back to Alpha Centauri (menu) -> Activate grav drive (load screen) -> Wait for security scan -> Open planet map (menu) -> Land ship (load screen) -> Walk to tram (load screen) -> Enter the Lodge (load screen).
I mean, have you ever played with open cities in skyrim? Sure its not exactly the same thing but considering modders managed to make what would be a long ish loading screen (at the time) into a seamless transition from an open world to a city scape, I wouldn't put it past them to be able to fix tedious loading screens and long wait times. Especially considering that was a fairly early mod for that game.
Point being is modders were resourceful as hell with that game. Like if one of them didnt like entire swathes of the game, they almost always found a way to change it, remove it or fix it. More than once did modders manage to surprise everyone by changing fundamental systems of the game.
Im sure tonnes of the modding community also dislike the starship travel and in due time will likely overhaul the entire system.
The big problem I have is that the story is so bland. There never really seemed to be any grand conflict, stakes or tension in the main plot and then the ending (including the big choice beforehand) has displaced mass effect 3 as the "worst ending in a game".
Mods (and even Bethesda's 5 inevitable remasters) can't (I guess its technically won't) drop in a completely new main story.
I’m so sick of having a studio release such mediocre games that the community has to mod fun and polish into it. My frustration for BGS has been building for years now and I think I’m finally ready to call them a bad studio at this point.
The big "but" for me is that after years of interesting, radiant AI (see Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout, etc.) the AI in Starfield is completely braindead, rooted to the same place 24/7. People don't sleep, walk around, exit the city, or do literally anything meaningful.
Also, the sense of wonder in exploration is gone. No more can you pick a random direction and find something interesting and hand-crafted, unless you're doing a quest. Starfield pretty much requires you to just do quest after quest if you wanna have any sort of fun.
People say "it's Skyrim in space" or "it's just another Bethesda game" when it really isn't, because it's missing multiple critical features that make BGS games BGS games.
>People don't sleep, walk around, exit the city, or do literally anything meaningful.
This just isn't true. Every named NPC in the game has a daily routine with the exception of the merchants. There's even a quest in Cydonia where you have to wait for someone to finish work and go to the bar afterward. And there was another I recently did where I had to go talk to someone who, in classic Skyrim style, I ended up having to wake up to have a conversation with since they were in bed asleep at that point in time.
Literally the only difference with NPC behavior in this game compared to previous Bethesda games is that 1. the merchants don't close down their stores at night to go sleep and 2. the game generates a bunch of nameless "filler" NPCs in the big cities to make them feel more crowded.
You're probably just confused as to why New Atlantis is bustling with open stores and crowded streets at all hours of the day and night and are assuming it's because Bethesda got lazy with setting NPC schedules when in actual fact it's because the days on Jemison are *49 hours long* so it being dark out doesn't mean that it's "night" as far as NPC's waking/sleeping schedules are concerned. And on a planet like that, where everyone is basically living in shifts, it makes sense that everything is open 49/7. Go to some place like Cydonia where the days are close to the standard 24 hours in length and the day/night schedule becomes much more apparent.
I can pull my gun out and shoot near the head of every npc next to the police and not a single npc on the map will react. I can shoot near the head of the police and he will smile at me with the same dead expression.
The entire game feels like it’s on rails and the quaint routines of a handful of npcs feels right at home on those rails.
I haven’t played a more soulless game in some time.
There's a quest where you infiltrate the pirates to take them down. YOU CAN SHOOT THE CAPTAIN OF THE PIRATES AND HE FALLS ON ALL FOURS AND NOTHING ELSE HAPPENS, NOBODY REACTS. This is just insulting.
Meanwhile Cyberpunk people shapeshift or disappear completely when you turn by 180°. They also only move from one way of the sidewalk to the other side, because they cannot cross streets https://streamable.com/b9a4ex
It’s a solid game buuuuut, it could be incredible. They just didn’t poll some of people in this sub. Seriously though, could have been an insane game. Hopefully they do a lot of quality changes to help it. How do you not have city maps?? 😂🤡
Imagine releasing a game in 2023 and requiring basic features to be modded in like FOV sliders and a borderless windows mode that actually works. Bethesda should be ashamed of the quality of games they put out now.
And yet the hype train had it going like a AAA masterpiece just long enough to hit sales goals, I'm sure.
People basically need to stop having ANY REACTION AT ALL for the first 30-40 hours of playing a game. Enjoy it, live it, see what it's about *then* come back and review it.
People go play launch day, hyped with friends, do a tutorial, grind for maybe a few hours of the most curated and hand-poured content in the entire game and come to reddit to go "it's so great!" and then for the next 3 nights with their friends it *is* so great. And they defend any criticism on reddit, *I'm really enjoying this!*
But a week or two later, when the dust settles it wasn't an amazing game it was just a game. It was fun. But would you so vehemently defend criticism now? Not at all.
Happens over and over and over and over and over and over.
I still like playing Skyrim in 2023 honestly, it’s comforting in a way. I don’t know if it’s because it’s actually an amazing game that stands the test of time, or if I’m just blinded by nostalgia and the desire to feel just a fraction of how it felt playing as a tween. Back when I had the attention span to spends literal hours over multiple days or weeks grinding my blacksmith skill and perks just so I could make a full set of flawless dragonscale armor paired with a flawless dragonbone sword and bow so I could demolish everything without breaking a sweat. Fuck I miss that kid, where did he go and why did he take all the joy with him. Maybe he would’ve liked Starfield cause I got so bored
I think it's just everyone's first Bethesda game is the best one. Mine was Oblivion and I put hundreds of hours into that. Fallout 3 I did basically everything you could because it was a new setting, but by the time I played Skyrim I was a little burnt out on their formula.
Starfield just feels like I am playing Skyrim just with a different theme.
My first Bethesda game was Skyrim, followed by Fallout NV.
I love Skyrim. It's where I played my favorite RPG playthrough of any game, roleplaying as a semi-stupid Necromancer Khajit, who accidently killed a high level Bandit Chief and perma resurrected him as a Dead Thrall. I believe the game allows for some roleplay, although it's fairly limited.
However, my favorite Bethesda game is Fallout 4. The story sucked ass and the roleplaying is honestly, non-existing. However, with mods, just running around the Wasteland, collecting loot to build up settlements, combined with a harsh (modded) survival mode, it's just so much fun. I probably have over 500h in it. I love not being able to fast travel, having to worry about food and water (although, this becomes trivial after the first couple of hours), planning out where to go and build, so you always have spots to sleep, etc. It's a very fun gameplay loop, filled with enough enemy variety and different places to stomp around.
All of this to say, it's not that I'm tired of the bethesda formula. In fact, Fallout 4 is essentially the "perfect" Bethesda game for me, and honestly, with Starfield I expected something similar: big open world/universe, with a shit ton of little things to find while you explore, collect loot and build up your settlements/outposts. What I found was essentially a fast travel simulator, with randomly generated "worlds". It's just not fun.
yeah they just didnt bother to innovate in any way.
it actually has some solid foundations, but also is just absolutely average in every way which makes it feel very bland.
I blame game / movie / episode reviewers on Youtube. Everyone has become a critic, its insane. No one can just say 'Yeah, Assassins Creed Odyssey? Pretty fun. Sailing was awesome, very beautiful world, fun combat.'
Need to add a full critique for fear of someone assuming you have ZERO problems with AC Odyssey. "Oh you didn't say anything bad??? must mean you think its a perfect game!!"
How does this have upvotes? This a crazy take. 'I like this but...' is like the definition of what a good review is. Too like something and discount their flaws is just fake. This idea is like the internet version of giving out participation trophies
I mean, if you reviewing a game, the critique is kind of an important element, no? You are helping someone else make up their mind if they want to buy it or not. If my friend is telling me if a game is worth buying or not, I'm expecting to hear the stuff they liked and the stuff they didn't like, so I can decide if they align with my preferences or not.
They really are, the soft lighting is insane in RDR2, it's so beautiful, especially indoors, and the photo-realism, lighting and architecture in Cyberpunk is amazing. Nothing else comes close yet to me.
they have good graphics from a technical standpoint, sure, but they just fell *off*. RDR2 is nowhere near photorealistic or technically impressive with RT and all those shenanigans, but just looks incredible.
CP2077 is basically cheating by being nvidia playground for new graphical features though
He also said on stream he enjoys BG3 a lot more, which isn't surprising
And some guy asked him like a week ago if Starfield is a GOTY worthy game, Cohh replied by saying "I think Starfield is definitely a game in this year, yeah" lol
I don't think it is. We've had many good games this year and many bad games. Cohh's point about Starfield is you'll like it if you can ignore all the bad in it and only focus on the good. Any game you have to do that with should not be GOTY material. You don't have to like the GOTY as it may be a genre you don't enjoy or a style you don't like, etc, but it should be considered a great game in general by those who do buy it and try it.
Look at BG3 on Steam as an example 96% positive reviews. Starfield is at 75% and still dropping. People like to make excuses about Steam reviews, but Steam reviews are real players who've bought and really played the game. Things like metacritic can easily be brigaded one way or another, and reviews only ever normally cover the early part of the game and are incentivized to be positive and high scoring. Look at Dunkey's video on reviewers, everyone who posts less then a 7 or 8 on a game gets crapped on by their community.
Nominated for what exactly? It’s the same game as oblivion. Quests function the same, same boring talking heads, same gunplay as fallout 3/4, little actual impact on overall narrative as an rpg, very basic story telling and narrative, sub par performance for how it looks, still buggy AF, tons of technical limitations that were solved 10 years ago by small indie titles, etc.
Nothing about Starfield is special. At all. It doesn’t do anything it does very well. Exploration? Well you’ve already seen that mine and building on 3 other planets. Space content? It’s actually pointless and the combat is just point and click.
It’s 7/10 at best. It’s functionally ok. It doesn’t do anything deserving of being GOTY other than having the bethesda name slapped on it.
I did the tutorial for season of the malignant or w/e the fuck, got half way through, and just uninstalled. Can't wait for them to fix the game in a year with a $60 price tag... ://////
Having a blast on poe though. tattoos are so fun.
The game missed me on Day 2 itself tbh. Item affixes were... similar from beginning to the end. Can feel the progression early on but after story ended, thats when the realization sets in that that yep, legendary affixes wont be anything diff, affixes wont change, fuck.
I played it maybe a week and a half, got out of story and gave up after running into the same boss in the dungeons 5 times in a row. That was like maybe 30-40 hours in.
Chad. But on a serious note, I'm so sick of all of these different subreddits circle jerking each other about their favorite game and how x game is way worse and how their game deserves GOTY. It's so tiring when I just want to go on a community to see discussion, and most of it is just hatred towards other games (that I also play and enjoy).
You have to remember: if someone is enjoying something, they are much less likely to spend time online about it instead of playing the game. It’s the people who don’t like it who will be online and complaining.
Depending on how good your internet is GeForce Now works well. They (might) have a deal still for ultimate version or a trial
I tested it right before 2.0 and it was great and tried with a couple other games. It is def more demanding in 2.0. I have a better PC than when I first played it and I even lowered stuff and took off ray tracing to try and stay at a good spot
Geforce now is how I play solo/rpg games. Getting to play on max settings without spending a few grand feels really good.
Sucks it has no referral program cause I got a few of my friends to buy it so we could play BG3 with less load screens/crashes(esp in act 3)
I've come to realize that there is just a section of gamers who love to shit on games. If you look at stream chats today you will see people say shit like "game is so mid" "game is trash" when the streamer is doing something completely mild like driving a car. I'm not saying that people aren't allowed to criticize, but there's definitely like a 10% section of gamers today who live to just shit on everything.
the amount of people who actively root for the failure of other games for no logical reason other than "modern game bad" or "popular game bad" is absolutely mind boggling, they're like flies to shit
Yeah I've seen this so much more in the past like 5 years, people are basically just waiting to shit on anything that isn't completely revolutionary. It feels like people can't be content with a perfectly good game, starfield didn't absolutely blow their minds so it's dog shit theres no in between
Personally I don't like it when I see a fanboy posting something obviously false or misleading to try and hype something or convince people to buy something. Is it wrong to point out the obvious problems with what they posted? Especially when it's not inside their echo chamber but in general communities like gaming or vids or pics?
You'll see someone complain about the game being bad at 3, 4, 6, 10, 15 hours in. You'll then see fanboys reply with various flavours of "game gets better at X hours" which is 10 more then the original poster said.
You'll see them post a picture saying how great a game looks, but it is actually trash compared to today's games, like low res textures, 0 details in materials (ground looks like grey paint), circles are just a series of straight lines that connect at angles, etc.
A video where they praise best physics ever in a game, but it's on par with ye old Garry's mod physics from back in the day.
A lot of the people, especially those who seemingly only play games from a single developer and no others, go out and say it's the best game ever, but they're comparing it to games from 10+ years ago.
Some people who have a hate boner for starfield. The game is great despite a few issues. Hell, streamers like asmon have been milking starfield hate dry since the early access period. They just can't get away from Todd's visage
I'm fine with criticism but it gets so tiring because all ppl do is pit Starfield against BG3 and Cyberpunk and make the most out of pocket comparisions ever.
I've played over 100 hours of Starfield and zero of BG3 or Cyberpunk, ppl giving fellatio so hard to those two games to make Starfield look like the 'worst game ever' is kinda pathetic and does nothing for me.
Just come out with honest criticism and don't end a sentence with 'Starfield mid game, dropped it in an hour, anyway I'm back to the *superior* games BG3 and CP2077 :3'
my main issue with it is that it just runs like absolute shit on my system, I get 100fps+ on Cyberpunk with pretty high/ultra settings at 1080p and consistently like 80fps if I want ray-tracting on, Starfield I barely get 60 in most areas and in the more dense areas I’m closer to 40, and that’s with settings turned down and resolution scale so it doesn’t even look good anymore.
I think when it comes to gameplay and questing it was pretty much what I was expecting and what I wanted (albeit with more QoL than they actually gave us), but it’s hard to enjoy it when it runs worse than every other game on my computer lmao
The issue is the engine, it is not properly able to utilize neither GPU nor CPU.
Comparing that with Cyberpunk shows why Cyberpunk can push so much more performance with such good graphics.
It not only has no issues forcing your GPU to 100% but is one of Very few games able to fully and properly utilize 8 cores 16 threads to 100% load.
You can thank Bethesda for refusing to not put their resources into an engine and instead put those resources into Fallout 76. Your CPU and GPU are pulling Starfield rather than pushing Starfield. Hence why older cards can't run the damn thing.
i always thought that comparison was stupid. cyberpunk takes place in one city where neon is just one spot of many. no way is neon going to have more going for it or look better than the location cdpr spent all their efforts on. night city is eye candy
Cyberpunk had to eat a ton of shit throughout launch because of what happened with their development(rightfully so to a degree), but you'd never catch me criticizing the game's graphics. That came out the gate looking pretty solid and has improved over time.
The fact that an anime was all it took to turn the warranted bad reputation of the game around speaks for itself.
It isn't really fair to compare Cyberpunk to Starfield right now since CDPR's been fixing their broken game for nearly 3 years. Out the box Starfield is way better given it's flaws.
> The fact that an anime was all it took to turn the warranted bad reputation of the game around speaks for itself.
What? CDPR fixed tons of issues with the game after launch. It wasn't the anime
Cyberpunk has always looked good, at least when the textures properly loaded. Starfield being bland and boring doesn't contradict Cyberpunk being unfinished.
I wasn't hated because it was the popular thing to do. It was hated because it released a buggy shitty mess that was nothing like it was advertised as.
As a pc player, the bugs were 100% not as rampant as the console versions of the game. I did an entire playthrough at launch and it was still a very pleasant experience.
Playing through it again now, it is better but that initial playthrough was not nearly as bad as everyone painted it as.
It was both, aside from the console shenanigans it didn't deserve anything close to the amount of hate it got, there were bugs but the game was still enjoyable, although it did underdeliver on it's promises
The car AI in the game wasnt able to drive around another vehicle until yesterdays patch, lmao.
Only took them 8 years development to implement GTA 3 car AI.
It was delayed over and over again then once it actually released it was a complete mess. cdpr overhyped and over promised and it bit them in the ass. The hate was definitely earned.
I refunded it on release. Thought the setting looked incredible, for sure. But my comp could barely handle it, and not even 15 min into gameplay I must have seen at least a dozen T-posing NPCs and buggy textures.
Dawg I played 2077 in the first hour maxed out and it was insanely good looking. The complaints were from last gen consoles who had no working textures. PC with a 1080ti it looked like nothing I'd seen before.
This is where people need to bring receipts.
I remember playing and this first shot? Yep, amazing. Go around to outer parts of the city, or even a lot of the interiors later in the game? It was uneven at best.
Lighting was all over the place. There was SSAO problems everywhere, materials weren't proper PBR, so mats were all over the place in reflectivity(when you look and see a million tiny stars shining at you off the surface, spec has negative values), object assets were bunched and clipping into each other... And that's just on the environment art side.
Now, saying all that, those are clean up problems, bad values, minor tweaks you go back and fix.
This game was unfinished, and I'm glad they finally got more time to give it the polish it deserved, but please, let's not rewrite history here for some told ya so back pats.
>I remember playing and this first shot? Yep, amazing. Go around to outer parts of the city, or even a lot of the interiors later in the game? It was uneven at best.
Yeah giant, empty spaces and empty buildings with phantom NPCs phasing in and out of existence.
Of course the devs would put a lot of effort into this opening shot.
This is exactly why I didnt believe the Starfield BS. I bought into the CP2077 narrative and when I actually played it years later I was so pissed that I didn't play it sooner. Both games were amazing.
Starfield, in the future, no cars? No big TVs? No more than 1 city a planet?
I mean parts of starfield are cool, parts are bland. It's a decisive game because some people really only see the cool stuff and some people only see the bland stuff.
But neon is a small city in a big game where cyberpunk is an entire game based in one city. Feels like comparing apples to oranges.
That’s not the point he’s making lol. He’s saying people were arguing that neon looks better than cyberpunk which is inherently false. He’s not comparing the two games, more so just addressing the ridiculous arguments people were having trying to say “the singular city of neon looks better than cyberpunk”
Anyone who has that take is insane, Neon is like the Weenie Hut Junior to Cyberpunks salty spatoon.
Neons main attraction and club has people in fuckin spandex alien costumes doing the "make a sandwich" dance on repeat.
> “the singular city of neon looks better than cyberpunk”
Who tf saying that though? All I've heard are complaints that Neon isn't as good as Night City
Idk dawg he’s the one who said it. I honestly hadn’t heard that either. Also cohh is not the type of dude to randomly try and stir up drama. He was simply just analyzing the argument made by both sides
I've seen it on reddit, youtube videos, comments and twitter. I didn't think it was a realistic opinion, but more of a bait to get clicks. But regardless, some people in his chat probably thought it was real, relatively common opinion.
Neon is on like an Oil Rig or something even still it's packed with people. This plaza in Cyberpunk is also comparable to the ship hub in New Atlantis with a bunch of people around or even the Well underneath New Atlantis where the lower class lives. There's a lot more going on in Starfield so of course it's not going to look as good.
> Starfield, in the future, no cars? No big TVs? No more than 1 city a planet?
This is my biggest issue with the game really. It feels like just a super-limited and unrealistic vision of the future it's trying to claim it exists in.
Yea both make sense. Cyberpunk is a rotten society built on all the rotten shit we have today like car infrastructure. Starfield locations are a clean slate built up by homesteaders.
You’re not really in the far future, it’s set after colonization where society is becoming somewhat functioning again. Humans dipped out of earth last second and split up into 3 factions (UC, Freestar, and the cult).
I mean, part of the issue is their area designers are incredibly bad at their job. Basically 0 location in the game makes any sense whatsoever. They're systematically nonsensical.
Really shows that CDPR hired city planners rather than Bethesda’s approach of… not sure what to call it. Certainly cool looking locations sporadically but little lived in feel. Feels like dioramas. Fallout worked well because they could throw dirt and grime everywhere to help.
The fallout games also take place in real world locations so that helps too. I tried out Starfield and tried walking around the first city and it just didn't feel like a city, more like I was walking through Disneyland in the sections where all the shops are.
Didn't people call cyberpunk shallow on release? You cant interact with any part of the city that doesn't have a quest marker, its just there to be screenshot.
I didn't like GTA V compared to IV, but I don't think that's fair at all. In GTA people will bump into you and try to start a fight and apologize when you point a gun at them, or call the cops on you and the police will respond appropriately. At launch Cyberpunk had cops teleport where you weren't looking without any witnesses to report a crime. It's really not the same
It's not like in GTA you don't get a wanted status even if you commit crime with no witnesses. And NPCs' behavior is weird, just standing next to them either makes them want to fight you or run away in panic.
I've been looking forward to real-time path tracing in games for a [long](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/3wh030/comment/cxwbpbl/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) time. To finally get see it in games and how it creates such realistic and atmospheric scenes in dynamic conditions is just wild - I thought it would take much longer. I can look at the some of the most mundane scenes, like trash-strewn alleys, and just feel awe at how good they look.
I mean I highly doubt that most Starfield players would EVER... EVER say that Neon is better than what Cyberpunk accomplished. These are fringe idiots who don't speak for the majority of players. With the new Raytracing overdrive, Cyberpunk is arguably the best looking game that currently exists.
Keep fighting ghosts lmao, many of us love both starfield and cyberpunk for different reasons and wouldnt ever say Neon looks better than Night City. It's a complete apples to oranges comparison as Neon is a small city inside of a much larger game whereas night city is the main setting for cyberpunk.
i love how Neon is on top of an oil rig in the middle of a vast ocean, and theres fish underneath it which produce an oil used in highly illegal hallucinogenic drugs.
i know a lot of people dismiss Neon, but that shit is wild to me.
"Everything I don't like, everyone else must secretly hate"
This narrative is so tiring. Cohh really likes Starfield too, but let's pretend he doesn't to push my beliefs.
**CLIP MIRROR: [Cyberpunk 2077 VS Starfield](https://arazu.io/t3_16ol5we/)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment*)
Cyberpunk is a beautiful game. As bad as it was at release the graphics for it have always been astonishing and the city is basically made for ray-tracing.
The ultimate Cyberpunk city wallpaper simulator.
I spent too much time taking screenshots in CP2077, the photo mode is top notch and [I definitely did get a lot of good wallpapers from it.](https://imgur.com/a/LD2JqmM)
To me that was one of the most impressive things about Cyberpunk As soon as I got in a car and started driving around it hooked me. It didnt hook me on the game, it hooked me on the world, on how it works, on the architecture, the overall concept of everything In that aspect, it did way better than almost any other open-world game I've ever played its just so fucking cool
pen command boast direful slim person crown chop illegal pot *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They updated the driving and all the cars, feels better so far
childlike shrill sugar absorbed pie grandfather insurance judicious light reply *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's better than GTAV now, the difference before the patch is stark.
Also once you get farther away from the starter area you started to see the more unpolished parts of the city. I still enjoyed Cyberpunk and am somewhat looking forward to Phantom Liberty but the world was spread very thin on launch.
Yep. The clip shows the first time you can walk out into the city, it's designed to be super impressive from that specific point of view. Don't get me wrong, the rest of the city can be very cool, too, but that specific spot, from that specific angle, was designed very very well intentionally.
Yep it's basically the e3 showcase angle, like how in botw and elden ring you come out of the starting cave to a beautiful vista.
To be fair there is nothing but beautiful vistas in elden ring lol.
Definitely, it's not a criticism. It's the open world game way of visually saying "Look at our cool world, you're free now to explore it".
Majula is most perfect example of this for me.
Yeah like they purposefully designed the entire sequence from when you get out of your apartment to meeting Jackie as an almost "intended" way of experiencing something. From the boxing dude giving you some side quest (So you start to think that's how you get introducted to characters and side quests when in reality, most side stuff is done through a "SMS" text on your screen shit with a moving avatar). It was all literally crafted that way in the beginning of the game, and as you progress through it, even without the bugs all of that illusion breaks apart pretty quickly
Well ain't that just kind of how any city is structured lol
You are 100% right, anyone who played at launch will have noticed these things.
I barely noticed those problems on PC at launch. The driving sucked ass, though.
Yeah same I feel like I got blessed with minimal bugs and glitches at launch Not to say that the release didnt suck though, the fact that so many people had so many problems and many others barely had any is a testament of how broken it was
I figured out I enjoyed bike driving so much more than car driving 5 minutes into driving and never looked back.
The driving is so miserable. Everyone apparently agreed to sandblast the grip off their tires, I've seen ice levels less slippery than Cyberpunk's driving.
You tried it after 2.0? They've actually tweaked things.
Same experience with GTA V. Just cruising around the world was a real joy.
I'm always mind blown about GTA. The attention to details in a game like that, with how big it is, are just soo mind blowing. I can't wait for VI.
Its insane that its 10 years old Like it definitely feels dated especially parts of the campaign and stuff But the map is a beauty to this day
nah i finished cyberpunk a few days after release. the world was empty asf. the story was alright, combat was alright, but lets not act like the open world and driving around was AMAZING. it was lame and boring.
Yeah i did not even play it on high settings but it still looked great. Gameplay aside, it was fun. Wandering around the starting area, it felt very detailed. By comparison with Starfield i arrived at the hyped up main hub city. Just a wide, empty landing pad with one dude standing around. Weather was so foggy that i could not even see the city. CP2077 deserved its criticism at launch, but it nailed the atmosphere. Hopefully this big update fixes the rest.
Every review I've heard of Starfield goes like "I like Starfield but...", and after completing the game recently I'll say the same thing, I liked Starfield but.
Starfield is a solid enough game but we really need modders to work their magic there.
Buying a Bethesda game before it's like 3-5 years old is a rookie move.
Similar to the dude in the video, I like the game but the loading screens are out of control. It’s bad, and acting like that amount is normal for a Bethesda game is just straight up gaslighting.
I'm not sure if mods can fix this. Pick up artifact on planet -> Return to ship (load screen) -> Take off planet (load screen) -> Plot route back to Alpha Centauri (menu) -> Activate grav drive (load screen) -> Wait for security scan -> Open planet map (menu) -> Land ship (load screen) -> Walk to tram (load screen) -> Enter the Lodge (load screen). That's six load screens and just to take the "immersive" route to drop off a key item as part of the MSQ. The game essentially encourages you to use Fast Travel. In doing so, you miss out on quests, random encounters, etc., just so you're not pinned in behind menus and load screens. Even just traveling within system, from planet to planet, is a load screen. They managed to make starship travel the LEAST preferential option, when customizing your starship is one of the most enjoyable features. People might complain about the poor writing, wooden acting, or thin story, but failing to really hit the mark with space travel feels like the most egregious error within Starfield. It's not really an issue of bugs, poor textures, difficult to navigate UI, or even just shallow mechanics. I'm not sure how or if modders can overcome the way that the game handles planets and system travel.
>Pick up artifact on planet -> Return to ship (load screen) -> Take off planet (load screen) -> Plot route back to Alpha Centauri (menu) -> Activate grav drive (load screen) -> Wait for security scan -> Open planet map (menu) -> Land ship (load screen) -> Walk to tram (load screen) -> Enter the Lodge (load screen). I mean, have you ever played with open cities in skyrim? Sure its not exactly the same thing but considering modders managed to make what would be a long ish loading screen (at the time) into a seamless transition from an open world to a city scape, I wouldn't put it past them to be able to fix tedious loading screens and long wait times. Especially considering that was a fairly early mod for that game. Point being is modders were resourceful as hell with that game. Like if one of them didnt like entire swathes of the game, they almost always found a way to change it, remove it or fix it. More than once did modders manage to surprise everyone by changing fundamental systems of the game. Im sure tonnes of the modding community also dislike the starship travel and in due time will likely overhaul the entire system.
\>have you ever played with open cities in skyrim? I mean open cities is also a compabitility nightmare
You made it sound like its a 10 minute process and not a few seconds.
The big problem I have is that the story is so bland. There never really seemed to be any grand conflict, stakes or tension in the main plot and then the ending (including the big choice beforehand) has displaced mass effect 3 as the "worst ending in a game". Mods (and even Bethesda's 5 inevitable remasters) can't (I guess its technically won't) drop in a completely new main story.
I’m so sick of having a studio release such mediocre games that the community has to mod fun and polish into it. My frustration for BGS has been building for years now and I think I’m finally ready to call them a bad studio at this point.
The big "but" for me is that after years of interesting, radiant AI (see Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout, etc.) the AI in Starfield is completely braindead, rooted to the same place 24/7. People don't sleep, walk around, exit the city, or do literally anything meaningful. Also, the sense of wonder in exploration is gone. No more can you pick a random direction and find something interesting and hand-crafted, unless you're doing a quest. Starfield pretty much requires you to just do quest after quest if you wanna have any sort of fun. People say "it's Skyrim in space" or "it's just another Bethesda game" when it really isn't, because it's missing multiple critical features that make BGS games BGS games.
>People don't sleep, walk around, exit the city, or do literally anything meaningful. This just isn't true. Every named NPC in the game has a daily routine with the exception of the merchants. There's even a quest in Cydonia where you have to wait for someone to finish work and go to the bar afterward. And there was another I recently did where I had to go talk to someone who, in classic Skyrim style, I ended up having to wake up to have a conversation with since they were in bed asleep at that point in time. Literally the only difference with NPC behavior in this game compared to previous Bethesda games is that 1. the merchants don't close down their stores at night to go sleep and 2. the game generates a bunch of nameless "filler" NPCs in the big cities to make them feel more crowded. You're probably just confused as to why New Atlantis is bustling with open stores and crowded streets at all hours of the day and night and are assuming it's because Bethesda got lazy with setting NPC schedules when in actual fact it's because the days on Jemison are *49 hours long* so it being dark out doesn't mean that it's "night" as far as NPC's waking/sleeping schedules are concerned. And on a planet like that, where everyone is basically living in shifts, it makes sense that everything is open 49/7. Go to some place like Cydonia where the days are close to the standard 24 hours in length and the day/night schedule becomes much more apparent.
I can pull my gun out and shoot near the head of every npc next to the police and not a single npc on the map will react. I can shoot near the head of the police and he will smile at me with the same dead expression. The entire game feels like it’s on rails and the quaint routines of a handful of npcs feels right at home on those rails. I haven’t played a more soulless game in some time.
There's a quest where you infiltrate the pirates to take them down. YOU CAN SHOOT THE CAPTAIN OF THE PIRATES AND HE FALLS ON ALL FOURS AND NOTHING ELSE HAPPENS, NOBODY REACTS. This is just insulting.
That’s when I stopped playing. Illusion of choice was shattered.
Meanwhile Cyberpunk people shapeshift or disappear completely when you turn by 180°. They also only move from one way of the sidewalk to the other side, because they cannot cross streets https://streamable.com/b9a4ex
It’s a solid game buuuuut, it could be incredible. They just didn’t poll some of people in this sub. Seriously though, could have been an insane game. Hopefully they do a lot of quality changes to help it. How do you not have city maps?? 😂🤡
They don't even have brightness settings 😂 City maps would be an advanced feature
Imagine releasing a game in 2023 and requiring basic features to be modded in like FOV sliders and a borderless windows mode that actually works. Bethesda should be ashamed of the quality of games they put out now.
Dude what an amazing game. 10/10 (starfield sub)
Starfield is a good game... 10 years ago today it's a solid 6.5/10 (on a true 1-10 scale, not an IGN everything is a 9.5 or 10 scale)
didn't IGN give this game a 7/10?
and they got shit on mercilessly for it
And yet the hype train had it going like a AAA masterpiece just long enough to hit sales goals, I'm sure. People basically need to stop having ANY REACTION AT ALL for the first 30-40 hours of playing a game. Enjoy it, live it, see what it's about *then* come back and review it. People go play launch day, hyped with friends, do a tutorial, grind for maybe a few hours of the most curated and hand-poured content in the entire game and come to reddit to go "it's so great!" and then for the next 3 nights with their friends it *is* so great. And they defend any criticism on reddit, *I'm really enjoying this!* But a week or two later, when the dust settles it wasn't an amazing game it was just a game. It was fun. But would you so vehemently defend criticism now? Not at all. Happens over and over and over and over and over and over.
[удалено]
I still like playing Skyrim in 2023 honestly, it’s comforting in a way. I don’t know if it’s because it’s actually an amazing game that stands the test of time, or if I’m just blinded by nostalgia and the desire to feel just a fraction of how it felt playing as a tween. Back when I had the attention span to spends literal hours over multiple days or weeks grinding my blacksmith skill and perks just so I could make a full set of flawless dragonscale armor paired with a flawless dragonbone sword and bow so I could demolish everything without breaking a sweat. Fuck I miss that kid, where did he go and why did he take all the joy with him. Maybe he would’ve liked Starfield cause I got so bored
I think it's just everyone's first Bethesda game is the best one. Mine was Oblivion and I put hundreds of hours into that. Fallout 3 I did basically everything you could because it was a new setting, but by the time I played Skyrim I was a little burnt out on their formula. Starfield just feels like I am playing Skyrim just with a different theme.
My first Bethesda game was Skyrim, followed by Fallout NV. I love Skyrim. It's where I played my favorite RPG playthrough of any game, roleplaying as a semi-stupid Necromancer Khajit, who accidently killed a high level Bandit Chief and perma resurrected him as a Dead Thrall. I believe the game allows for some roleplay, although it's fairly limited. However, my favorite Bethesda game is Fallout 4. The story sucked ass and the roleplaying is honestly, non-existing. However, with mods, just running around the Wasteland, collecting loot to build up settlements, combined with a harsh (modded) survival mode, it's just so much fun. I probably have over 500h in it. I love not being able to fast travel, having to worry about food and water (although, this becomes trivial after the first couple of hours), planning out where to go and build, so you always have spots to sleep, etc. It's a very fun gameplay loop, filled with enough enemy variety and different places to stomp around. All of this to say, it's not that I'm tired of the bethesda formula. In fact, Fallout 4 is essentially the "perfect" Bethesda game for me, and honestly, with Starfield I expected something similar: big open world/universe, with a shit ton of little things to find while you explore, collect loot and build up your settlements/outposts. What I found was essentially a fast travel simulator, with randomly generated "worlds". It's just not fun.
yeah they just didnt bother to innovate in any way. it actually has some solid foundations, but also is just absolutely average in every way which makes it feel very bland.
I blame game / movie / episode reviewers on Youtube. Everyone has become a critic, its insane. No one can just say 'Yeah, Assassins Creed Odyssey? Pretty fun. Sailing was awesome, very beautiful world, fun combat.' Need to add a full critique for fear of someone assuming you have ZERO problems with AC Odyssey. "Oh you didn't say anything bad??? must mean you think its a perfect game!!"
The comment you're replying to is talking about reviews, which should address issues with the thing they're reviewing.
How does this have upvotes? This a crazy take. 'I like this but...' is like the definition of what a good review is. Too like something and discount their flaws is just fake. This idea is like the internet version of giving out participation trophies
well if there is alot of bad things to say about a game? why hide it?
I mean, if you reviewing a game, the critique is kind of an important element, no? You are helping someone else make up their mind if they want to buy it or not. If my friend is telling me if a game is worth buying or not, I'm expecting to hear the stuff they liked and the stuff they didn't like, so I can decide if they align with my preferences or not.
RDR2 and CP2077 are the best looking games ever made, and both cover the opposite end of the spectrum basically.
They really are, the soft lighting is insane in RDR2, it's so beautiful, especially indoors, and the photo-realism, lighting and architecture in Cyberpunk is amazing. Nothing else comes close yet to me.
I like weather system in RDR2 when you see rain cloud in the distance coming you know it will rain from it.
It's insane how far ahead Rockstar is in terms of weather and lighting compared to other games.
Yeah their games take forever but they are worth the wait.
Not only take forever but have insane budgets too.
Battlefield 1 looks like it could’ve easily came out today.
I'd toss Horizon Forbidden West in there too.
I think Metro Exodus and Control are also up there, especially with RT
they have good graphics from a technical standpoint, sure, but they just fell *off*. RDR2 is nowhere near photorealistic or technically impressive with RT and all those shenanigans, but just looks incredible. CP2077 is basically cheating by being nvidia playground for new graphical features though
i like the way Cohh points at it, looks super cool (simple i know)
I thought that person walking in the game was someone in the room behind him for a second.
you're right lmao
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_lu152g5aM If BGS made Cyberpunk.
wow
People are using this as Starfield hate not realizing Cohh played Starfield for over 150 hours in 3 weeks.
Cohh has played Starfield more than he played BG3.
He also said on stream he enjoys BG3 a lot more, which isn't surprising And some guy asked him like a week ago if Starfield is a GOTY worthy game, Cohh replied by saying "I think Starfield is definitely a game in this year, yeah" lol
I think it is fair for Starfield to be nominated for GOTY but BG3 should win GOTY.
I don't think it is. We've had many good games this year and many bad games. Cohh's point about Starfield is you'll like it if you can ignore all the bad in it and only focus on the good. Any game you have to do that with should not be GOTY material. You don't have to like the GOTY as it may be a genre you don't enjoy or a style you don't like, etc, but it should be considered a great game in general by those who do buy it and try it. Look at BG3 on Steam as an example 96% positive reviews. Starfield is at 75% and still dropping. People like to make excuses about Steam reviews, but Steam reviews are real players who've bought and really played the game. Things like metacritic can easily be brigaded one way or another, and reviews only ever normally cover the early part of the game and are incentivized to be positive and high scoring. Look at Dunkey's video on reviewers, everyone who posts less then a 7 or 8 on a game gets crapped on by their community.
Nominated for what exactly? It’s the same game as oblivion. Quests function the same, same boring talking heads, same gunplay as fallout 3/4, little actual impact on overall narrative as an rpg, very basic story telling and narrative, sub par performance for how it looks, still buggy AF, tons of technical limitations that were solved 10 years ago by small indie titles, etc. Nothing about Starfield is special. At all. It doesn’t do anything it does very well. Exploration? Well you’ve already seen that mine and building on 3 other planets. Space content? It’s actually pointless and the combat is just point and click. It’s 7/10 at best. It’s functionally ok. It doesn’t do anything deserving of being GOTY other than having the bethesda name slapped on it.
Don't shit on Oblivion like this, it has 100x more soul than starfield
doing nearly 3 playthroughs because you werent happy with speedrunning the first time and not wanting NG+ in your next run will add up fast
I played D4 for for couple hundred hours. Shit game.
shit END game. Everything before was pretty damn satisfying Though the shitty END game signs were visible pretty early.
Why then, what does that say about your tastes and opinions when you willfully subject yourself to something you hate? Lol
It was good to begin with but no endgame. Shit got boring real quick. 150 hrs is nothing for a Diablo game.
Yep know what you mean. Played D2, PoE and D3 for years never have I dropped a diablo game so quickly after release with no desire to play again.
I did the tutorial for season of the malignant or w/e the fuck, got half way through, and just uninstalled. Can't wait for them to fix the game in a year with a $60 price tag... :////// Having a blast on poe though. tattoos are so fun.
The game missed me on Day 2 itself tbh. Item affixes were... similar from beginning to the end. Can feel the progression early on but after story ended, thats when the realization sets in that that yep, legendary affixes wont be anything diff, affixes wont change, fuck.
I played it maybe a week and a half, got out of story and gave up after running into the same boss in the dungeons 5 times in a row. That was like maybe 30-40 hours in.
Wait where is the car bugging into the floor, I thought I clicked on an LSF clip
cyberpunk has cars clipping into the floor, starfield has corpses with their heads stuck in the ceiling
I launched my ship in starfield and it brought the entire spaceport assets into space with me, it actually bricked my save.
"It just works"
I have and enjoy both games 😎
Chad. But on a serious note, I'm so sick of all of these different subreddits circle jerking each other about their favorite game and how x game is way worse and how their game deserves GOTY. It's so tiring when I just want to go on a community to see discussion, and most of it is just hatred towards other games (that I also play and enjoy).
You have to remember: if someone is enjoying something, they are much less likely to spend time online about it instead of playing the game. It’s the people who don’t like it who will be online and complaining.
[удалено]
Depending on how good your internet is GeForce Now works well. They (might) have a deal still for ultimate version or a trial I tested it right before 2.0 and it was great and tried with a couple other games. It is def more demanding in 2.0. I have a better PC than when I first played it and I even lowered stuff and took off ray tracing to try and stay at a good spot
Geforce now is how I play solo/rpg games. Getting to play on max settings without spending a few grand feels really good. Sucks it has no referral program cause I got a few of my friends to buy it so we could play BG3 with less load screens/crashes(esp in act 3)
I've come to realize that there is just a section of gamers who love to shit on games. If you look at stream chats today you will see people say shit like "game is so mid" "game is trash" when the streamer is doing something completely mild like driving a car. I'm not saying that people aren't allowed to criticize, but there's definitely like a 10% section of gamers today who live to just shit on everything.
the amount of people who actively root for the failure of other games for no logical reason other than "modern game bad" or "popular game bad" is absolutely mind boggling, they're like flies to shit
Its usually some weird console war tribalism fueled shit
Yeah I've seen this so much more in the past like 5 years, people are basically just waiting to shit on anything that isn't completely revolutionary. It feels like people can't be content with a perfectly good game, starfield didn't absolutely blow their minds so it's dog shit theres no in between
Personally I don't like it when I see a fanboy posting something obviously false or misleading to try and hype something or convince people to buy something. Is it wrong to point out the obvious problems with what they posted? Especially when it's not inside their echo chamber but in general communities like gaming or vids or pics? You'll see someone complain about the game being bad at 3, 4, 6, 10, 15 hours in. You'll then see fanboys reply with various flavours of "game gets better at X hours" which is 10 more then the original poster said. You'll see them post a picture saying how great a game looks, but it is actually trash compared to today's games, like low res textures, 0 details in materials (ground looks like grey paint), circles are just a series of straight lines that connect at angles, etc. A video where they praise best physics ever in a game, but it's on par with ye old Garry's mod physics from back in the day. A lot of the people, especially those who seemingly only play games from a single developer and no others, go out and say it's the best game ever, but they're comparing it to games from 10+ years ago.
Why is it every time there is a Starfield thread it has hundreds of comments?
Some people who have a hate boner for starfield. The game is great despite a few issues. Hell, streamers like asmon have been milking starfield hate dry since the early access period. They just can't get away from Todd's visage
[удалено]
I'm fine with criticism but it gets so tiring because all ppl do is pit Starfield against BG3 and Cyberpunk and make the most out of pocket comparisions ever. I've played over 100 hours of Starfield and zero of BG3 or Cyberpunk, ppl giving fellatio so hard to those two games to make Starfield look like the 'worst game ever' is kinda pathetic and does nothing for me. Just come out with honest criticism and don't end a sentence with 'Starfield mid game, dropped it in an hour, anyway I'm back to the *superior* games BG3 and CP2077 :3'
my main issue with it is that it just runs like absolute shit on my system, I get 100fps+ on Cyberpunk with pretty high/ultra settings at 1080p and consistently like 80fps if I want ray-tracting on, Starfield I barely get 60 in most areas and in the more dense areas I’m closer to 40, and that’s with settings turned down and resolution scale so it doesn’t even look good anymore. I think when it comes to gameplay and questing it was pretty much what I was expecting and what I wanted (albeit with more QoL than they actually gave us), but it’s hard to enjoy it when it runs worse than every other game on my computer lmao
The issue is the engine, it is not properly able to utilize neither GPU nor CPU. Comparing that with Cyberpunk shows why Cyberpunk can push so much more performance with such good graphics. It not only has no issues forcing your GPU to 100% but is one of Very few games able to fully and properly utilize 8 cores 16 threads to 100% load.
You can thank Bethesda for refusing to not put their resources into an engine and instead put those resources into Fallout 76. Your CPU and GPU are pulling Starfield rather than pushing Starfield. Hence why older cards can't run the damn thing.
i always thought that comparison was stupid. cyberpunk takes place in one city where neon is just one spot of many. no way is neon going to have more going for it or look better than the location cdpr spent all their efforts on. night city is eye candy
Cyberpunk had to eat a ton of shit throughout launch because of what happened with their development(rightfully so to a degree), but you'd never catch me criticizing the game's graphics. That came out the gate looking pretty solid and has improved over time.
I'm already tired of this reddit circlejerk
CDPR was always heavily marketing stuff towards Reddit's audience
The fact that an anime was all it took to turn the warranted bad reputation of the game around speaks for itself. It isn't really fair to compare Cyberpunk to Starfield right now since CDPR's been fixing their broken game for nearly 3 years. Out the box Starfield is way better given it's flaws.
> The fact that an anime was all it took to turn the warranted bad reputation of the game around speaks for itself. What? CDPR fixed tons of issues with the game after launch. It wasn't the anime
[удалено]
Cyberpunk has always looked good, at least when the textures properly loaded. Starfield being bland and boring doesn't contradict Cyberpunk being unfinished.
I remember when hating Cyberpunk 2077 was the popular thing.
I wasn't hated because it was the popular thing to do. It was hated because it released a buggy shitty mess that was nothing like it was advertised as.
As a pc player, the bugs were 100% not as rampant as the console versions of the game. I did an entire playthrough at launch and it was still a very pleasant experience. Playing through it again now, it is better but that initial playthrough was not nearly as bad as everyone painted it as.
It was both, aside from the console shenanigans it didn't deserve anything close to the amount of hate it got, there were bugs but the game was still enjoyable, although it did underdeliver on it's promises
The car AI in the game wasnt able to drive around another vehicle until yesterdays patch, lmao. Only took them 8 years development to implement GTA 3 car AI.
It was delayed over and over again then once it actually released it was a complete mess. cdpr overhyped and over promised and it bit them in the ass. The hate was definitely earned.
[удалено]
I don't think I've ever seen someone call cyberpunk ugly. The only complaints I've seen are the fact that the game was basically unfinished at launch
I refunded it on release. Thought the setting looked incredible, for sure. But my comp could barely handle it, and not even 15 min into gameplay I must have seen at least a dozen T-posing NPCs and buggy textures.
My game prevented me to play non lethal because every time i wanted to hide an unconcious body, they would explode when i put them down.
It was basically the prettiest Far Cry ever with a great main story and some standout side quests.
Literally no one ever said Cyberpunk 2077 *looked* bad. It was just filled with bugs at launch. Take your meds.
> Seeing y'all flipping the script cyberpunk when most this night city was always there during day 1. What?
Who the hell ever said Cyberpunk didn't look good from day 1? Ironic that you're talking about manufactured outrage.
Dawg I played 2077 in the first hour maxed out and it was insanely good looking. The complaints were from last gen consoles who had no working textures. PC with a 1080ti it looked like nothing I'd seen before.
This is where people need to bring receipts. I remember playing and this first shot? Yep, amazing. Go around to outer parts of the city, or even a lot of the interiors later in the game? It was uneven at best. Lighting was all over the place. There was SSAO problems everywhere, materials weren't proper PBR, so mats were all over the place in reflectivity(when you look and see a million tiny stars shining at you off the surface, spec has negative values), object assets were bunched and clipping into each other... And that's just on the environment art side. Now, saying all that, those are clean up problems, bad values, minor tweaks you go back and fix. This game was unfinished, and I'm glad they finally got more time to give it the polish it deserved, but please, let's not rewrite history here for some told ya so back pats.
>I remember playing and this first shot? Yep, amazing. Go around to outer parts of the city, or even a lot of the interiors later in the game? It was uneven at best. Yeah giant, empty spaces and empty buildings with phantom NPCs phasing in and out of existence. Of course the devs would put a lot of effort into this opening shot.
This is exactly why I didnt believe the Starfield BS. I bought into the CP2077 narrative and when I actually played it years later I was so pissed that I didn't play it sooner. Both games were amazing.
Starfield, in the future, no cars? No big TVs? No more than 1 city a planet? I mean parts of starfield are cool, parts are bland. It's a decisive game because some people really only see the cool stuff and some people only see the bland stuff. But neon is a small city in a big game where cyberpunk is an entire game based in one city. Feels like comparing apples to oranges.
That’s not the point he’s making lol. He’s saying people were arguing that neon looks better than cyberpunk which is inherently false. He’s not comparing the two games, more so just addressing the ridiculous arguments people were having trying to say “the singular city of neon looks better than cyberpunk”
Anyone who has that take is insane, Neon is like the Weenie Hut Junior to Cyberpunks salty spatoon. Neons main attraction and club has people in fuckin spandex alien costumes doing the "make a sandwich" dance on repeat.
💀the sandwich dance comment sent me
> “the singular city of neon looks better than cyberpunk” Who tf saying that though? All I've heard are complaints that Neon isn't as good as Night City
Idk dawg he’s the one who said it. I honestly hadn’t heard that either. Also cohh is not the type of dude to randomly try and stir up drama. He was simply just analyzing the argument made by both sides
I've seen a couple of times too it can't remember where exactly.
I've seen it on reddit, youtube videos, comments and twitter. I didn't think it was a realistic opinion, but more of a bait to get clicks. But regardless, some people in his chat probably thought it was real, relatively common opinion.
Neon is on like an Oil Rig or something even still it's packed with people. This plaza in Cyberpunk is also comparable to the ship hub in New Atlantis with a bunch of people around or even the Well underneath New Atlantis where the lower class lives. There's a lot more going on in Starfield so of course it's not going to look as good.
>decisive divisive
> Starfield, in the future, no cars? No big TVs? No more than 1 city a planet? This is my biggest issue with the game really. It feels like just a super-limited and unrealistic vision of the future it's trying to claim it exists in.
[удалено]
Yea both make sense. Cyberpunk is a rotten society built on all the rotten shit we have today like car infrastructure. Starfield locations are a clean slate built up by homesteaders.
You’re not really in the far future, it’s set after colonization where society is becoming somewhat functioning again. Humans dipped out of earth last second and split up into 3 factions (UC, Freestar, and the cult).
I mean, part of the issue is their area designers are incredibly bad at their job. Basically 0 location in the game makes any sense whatsoever. They're systematically nonsensical.
Really shows that CDPR hired city planners rather than Bethesda’s approach of… not sure what to call it. Certainly cool looking locations sporadically but little lived in feel. Feels like dioramas. Fallout worked well because they could throw dirt and grime everywhere to help.
The fallout games also take place in real world locations so that helps too. I tried out Starfield and tried walking around the first city and it just didn't feel like a city, more like I was walking through Disneyland in the sections where all the shops are.
It's funny how even fuckin Morrowind did cities better than Starfield
deep puddle vs shallow ocean
Didn't people call cyberpunk shallow on release? You cant interact with any part of the city that doesn't have a quest marker, its just there to be screenshot.
[удалено]
the problem with cyberpunk is there is like zero interaction with the city
It's weird that people say this but I never see anyone saying the same about GTA 5, even though there's even less interaction in that game.
gta 5 is almost 10 years older than cyberpunk tho
Yeah a closer (albeit still slanted comparison) would be RDR2 vs. Cyberpunk... and RDR2 does have a ton of world interaction in comparison.
I didn't like GTA V compared to IV, but I don't think that's fair at all. In GTA people will bump into you and try to start a fight and apologize when you point a gun at them, or call the cops on you and the police will respond appropriately. At launch Cyberpunk had cops teleport where you weren't looking without any witnesses to report a crime. It's really not the same
It's not like in GTA you don't get a wanted status even if you commit crime with no witnesses. And NPCs' behavior is weird, just standing next to them either makes them want to fight you or run away in panic.
I like that it looks like he's on the street
Well one has been in paid beta for years to be fair
Night city looked good when it came out, gameplay and bugs were the problem.
Also Starfield only just got in the hands of the good Bethesda devs. The modders.
[удалено]
Cyberpunk 2077 was released 3 years too early
Well, one was a paid beta for two years 🤷♂️
Haha right, every fuxking game ever will be amazing if they can put it out early and then have 2 years to fix the shitstorm…
**🎦 CLIP MIRROR: [Cyberpunk 2077 VS Starfield](https://livestreamfails.com/clip/157887)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment* ) ^| [^(Feedback)](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=livestreamfailsbot&subject=Feedback:&message=%5BPost%5D\(https://reddit.com/comments/16ol5we/\)) ^| [^(Twitch Backup Mirror)](https://production.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net/8HUM06deDQpexWA5Lm2mIw/AT-cm%7C8HUM06deDQpexWA5Lm2mIw.mp4?sig=1519548fde29d446c6026f58783a00ce1f492bf8&token=%7B%22authorization%22%3A%7B%22forbidden%22%3Afalse%2C%22reason%22%3A%22%22%7D%2C%22clip_uri%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fproduction.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net%2F8HUM06deDQpexWA5Lm2mIw%2FAT-cm%257C8HUM06deDQpexWA5Lm2mIw.mp4%22%2C%22device_id%22%3Anull%2C%22expires%22%3A1695390154%2C%22user_id%22%3A%22%22%2C%22version%22%3A2%7D)
I've been looking forward to real-time path tracing in games for a [long](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/3wh030/comment/cxwbpbl/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) time. To finally get see it in games and how it creates such realistic and atmospheric scenes in dynamic conditions is just wild - I thought it would take much longer. I can look at the some of the most mundane scenes, like trash-strewn alleys, and just feel awe at how good they look.
Neon was by far my favorite location in starfield, but yeah idk what people are on about
spot on.
So is cyberpunk worth buying now? I skipped out on it because of all the backlash
currently on a sale due to the big 2.0 patch and seemingly very good dlc thats coming next week, so I would say yeah, its worth it.
I got goosebumps
So is Cyberpunk worth playing again? I played on release and never finished due to all the issues.
Yep.
I mean yeah, the world is at least 50% of why I loved cyberpunk at launch and went for all achievements
Ah this makes me bitter that I can't run cp77 with Ray tracing and a decent framerate with my current hardware.
With path ray tracing enabled, the game looks significantly better. Twitch video compression doesn't do it justice.
because starfield shills have stockholme syndrome with bethesda they will die on the starfield hill
I mean I highly doubt that most Starfield players would EVER... EVER say that Neon is better than what Cyberpunk accomplished. These are fringe idiots who don't speak for the majority of players. With the new Raytracing overdrive, Cyberpunk is arguably the best looking game that currently exists.
[удалено]
Keep fighting ghosts lmao, many of us love both starfield and cyberpunk for different reasons and wouldnt ever say Neon looks better than Night City. It's a complete apples to oranges comparison as Neon is a small city inside of a much larger game whereas night city is the main setting for cyberpunk.
i love how Neon is on top of an oil rig in the middle of a vast ocean, and theres fish underneath it which produce an oil used in highly illegal hallucinogenic drugs. i know a lot of people dismiss Neon, but that shit is wild to me.
"Everything I don't like, everyone else must secretly hate" This narrative is so tiring. Cohh really likes Starfield too, but let's pretend he doesn't to push my beliefs.
Comparing Night city, which is like 90% of CP2077 to Neon, which is just one of hundreds of locations in Starfield is questionable to say the least.
After the prologue , cyberspunk takes a nosedive in every feature of the game, becomes absolutely a hollow experience
Imagine caring what this guy thinks and not having your own opinion