this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
97 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
70 readers
1 users here now
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My feelings exactly.
I played for 60 hours or so, and I enjoyed it a lot. But they put a fatal design flaw into the game by forcing to you be V, and by putting a ticking time bomb in your head. That means that if you play logically, you'll follow the storyline quests in order to fix the big issue rather than spending the time slowly exploring the world they made. It also means that once you beat it, there's no fun in going back and doing it again, because you have to follow the same railroad tracks and go through the same story beats again. It cheapens the experience greatly.
Like you, the world holds no interest for me now that I have found a satisfying ending for V. The least they could have done was put in a "story mode," and a separate "open mode" where you can build any character (who isn't V) and live any life you choose, free from the main quest railroad.
I'll never understand why game designers would make an open world, and then slap on a "YOU HAVE TO SAVE YOUR LIFE HURRY UP!!! railroad quest as the main story. It's a lazy and utterly stupid design choice.
Counter point: Fallout 4 has you searching for your kidnapped son. I'm a father, in actuality. So to me that's an imperative too, but it didn't stop me from building skyscrapers in the interim. There was no real death clock, so I really don't get your criticism there.
Shit, final fantasy 7 is one of the greatest games of all time and that asteroid will sit there in the sky as long as you let it. You're reaching hard. The more I think on it, nearly every open world game has some imperative story point and they'll happily wait for you to get there. You get tuberculosis in RDR2 and you will live forever as long as you avoid the last mission. This isn't uncommon at all.
Whether there's a mechanical clock or not is irrelevant, this is about roleplaying and immersion. The player should be able to play in a way that makes sense in-world without being punished for it.
A good open world game should have lower tension moments sprinkled along the main story so it gives the player time to chill and explore the world.
I named two outstanding open world games recognized as being in the top 5 games of all time that utilize the exact same plot mechanic, either the criticism applies to them (and you aren't) or its invalid criticism.
You bring up immersion... rdr2 is considered the most immersive game ever. Rightly so. You still have imperatives you can ignore.
They do and i am, lots of games have this problem, which doesn't make it less of a problem.
Though my point was mainly that the fact that "nothing actually happens if you wait" isn't the issue, but rather the fact that it doesn't make sense for your character not to always priorize the main quest.
I haven't played fo4 because they neutered the dialogue, but in 3 there are similar stakes with you trying to find your father, and although that game isn't perfect about this either, there are times where the lead gets colder, and others where it's hotter, this counts as a shift of tension like i mentioned.
But that doesn't change the fact that narrative and gameplay are almost always at odds with each other in open world games. Even if dialogue or game state changes a little there's no need for you to actually follow the story if you don't want. Compared to Majora's Mask where there's a very real time limit to push you towards progress in each cycle.
Yet that doesn't mean developers should just give up trying to reconcile the two. There are ways to fit them together in a more satisfying manner and it's a valid criticism to point out when they are not
I liked how this was handled in Spiderman 2018 - after major plot points, the main character would say 'looks like it'll take a while before the lab results (or whatever) come back, now's probably a good time to patrol the city', and the main quest wouldn't progress until you'd done at least one side activity - so if you wanted to just plow through the main quest it was just a small diversion, but it was also a great indicator that now was a nice time to spend some time playing around in the open world if you wanted to.
CDPR did something nearly every RPG or Open world game does. They made the main quest have a time count down that overwhelms/looms of side quests.
Skyrim does it. Why am I helping this dude recover his friend's bodies from a cave if Alduin the World Eater has returned and I'm the only one that can stop him. Fallout 4, is go find your infant son. BOTW, wtf am I doing fucking about when Gannon is on the rise? RD2, Arthur is imminently dying from TB but yet here I am romping around with no problem at all as long as I ain't doing the main story.
V dying from the chip is just like that, it's a flaw that many of these games have. Few games try to fix it, FNV has it so that the main quest factions that drive the story could do with your help/freelancing to put them in the best position. Morrowind makes it so you need to ingratiate yourself among the houses so you can be in a powerful enough political situation to deal with Dagoth Ur. This encourages you to do side quests.
The difference is, there was actually engaging content outside the main story quest in those games.
I'm at 67 hours in Cyberpunk and last time I logged in I spent 20-30 minutes just TRYING to find something to do. There was absolutely nothing that pulled you into the world. There's no base building mechanic. No fishing or hunting. Just.. empty lifelessness.
I'm not trying to say it's a bad game. The story was really fun. But if you are expecting some vast open world game that leaves you plenty to do outside the story... this just ain't it. At least in my own personal experiences. I dumped FAR more time into games like RDR2 and Fallout 4.
Not every open world game needs to be infinite, right? There was no base building mechanic... but why would it need one? There was one in Fallout 4, but it was pretty much entirely ignorable and only offered annoyance. A subset of people wanted to play the sims. There was no base building in GTA games either. Most open worlds don't have such a mechanic.
What I found it has is replay value. You can play that game multiple ways and it is markedly different. Same thing with Witcher 3, there's no infinite game mechanic. You start over and try different things. People loved that game and frankly CP2077 followed exactly the same framework, just "with guns". Why is it a problem with CP2077? Couldn't possibly be because there's a prominent trans character, or a pretty girl who won't sleep with your male character ...
I think the near clone that Cp2077 is of Witcher 3 really drives home the point. People didn't have a problem with the game, but certain groups have made it cool to nitpick one and not the other.
Literally no one here is complaining about this, and you are the only one to bring this up. I have at least triple the time in Witcher 3 that I do in CP2077 and I never once completed the game in Witcher 3. Because there is so much more to do in that game. It is a more vibrant world, with more engaging side quests and little areas to explore.
There's nothing to explore in CP2077. It honestly feels like you are driving around in a vast wasteland for 90% of the game.
Both of the examples you gave are not counterpoints. They are examples of the exact same issue.
When I played FO4, I couldn't enjoy the building or storylines, because the game tells you that your son is all-important and that you need to rescue him from a world that is certainly going to destroy him. I'd have loved to sit around and carefully build the perfect post-apocalyptic town, but that stupid main quest was hanging over my head, and I'd have been a terrible virtual father if I let myself idly screw around instead of spending every ounce of energy searching for him.
It doesn't matter at all that the asteroid doesn't fall until you get to the spot you need to be, or that your son will never die and never age even if you play the game for 14 years, or that V lives forever because they never show him die in the game. It's an RPG, and it's specifically designed for you to immerse yourself in the game and "become" the character. A fake death timer is in some ways worse than a real one, because it breaks the illusion and reminds you constantly that this is a game.
It's bad storytelling.
Check out Unsighted!