Lux R7
Member
i don't think so, but you know modders, maybe the pc version will have it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Cyberpunk 2077 - Review Thread
- Thread starter JORMBO
- Start date
i don't think so, but you know modders, maybe the pc version will have it.
Astorian
Member
I’ve answered all these in my previous posts, if you don’t accept that you can review a game without bothering with all its systems then there is nothing more to talk about.
meech
Member
Rpg? There were shooters with a more complex skill tree and upgrades at the time,lol.
xacto
Member
No, every time you put some fancy clothing on, you gotta go photomode.
Kadayi
Banned
Last edited:
Most of the criticism is actually about systems and tone though. Almost no reviewer made 'bugs' the centerpiece of their criticism. If you add to that, that the latest delay SCREAMED "need more bugfixing", it seems like thats not the main issue here.
On the tone front. "When everything is extreme - nothing is." "Its a 'my first cyberpunk story' storybook". "The character of the city is - that it has 'all the characters - it has no identity." (On city design the japanese IGN review said the opposite.) Reviewers that still see it "as another GTA".
So here is what happened from my view. Team of 300+ programmers. Serious issues on getting the games tone right because peoples concept of the game was different. Mike Pondsmith doesnt seem like the guy that 'can tell you what a certain aspect meant - in the 90s'. Keanu Reeves. Having to implement a shooter and a driving model. Delays causing the script translation not to be perfect (several months ago) - and as a result much of the 'ambition' gets cut, because "look at the timeline".
Storytelling will save it though - as it always does with CDPR games.
The one thing they did right is, they picked the right genre for their 'second IP'. There are so many great untold stories in the Cyberpunk universe, that are ripe to be tapped by a videogame that isnt a rail shooter (Deus Ex also barely scratched on it), that storyboarding could be hit and miss - but the hits, should still be great.
If you need a primer for the games problems, look at the gang design. Everyone is kaka karazy cool! With most of them feeling as if they are in the middle of an identity crisis..Except for maybe one.
Several of the reviews did mention bugs though so I'm guessing that it is quite a significant amount for it to pop up in a number of the reviews.
I do agree that the genre is perfect for storytelling but I honestly would expect only surface level stuff.
The design of the gangs does now that I took a closer look seems like something from the 80s. I was honestly expecting a bit more weirder tech looking people. They look cool but kinda average for cyberpunk to me.
My opinion is negatively biased since i was originally planning on not buying the game since I'm not a fan of first person.
Last edited:
Gold Member cant read two pages back in the thread he is posting in.
Senua
Member
Realitycheck - AI is machine learning, is pattern recognition. Uber sold off its automatic driving devision - because 'needs more time' (https://venturebeat.com/2020/12/07/...ng-division-to-autonomous-car-startup-aurora/).
Creative professions, and education workers are the only ones not affected by AI in the workplace.
So no - you just have a wrong concept of AI. AI is what will eliminate your job, if your job is facilitating repeatable interactions, or gradual improvement on static systems. AI is not 'what quest would you like to play next?'.
Recommendation algos are messy as hell - and useless if you only have betatesters as your database.
Best example for that is 'project management' (speaking of the devil), which is a growth sector under automation - because you pump all kind of talent into gig working gigs - and then need people that can actually form projects around complex tasks, picking the cheapest gig worker that will do for part of the job. Thats the new efficiency.
But the point is, "project" still too comlex for AI to handle it. Aquisition, payment, scheduling, ... not.Also - big language models still s*ck.
Last edited:
Honestly, with respect to Giantbomb, if Jeff says something sucks then it probably sucks... to some degree. He exaggerates and hyper focuses on the negative things in games but there's always a little truth in what he says.
That said, Vinny is a CDPR superfan and has loved everything they've made, so hearing his disappointment carries a bit more weight with me. He's still very early into it so I don't think his thoughts are fully formed at this point.. just that he's very unimpressed so far.
That said, Vinny is a CDPR superfan and has loved everything they've made, so hearing his disappointment carries a bit more weight with me. He's still very early into it so I don't think his thoughts are fully formed at this point.. just that he's very unimpressed so far.
Explosive Zombie
Banned
Yikes, oof, sweaty...
That might be a case of most commenters not knowing what they are talking about. But on the user, not the reviewers end.
Listened to the two 'in depth' youtubers reviews that were recommended in here. Listened to the Giantbomb Jacking In commentary video. Played The Witcher 3 for 150+ hours -- to the point where I really, really got to know the games systems - and I know what she is talking about.
And its nothing like most commenters want to make out of it.
Upgrading weapons and gear - is 'a worse optimizing strat' than the usual min/maxing you are engaged in, for when you mostly like the look of an item, and want to keep it. Its not the min/max optimum - and the way the game scales loot, you are getting better gear all the time. In addition to that - some of the upgrading materials are rare - so you might want to keep them for the endgame.
On the sidequests front, she admitted to barely doing 'contextual situations' quests - where quests would pop up, because you were in proximity to something. Knowing how that 'pull in structure' was implemented in The Witcher 3 - it wasnt great, it was just a 'hey there is something here' tease, that never quite pulled you in. One or two throw away voicelines, thats it. Didnt mean, that the quests behind it were bad, but the attract structure was nothing special. If they've kept it roughly the same - I can entirely understand why a reviewer would skip all of them, presuming, that they did other sidequests. (That 'attract' structure is not the only way to get sidequests in The Witcher 3).
On the 'did not do any crafting' front - if its set up like in The Witcher 3, crafting is level scaled, with 'top levels' for certain gear, but also scaled - so you never get high level crafting recipes, you'd actually be interested, that are much more than 2 levels above yours. Which means, that they tend to become meaningless, because you are advancing levels faster than trying to gather stuff for specific recipes would be worthwhile - considering the time commitment - and while you'd be gathering, you'd be leveling and...
The actual loop in The Witcher 3 is "Best weapons drop scaled as quest rewards - rarely." At least once you are overleveled for the general level cap of an area. There are about 5 different 'perk groups' for weapons that make sense - and there are about 20 perk groups in total. So loot is mostly useless (same with crafting recipes), until you hit one of those - and then it is not.
So if CDPR copy pasted systems from The Witcher 3, which hearing about all the systems they have in place from reviewers seems like they did --
ALL of those are valid criticisms.
So if you are getting all 'rallying cry for reviewer is stupid' about it - it might turn out, that you just dont know what you are talking about at all.
Now here's a post from someone who might turn out, they just don't know what they are talking about at all.
What's with you garbo-tier white knights forcing me to seem like I'm defending the Quartering? The review sucks.
Last edited:
At leat he says it. When Anita and go went against people and never said anything what do you think did happen to them? I remember a non gaming relavant incident in which a guy was wearing a shirt he got from his best female friend and wanted to wear it on his most important day. Since it has featured women in more scantily clothing he got called sexist and asshole by blue checkmarks and the harassment went so far that he had to apologize for wearing a fucking shirt on TV while crying and fearing for his life. This was the shirt by the way.
So as Influencer the only thing you can do is to say not to go after people and most people will not do it. If you say nothing like Anita and CO. The mob is mobilized and is out for blood.
Last edited:
As for Giantbomb. I do not know what did happen to them but they really do not enjoy games anymore. I remember all the hype E3 Conferences which many people loved and they just sit there like it was a fucking funeral. The magic they had is basolutely gone. Dan Ryckert was a great addition and bought some of the fun back but when he left so did the fun.
balls of snow
Member
Gone are the days of Greg Kasaavin and Kevin VanOrd of gamespot..they knew what the fuck they were talking about in systems heavy role playing games and were damn insightful in their review.
Killer8
Member
The poll in the IGN review
More interested to be honest. Open world games rarely respect your time. 20-30 is the sweet spot for me.
It just has to be said I have never finished Witcher 3.
Last edited:
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
20 would be great, I don't think I'll be able to get it that low though. Generally, games are too long for old fuckers like me, seriously. I frequently put like 10-12 hours into a game, come back to it like a month later and ask myself "wtf am I supposed to do again? And what buttons am I supposed to press? What are my options gameloop-wise? Aaaah" and that sucks. But that's me.
I will never understand this. If its 50-60 hours you love why is it so bad? No one needs to rush? Due to Work I played Yakuza over 3 weeks and it was 60 hours. but I have a blast. Back then I went trhough it much faster. It is not bad when a game takes long
As much as I think the Gamestop review (and her later comments on the game) is an embarrassment and completely unprofessional, I also think the reaction has been a bit over the top. Maybe they knew this though. Start a bit of drama and just become a part of the story of the games launch.
If we move away from the drama a bit there are actually a lot of questions that could be raised regarding how video games are reviewed.
Especially games like this. Multi-platform, open world, replayable, RPG.
Too many outlets are reviewing games like they would review a movie, TV show or music album.
How can you possible give a review score for a product and present it as such when the actual experience depends on the equipment used to play the game? Some set ups will be a lot better than others. PC may be more buggy than console. It's ridiculous to publish a 9 out of 10 for a game that might run terribly on other platforms and not mention it.
With the open world nature of the game it's also nonsense that reviewers basically play the game for a week and then give a review based on that. How can this be a realistic review when you know they are basically rushing through the game or skipping large parts of the game? I'd hate every videogame if I was basically forced to put in 40 to 60 hours in a week just to do a write up. Even if it's a paid job it's not like a movie review where you could watch the movie in 3 hours then spend the rest of the day composing your thoughts. Maybe even watch it again, etc. With a massive open world game you are asking reviewers to binge the game over many many hours and then churn out a review before the deadline.
No wonder so many reviews are just generic cookie cutter stuff and basically the review scores end up really being tied to hype in a lot of ways.
You won't see many low hype games coming storming in with stellar reviews and most games with huge hype tend to review very well.
Then you've got the other side of videogame "reviews" coming in the form of Polygon and Kotaku etc where they aren't reviewing the game as such but rather are using the event of a videogame launch as a vehicle for political commentary. It's getting to the point where I wonder when we'll finally get a review where the reviewer just says "listen, I don't like games and I didn't play this but the game's release raised very interesting questions about living in Trumps America, 8 out of 10".
This is a segment from Kotaku's review of the Playstation 5.
kotaku.com
A review of a videogame console includes this:
"The world is still reeling under the weight of the covid-19 pandemic. There are more Americans out of work right now than at any point in the country’s history, with no relief in sight. Our health care system is an inherently evil institution that forces people to ration life-saving medications like insulin and choose suicide over suffering with untreated mental illness.
As I’m writing this, it looks very likely that Joe Biden will be our next president. But it’s clear that the worst people aren’t going away just because a new old white man is sitting behind the Resolute desk—well, at least not this old white man. Our government is fundamentally broken in a way that necessitates radical change rather than incremental electorialism.
The harsh truth is that, for the reasons listed above and more, a lot of people simply won’t be able to buy a PlayStation 5, regardless of supply. Or if they can, concerns over increasing austerity in the United States and the growing threat of widespread political violence supersede any enthusiasm about the console’s SSD or how ray tracing makes reflections more realistic. That’s not to say you can’t be excited for those things—I certainly am, on some level—but there’s an irrefutable level of privilege attached to the ability to simply tune out the world as it burns around you."
This kind of feels like some reviewers have gone with Cyberpunk 2077 too.
The review isn't really about the game anymore.
It's about the state of the world and how this game provides an opportunity to soapbox.
The Polygon review goes there for sure with them just basically ranting about stuff that really has nothing to do with the game.
www.polygon.com
Are we to criticize every game that doesn't include the specified amount of "representation" and "choice"?
Also worth noting that they have a good moan about a supposedly objectifying poster in the game but they can't stop themselves from placing that image front and center in their article.
It's getting to the point where it's almost impossible to trust reviewers and review scores are worthless as a result.
The game could be an amazing 250+ hours worth of content but the poor jaded reviewer had to cram that into 2 weeks so they just hated it.
You or I might spend the next year playing that game.
Or the game could be full of terrible gameplay and could be over in one or two sittings but the reviewer felt that the games politics were exactly what they wanted to hear so it gets a top score.
You or I might think that ham fisted political messages are not suited to videogames at all.
Then finally there's the biased and malicious reviewers who will give a game a low score knowing it will damage the "aggregate" but will hide that under a veneer of professional criticism. Usually these can be spotted a mile away and you just know if a game has some controversy then the 7 or 6 out of 10 is guaranteed no matter how good the game actually is.
I think for game like this if you buy into the hype then you might as well just get it at launch.
If you are a bit more cautious with your money or not crippled by fear of missing out then best to wait a year or two and see what people are saying once they have properly seen all that the game has to offer.
I didn't get into Skyrim until the special edition came around and it is one of my all time favorites. It was the review scores that really sold it to me and made me want to jump in something like 5 years after the original release. Looking at some of the "reviews" on this game it has me thinking like what if Skyrim had gotten like an 85 because some reviewer just played a single build and just ignored magic or certain guilds or half of the map etc? Or what if the game didn't have enough LGBTQ characters so it lost points because of that?
It's a shame that reviewers don't really seem to review games properly.
"I rushed through the story, it was OK. Didn't try a few different builds. Didn't bother with upgrades or crafting or side quests or emergent events. Oh and there was that one kind of offensive character. 7 out of 10."
If we move away from the drama a bit there are actually a lot of questions that could be raised regarding how video games are reviewed.
Especially games like this. Multi-platform, open world, replayable, RPG.
Too many outlets are reviewing games like they would review a movie, TV show or music album.
How can you possible give a review score for a product and present it as such when the actual experience depends on the equipment used to play the game? Some set ups will be a lot better than others. PC may be more buggy than console. It's ridiculous to publish a 9 out of 10 for a game that might run terribly on other platforms and not mention it.
With the open world nature of the game it's also nonsense that reviewers basically play the game for a week and then give a review based on that. How can this be a realistic review when you know they are basically rushing through the game or skipping large parts of the game? I'd hate every videogame if I was basically forced to put in 40 to 60 hours in a week just to do a write up. Even if it's a paid job it's not like a movie review where you could watch the movie in 3 hours then spend the rest of the day composing your thoughts. Maybe even watch it again, etc. With a massive open world game you are asking reviewers to binge the game over many many hours and then churn out a review before the deadline.
No wonder so many reviews are just generic cookie cutter stuff and basically the review scores end up really being tied to hype in a lot of ways.
You won't see many low hype games coming storming in with stellar reviews and most games with huge hype tend to review very well.
Then you've got the other side of videogame "reviews" coming in the form of Polygon and Kotaku etc where they aren't reviewing the game as such but rather are using the event of a videogame launch as a vehicle for political commentary. It's getting to the point where I wonder when we'll finally get a review where the reviewer just says "listen, I don't like games and I didn't play this but the game's release raised very interesting questions about living in Trumps America, 8 out of 10".
This is a segment from Kotaku's review of the Playstation 5.
PlayStation 5: The Kotaku Review
I’m sitting at my desk, staring at the PlayStation 5 looming over my media stand—“entertainment center” is a little too grandiose for the small piece of Target furniture that holds all my gaming stuff—and wondering how the hell I’m going to review this thing. How would my boss, whose various...
kotaku.com
A review of a videogame console includes this:
"The world is still reeling under the weight of the covid-19 pandemic. There are more Americans out of work right now than at any point in the country’s history, with no relief in sight. Our health care system is an inherently evil institution that forces people to ration life-saving medications like insulin and choose suicide over suffering with untreated mental illness.
As I’m writing this, it looks very likely that Joe Biden will be our next president. But it’s clear that the worst people aren’t going away just because a new old white man is sitting behind the Resolute desk—well, at least not this old white man. Our government is fundamentally broken in a way that necessitates radical change rather than incremental electorialism.
The harsh truth is that, for the reasons listed above and more, a lot of people simply won’t be able to buy a PlayStation 5, regardless of supply. Or if they can, concerns over increasing austerity in the United States and the growing threat of widespread political violence supersede any enthusiasm about the console’s SSD or how ray tracing makes reflections more realistic. That’s not to say you can’t be excited for those things—I certainly am, on some level—but there’s an irrefutable level of privilege attached to the ability to simply tune out the world as it burns around you."
This kind of feels like some reviewers have gone with Cyberpunk 2077 too.
The review isn't really about the game anymore.
It's about the state of the world and how this game provides an opportunity to soapbox.
The Polygon review goes there for sure with them just basically ranting about stuff that really has nothing to do with the game.
Cyberpunk 2077 is dad rock, not new wave
CD Projekt Red’s open-world game does not exactly have a futuristic worldview
www.polygon.com
Also worth noting that they have a good moan about a supposedly objectifying poster in the game but they can't stop themselves from placing that image front and center in their article.
It's getting to the point where it's almost impossible to trust reviewers and review scores are worthless as a result.
The game could be an amazing 250+ hours worth of content but the poor jaded reviewer had to cram that into 2 weeks so they just hated it.
You or I might spend the next year playing that game.
Or the game could be full of terrible gameplay and could be over in one or two sittings but the reviewer felt that the games politics were exactly what they wanted to hear so it gets a top score.
You or I might think that ham fisted political messages are not suited to videogames at all.
Then finally there's the biased and malicious reviewers who will give a game a low score knowing it will damage the "aggregate" but will hide that under a veneer of professional criticism. Usually these can be spotted a mile away and you just know if a game has some controversy then the 7 or 6 out of 10 is guaranteed no matter how good the game actually is.
I think for game like this if you buy into the hype then you might as well just get it at launch.
If you are a bit more cautious with your money or not crippled by fear of missing out then best to wait a year or two and see what people are saying once they have properly seen all that the game has to offer.
I didn't get into Skyrim until the special edition came around and it is one of my all time favorites. It was the review scores that really sold it to me and made me want to jump in something like 5 years after the original release. Looking at some of the "reviews" on this game it has me thinking like what if Skyrim had gotten like an 85 because some reviewer just played a single build and just ignored magic or certain guilds or half of the map etc? Or what if the game didn't have enough LGBTQ characters so it lost points because of that?
It's a shame that reviewers don't really seem to review games properly.
"I rushed through the story, it was OK. Didn't try a few different builds. Didn't bother with upgrades or crafting or side quests or emergent events. Oh and there was that one kind of offensive character. 7 out of 10."
Haha. I was thinking the same.
Her review and her comments afterwards are completely ridiculous and embarrassing and unprofessional.
However, because some clickbaity YouTuber has completely blown the reaction out of all proportion you are on "his side" if you call out her shitty review.
This is what critics hav become EVERWHERE not only in games. They do not review the game, movie or book itself they just review the politics behind and in it. It is a real shame but this is why Critic scores and user scores have so much drfited apart
Because he does the same like critics just the other way around. They are going for the politics because it gives them more clicks.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
"Can be" beaten in 20 hours, but I plan on thoroughly exploring the multiple factions. Also, going to play multiple times to see the multiple endings. This seems to me like a game that will give as long of a road as you want depending on how you approach the game.
Hours away!
Hours away!
As soon as CDPR announced 'console versions need more work' - we need to delay again, but the game actually has gone gold (feature freeze, shipable in principle), everyones mind immediately went to "in which state is it, is it buggy?".
From what I've heard except for T-posing, there is nothing in there that also wasnt in the Witcher at the last patch of Blood and Wine. But with videogame media entirely ignoring it (for good reason - it didnt dominate the experience.
).Lets see. Characters beaming instead of moving in animation, was in Witcher 3. inventory bugging out - was in Witcher 3. Enemies not aggroing - was in Witcher 3. T-posing, was not in Witcher 3.
Interface sometimes keeping wrong prompts up wasnt in Witcher 3. Game crashing was in the Witcher 3 and could also be 3080 issues (capacetors), that would be mitigated by a nVidia driver update.The biggest concern to me is the inventory bugging out - because knowing the backstory on that with the Witcher 3, that could be itemID management, which - in Witcher 3 could lead to corrupt savestates. Only times I had enemies not aggroing, was when trying to 'fix that' - hex editing that savestate (to disappear duplicated items), which sometimes would lead to a corrupt savestate, that then in return would lead to certain enemies not aggroing. So if thats a legacy issue, and they now spam you with more 'junk' items - good night and good luck..
(Entirely speculative.)And appart from that its T-posing, which should be fixable until release.
When I hear people talking mostly about those issues, but then only say they are experiencing them 'every few hours, or so' - to me it means, something is wrong with immersion.
Especially with the 'game not ready yet' messaging of the last delay out there..
On the Cyberpunk storytelling and "deeper stuff", german reviewers from Gamestar, talked about long philosophical debates, which were their favourite parts of the game. So - some of it is in there.
And CDPR have proven, they can handle storytelling."Filler missions" are probably in the critique, because that map (leaked video we arent supposed to see yet) is Ubisoft levels of 'littered' (verticality and markers
), but from what reviewers are saying, are handled well (even the most filler have some unique aspects to them, and 'unique audiologs'). That busywork, with the same 'small unique story' concept was already in the Witcher 3, in addition to the 'real sidequests'. It was ok, i doubt, that they would mess it up.So what I can see - is people being nagged by the 'attract' system (getting the player to accept side missions), and several reports of 'being overwhelmed' (stimulus overflow), which they sometimes also attribute to 'everything is high intensity' to game doesnt feel different in tone enough. Fewer slow 'contemplative' moments. Which to me is more likely to result in varying quality of mission plot design, because I already know CDPR can do storytelling well, when they put their minds to it.
Also I very much agree on Jeff Gerstman not being the best critic, when it comes to more storytelling/artsy elements of games, and him liking a game usually means, I wont (that much), so yes. Jeff and RPG reviews isn't the best combo.
Oh, BTW, CDPR managed key sendout (for reviews) quite strictly this time around - which, if they havent sent out two keys to Giantbomb from the begining, was a bad idea..
(One could have anticipated, what would happen... )Much of this posting is interpretation - but I'm an informed guesser..
Last edited:
This also annoys me because it seems like the game was designed for multiple playthroughs with multiple characters.
They are saying it can be beaten in 20 hours but not really acknowledging that the game is not intended to be beaten so quickly.
Like, I could go to a 5 star restaurant and spend a couple of hours having a nice dinner.
OR they could chuck all the ingredients in a blender and I could down it in 10 seconds.
I always though a main point of open world design is about going around the world and having a look and trying things out.
As opposed to, say, and old school platformer where you are going left to right and the point is to get to the end.
Topher
Identifies as young
Completely agree. I laughed at the 5 star restaurant versus blender comparison. Funny.
I think we are both more like this guy who got 175 out of the game (and still had not beat it):
Granted, he is a dev, but still....
Last edited:
Mercenary09
Member
"Woah, woah, he has done a couple good things so don't be calling him out on the dozens of shitty things he has done. It totally excuses them." That's exactly you right now.
John2290
Member
Be careful folks on ps4 in the EU, that release timer is fucked up, had a heart attack a few minutes ago when I got a notifcacation saying it was ready to use and went to my downloads and it had the ready to use thing which turned to a start button so I clicked it and it went a loop where the timer kept restarting and it took me three restarts of my PS4 and an unplug of the mains before it I could reboot the ps4 normally. Not sure if this is some wild marketing stunt gone wrong or a glitch from the steam code where you could boot the game to see a screen but I'm not going near that file again until the timer on the home screen is up.
John2290
Member
Also, another 28 gigs of patch with a cersion 1.02 but it doesn't seem the file size has changed in storage. I never checked the end of the 102 gig download, anyone see it skip 28 gigs before it installed or was the 102 gig a full file? I know at least 5 gigs is a langauge pack with the way it skipped it mid download.
Last edited:
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
It's just factual. Can't find the time, and the gaps grow as a result. Having the same issue with Divinity 2 Original Sin. Sucks!
The time for what? So you play an hour or two a day or only on wekends. It will take longer but thats it. Nothing really will cahnge if you finish the game faster or not.
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
Sure but I'm losing the thread as a result. Then I'm wasting like 15 minutes to re-accomodate myself, remembering what I was about to do, finding the jump button, whatever. That's really annoying.
How old are you? I forget a lot of stuff especially what I did last week or so. But this sounds like a serious issue. No offense. But I guess everyone is different in this regard.
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
40, but I'm a programmer / consultant, and I have a family, so I've got lots of stuff on my mind all the time. The day-to-day grind drowns out specifics of games.
B-universe
Banned
If I feel your posts are a waste of pixels, should I declare that your GAF account should be terminated?
Apparently, personal responsability is an alien concept to you. The Quartering explicitly calls for no harassment, people X,Y and Z - whose motivation, origin, inspiration and identity you have absolutely no way of knowing - proceed to harass.
But who does Mr. Mercenary09 pin the blame on?
The Quartering.!
It's like the punch line of a comedy skit on open mic night.
Your irrational post is an embarrassment, an affront to logic, rationality and the concept of personal responsability.
Therefore, it is a waste of pixels and yet, because I'm not an armchair tyrant, I do stand by your right to post moral obscenities like the one you just did. I do think your account should not be terminated. I do think you should be able to post inanities.
I rejoice at the gargantuan difference between my stance and your stance.
Please, waste pixels away.
Mercenary09
Member
My post is an embarrassment and an affront to logic? My friend, I don't know what world you live in but you can't make videos that mislead people with false information, talk shit about a reviewer, and then say "hey everyone I know I'm saying this person isn't doing their job but don't go and attack them over it." That isn't how it works. When you build an audience of hateful people they aren't just going to watch your video and leave it at that. By doing those things he is part of the problem and responsible for what happens after. He just says those things to try and make himself look good which is impossible for him. You should step into reality.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
Sigh
easy to make this for any open world gamesAt least CDPR will patch the shit out of it. But lets keep making fun of a company with passion for games unlike Ubishit
Kadayi
Banned
Yeah, it's ridiculous. I can't stand the Quartering, but even a broken watch is right twice a day and that review was an embarrassment. it doesn't matter who wrote it. It wasn't written for anyone looking for a fair assessment of the game or any insight into its systems, etc at all. I hope Gamespot decide to reassess it once more of them have played it because frankly, it reflects badly on them as a brand. No ones calling for 10/10 best game ever!! Clearly, the build they got was buggy and that's a concern, but when reviewers entire assessment can be summarized as 'I couldn't be bothered' questions need to be asked about whether it's a good idea to run with it. I feel sorry for the poor bastards at Gamespot who probably have to defend that shit show on the basis of standing behind the team. Even in the review talk, you could see Lucy James cringing at what was being said.
Lets not.
Last edited:
Evilms
Banned
Yeah in 12 - 18 months after a dozen of patches the game will be maybe fineSigh
At least CDPR will patch the shit out of it. But lets keep making fun of a company with passion for games unlike Ubishit
Madflavor
Member
I can't stand the Quartering, but thay Gamespot review was overly harsh and came from a person who, let's just face facts here, didn't feel motivated to experience most of the content outside of the main story, because the game didn't meet whatever expectations she had and didn't give it a fair shake.
Please explain to me why I or anyone else should listen to a review for an immersive RPG, who rushed the main story, and went out of their way to not do things like side quests, crafting, and other things that immerse yourself into the atmosphere?
Please explain to me why I or anyone else should listen to a review for an immersive RPG, who rushed the main story, and went out of their way to not do things like side quests, crafting, and other things that immerse yourself into the atmosphere?
B-universe
Banned
Yes, it is.
You're not my friend.
The real, morally-objective world?
Oh, I see now.
A reviewer gets carte blanche to critique a game under her terms - which, for the record, it is her absolute right - but somehow that right doesn't extend to others critiquing her work.
Just sticking with the letter C, apparently, one cannot comment on the conduct, criteria, conclusions and consistency of Gamespot reviews.
Gaming journalists are this protected class, apparently, whose work is not open to scrutiny, whose conduct and worldview is not open to criticism.
Newsflash: it is.
In an open society, your public conduct and the quality or lack thereof of your work most definitely are under scrutiny. Luckily, we still live in an open society, despite the rabid efforts of people like yourself to turn it into a well-meaning nanny authoritarian state.,
Exactly.
The blame of actions lies at the feet of those who carry them out. This is especially true in this case since The Quartering discouraged harassment in the most unambiguous terms possible.
You do struggle with concept of personal responsability.
Know that I wont blame EviLore for your inane posts. They are your posts. Therefore, the blame for the moral indecency is on you, not on anybody else.
I reserve my right to critique the work of journalists in the most vehement terms possible. That in no way makes me remotely responsible for harassment carried out by god knows whom for god knows what motivations. I unequivocally condemn any form of harassment.
Maybe in a decade or so you'll come to terms with this fundamental distinction.
I don't really care for your unsubstantiated assertions
When you finally realize you have to provide evidence for your claims, let me know.
Asserted but not show, therefore dismissed.
Provide evidence for all of your assertions, if you want them to be considered in a rational exchange.
You don' know what personal responsability is.
Your posts are an affront to rationally, a moral obscenity and a complete waste of bandwidth.
Last edited:
Realitycheck - AI is machine learning, is pattern recognition. Uber sold off its automatic driving devision - because 'needs more time' (https://venturebeat.com/2020/12/07/...ng-division-to-autonomous-car-startup-aurora/).
Creative professions, and education workers are the only ones not affected by AI in the workplace.
So no - you just have a wrong concept of AI. AI is what will eliminate your job, if your job is facilitating repeatable interactions, or gradual improvement on static systems. AI is not 'what quest would you like to play next?'.
Recommendation algos are messy as hell - and useless if you only have betatesters as your database.
Best example for that is 'project management' (speaking of the devil), which is a growth sector under automation - because you pump all kind of talent into gig working gigs - and then need people that can actually form projects around complex tasks, picking the cheapest gig worker that will do for part of the job. Thats the new efficiency.
Also - big language models still s*ck.
I mean for scale and responses, someone was saying the NPC's only have limited conversations. I don't think we are so far away to get to the point where fake generated dialogue can take place regarding recent events.
Last edited:
It's sitting at 92 on Opencritic, what's "fine"? If a game is properly busted it's reflected heavily in the overall score, see FO76.Yeah in 12 - 18 months after a dozen of patches the game will be maybe fine
Last edited:
John2290
Member
This is an issues for loads of people. It's difficult to keep interest in a game when you pace it like that and for many they end up loosing interest and not being able to get back into it. For me, I can't leave a gap of three days or the game might as well go in a folder only to return when It feels fresh again to retart. Sure, you can play an MP game or an open world ubisoft style game an hour a week and it'll not cause issues but games like TW3, Divinity and I'm assuming Cyberpunk with deep systems and long arcs of progression that relies on knowing what you did in the last few hours of your play need to be paced with regular gameplay.
sevoro
Member
I really need to ask, when did everyone start treating video game reviewers as people with a set of standards to follow?
Let me explain myself. I don't see reviews as a comprehensive analysis of the game itself with pros and cons, but a personal analysis of how a person enjoyed the game. The reason I say this is if a person enjoys X feature but really dislikes Y features it will be shown in the review regardless of how much info you try to dump on someone about why X is good and Y is bad. I'd rather someone just talk about what they like and cut to the meat of how they enjoy the game rather than exposit the info that isn't really providing me anything but fluff. This is my personal opinion.
Onto Kallie Plagge. It seems more to the fact that the game just wasn't her thing, which is perfectly normal and fair. Her review would be helpful for someone like my brother-in-law who would have the same viewpoint as her about the crafting systems, and just the information overload. She played the game the way she wanted and based her review on that. Right off the bat you know it's not gonna be a comprehensive review of everything in the game. Now whether that warrants people harshly critiquing her, making fun off her, etc. I don't know. All I know is that at some point you have to realise, reviews are only useful if you know how said person reviews. In saying that her review was fair, but I believe she isn't a reviewer I would look to form my own opinions about whether I should purchase this game.
I also believe that clips about her are blown out of proportion to fit a narrative view of how shit she is. Also isn't the whole point of open world games to play however you want, you know with your own freedom instead of being forced to play a particular way, in that regard her review is perfectly fair. There are plenty of other reviews that can provide you different viewpoints, I don't think it's healthy to focus on this one person (who I personally believe has shit taste, just for the record). It's just a game, it doesn't need some strangers defending it.
Let me explain myself. I don't see reviews as a comprehensive analysis of the game itself with pros and cons, but a personal analysis of how a person enjoyed the game. The reason I say this is if a person enjoys X feature but really dislikes Y features it will be shown in the review regardless of how much info you try to dump on someone about why X is good and Y is bad. I'd rather someone just talk about what they like and cut to the meat of how they enjoy the game rather than exposit the info that isn't really providing me anything but fluff. This is my personal opinion.
Onto Kallie Plagge. It seems more to the fact that the game just wasn't her thing, which is perfectly normal and fair. Her review would be helpful for someone like my brother-in-law who would have the same viewpoint as her about the crafting systems, and just the information overload. She played the game the way she wanted and based her review on that. Right off the bat you know it's not gonna be a comprehensive review of everything in the game. Now whether that warrants people harshly critiquing her, making fun off her, etc. I don't know. All I know is that at some point you have to realise, reviews are only useful if you know how said person reviews. In saying that her review was fair, but I believe she isn't a reviewer I would look to form my own opinions about whether I should purchase this game.
I also believe that clips about her are blown out of proportion to fit a narrative view of how shit she is. Also isn't the whole point of open world games to play however you want, you know with your own freedom instead of being forced to play a particular way, in that regard her review is perfectly fair. There are plenty of other reviews that can provide you different viewpoints, I don't think it's healthy to focus on this one person (who I personally believe has shit taste, just for the record). It's just a game, it doesn't need some strangers defending it.
Similar threads
- Poll