That's also my point: Fallout 76 has had several large updates. On release the content in the game sucked as well.
This is... Tangential to the thread, but I'd argue a matter of interpretation. On release, 76 was a game I thought sounded interesting, exactly because "no NPCs and usual Fallout business", and primarily just exploring the wastes. Which is my favorite part of Fallout, the exploring. After all the updates, it's now something I've got no urge to engage with, because the interesting (to me) aspects have been stripped away and it's now just "A Fallout".
Same with NMS. I was actually really, really interested in the OG concept/implementation, and after all the "fixing" it's just... Bleh, bog-standard base builder in space. Woo. Obviously others disagree/disagreed, but still.
tl;dr I always feel like a lot of what gets called "bad" is actually "I don't like", and it's unfair to tar a thing with an objective label based on a subjective preference. (And the oft-repeated "It's okay to like bad things" really doesn't help that. A "bad thing" is the 3 am Jack in the Box taco, nobody's even pretending there, and you're damn right I'll go for a stack of them around that hour. But I would be out of line saying "tacos are bad" if I just didn't like tacos.)
I dunno, part of the original innovation of FO1/2 was the talking heads. And the city environments were always a much larger part of the gameplay than the "dungeons". Conversation has always been a cornerstone of the fallout series, so excising it completely is a bit weird. But I guess tactics did it first
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Actually tactics had several times you could talk to people.
That's also my point: Fallout 76 has had several large updates. On release the content in the game sucked as well.
This is... Tangential to the thread, but I'd argue a matter of interpretation. On release, 76 was a game I thought sounded interesting, exactly because "no NPCs and usual Fallout business", and primarily just exploring the wastes. Which is my favorite part of Fallout, the exploring. After all the updates, it's now something I've got no urge to engage with, because the interesting (to me) aspects have been stripped away and it's now just "A Fallout".
Same with NMS. I was actually really, really interested in the OG concept/implementation, and after all the "fixing" it's just... Bleh, bog-standard base builder in space. Woo. Obviously others disagree/disagreed, but still.
tl;dr I always feel like a lot of what gets called "bad" is actually "I don't like", and it's unfair to tar a thing with an objective label based on a subjective preference. (And the oft-repeated "It's okay to like bad things" really doesn't help that. A "bad thing" is the 3 am Jack in the Box taco, nobody's even pretending there, and you're damn right I'll go for a stack of them around that hour. But I would be out of line saying "tacos are bad" if I just didn't like tacos.)
I dunno, part of the original innovation of FO1/2 was the talking heads. And the city environments were always a much larger part of the gameplay than the "dungeons". Conversation has always been a cornerstone of the fallout series, so excising it completely is a bit weird. But I guess tactics did it first
Yeah, maybe it's me, but for me, the best part was just exploring this waste, finding logs, hacking terminals, sneaking around and occasionally obliterating a Deathclaw... It's not that I disliked or don't think the conversational/NPC aspect of FO1-4 was good--except for the damn settlements Preston--but I just always wandered, mostly.
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
+4
Options
Fleebhas all of the fleeb juiceRegistered Userregular
Oh man I would love to play this in VR, but yeah even on my 3080ti, I don't think I could get it running well. I guess with async I only need to hit 45fps to get a decent 90fps on the headset.
I played through about 2.25 times when it came and haven't played in ages. I am waiting for some new content to come out and hopefully a big story expansion regardless of whose story it tells.
However, every time I look at my remaining space on my ssd I get tempted to delete it.
Yeah, even with my 3080, I have to crank things pretty darn low to get a steady 60. Like DLSS performance AND no RT at all
What resolution are you playing at? Because besides the obvious things I cannot do I have a 1600 (super?) and crank things pretty high at 1920x1080 and still get 30 unless it’s a pretty big fight in a dense/lighted area.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Yeah, even with my 3080, I have to crank things pretty darn low to get a steady 60. Like DLSS performance AND no RT at all
What resolution are you playing at? Because besides the obvious things I cannot do I have a 1600 (super?) and crank things pretty high at 1920x1080 and still get 30 unless it’s a pretty big fight in a dense/lighted area.
4k, using the digital foundry recomended settings except for bumping RT up a bit, with DLSS balanced. Usually getting like 40ish, which is....okay. But for VR, you need a higher frame rate to not get sick
And I’d suggest you revisit the point I and so many others have made: this game was broken at launch and for months after the fact in ways that don’t come down to “preference” with stupid shit like all your cars being summoned to the sAme spot, crashes happening all over the place, doors being impossible to open, Johnny rambling something and then his dialogue being stuck on the screen, vehicles being yeeted because the game doesn’t have functional physics, your hud and weapons disappearing… all of this happened to me with a game that took 3 hours to gets started with between the base install and gargaantuan day one patch.
It's not broken because of a lack of multi-player or because the cars feel kind of samey or because the various gangs and enemies have iddentical behavior. It's broken because holy crap this thing has bugs for days, many of which are still not properly adressed a yeaar out from release.
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Like christ, I had to give up on delamain until months later because one of the cabs I was supposed to follow wasn't pathing to where it was supposed to be, instead ramming a k-rail over and over again. I tried using my vehicle to force it to stop, but since the game doesn't have proper mass physics for vehicles I couldn't get it to stop even with one of those giant slow as fuck flatbeds.
+1
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
Like christ, I had to give up on delamain until months later because one of the cabs I was supposed to follow wasn't pathing to where it was supposed to be, instead ramming a k-rail over and over again. I tried using my vehicle to force it to stop, but since the game doesn't have proper mass physics for vehicles I couldn't get it to stop even with one of those giant slow as fuck flatbeds.
Use more flatbeds. The answer is always more flatbeds. Block the road completely with them.
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
edited December 2021
The delamain quest-line is an odd one.
I had no problems with it whatsoever but others have had it bug out completely in some really astonishingly wild ways.
Perhaps it's because I did that quest-line in one go, one sentient/sapient taxi cab after another. And on patch level v1.02!
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place.
tl;dr: If the car exploded while driving because it was Tuesday, I'm not referring to you. If the lack of 3rd person perspective while driving is "clearly a bug in the engine", then well...
My personal beef on Stadia is not being able to step off ladders, and instead falling back down 3 out of 4 tries. Aside from that I've only had a handful of bugs.
I can imagine that other people, especially on the platforms we know it's super buggy on, are really upset about their experiences, but at one point it becomes repetitive to see all the arguments repeated.
And while the complaining is topical and at times entertaining in the rolling con job that's Star Citizen, for CP2077 there's just not enough drama or malice involved.
Management and marketing screwed up.
People did not get what they payed for.
And bugs persist more than a year after release.
These strike me as givens at this point in time.
So maybe we (and I) shouldn't be engaging with the people who complain and just acknowledge their pain?
Anyway, my particular itch is that CP2077 is so near to being great. I keep wondering, if I beef up on physical, can I bust open all those locked doors and find interiors? Are there NPCs I could have more interaction with?
I would love for CP2077 to have more content-generation systems, because it really does deliver on so many other things.
I don't really care if that's going to be paid extra content or sold as a whole other game. I would buy!
(And if that PC mod that makes cars drivable could be rolled out to other systems that would be neat, too.)
This second playthrough I did a little while ago I couldn't do the "get your old car" quest because it straight up was not there. No car at the location. For the entire game. I went back and checked every so often.
This is a quest I did successfully my first playthrough.
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
I had no problems with it whatsoever but others have had it bug out completely in some really astonishingly wild ways.
Perhaps it's because I did that quest-line in one go, one sentient/sapient taxi cab after another. And on patch level v1.02!
On one of them I had to reload a save. Delamain seems most prone to bugs.
I'm sure I'm in the minority in this but honestly I feel like the game would have been much better if it wasn't completely open world. Like the beginning of the game all the way up through the Heist (I think that's what it was called) were absolutely incredible (ignoring the car chase scene because it was buggy af at release). Give us a hub world around our apartment with a bar, phone, side missions for us to increase loyalty with factions, etc. I know that goes 100% against what they said the game was going to be like. Not a "living, breathing city" or whatever but this way they could have kept everything contained.
I'm sure I'm in the minority in this but honestly I feel like the game would have been much better if it wasn't completely open world. Like the beginning of the game all the way up through the Heist (I think that's what it was called) were absolutely incredible (ignoring the car chase scene because it was buggy af at release). Give us a hub world around our apartment with a bar, phone, side missions for us to increase loyalty with factions, etc. I know that goes 100% against what they said the game was going to be like. Not a "living, breathing city" or whatever but this way they could have kept everything contained.
That would have also been much, much more manageable to develop and likely wouldn't have lead to the clusterfuck launch.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I'm sure I'm in the minority in this but honestly I feel like the game would have been much better if it wasn't completely open world. Like the beginning of the game all the way up through the Heist (I think that's what it was called) were absolutely incredible (ignoring the car chase scene because it was buggy af at release). Give us a hub world around our apartment with a bar, phone, side missions for us to increase loyalty with factions, etc. I know that goes 100% against what they said the game was going to be like. Not a "living, breathing city" or whatever but this way they could have kept everything contained.
Of two minds here.
I agree if the game came out in its original timeframe that this would be the best way to do it, but if they gave the game the proper dev time I would've liked to see the open world still.
I'm sure I'm in the minority in this but honestly I feel like the game would have been much better if it wasn't completely open world. Like the beginning of the game all the way up through the Heist (I think that's what it was called) were absolutely incredible (ignoring the car chase scene because it was buggy af at release). Give us a hub world around our apartment with a bar, phone, side missions for us to increase loyalty with factions, etc. I know that goes 100% against what they said the game was going to be like. Not a "living, breathing city" or whatever but this way they could have kept everything contained.
Of two minds here.
I agree if the game came out in its original timeframe that this would be the best way to do it, but if they gave the game the proper dev time I would've liked to see the open world still.
That's true. However I feel like they could build the world in a much, much better way and make it feel organic. Right now it's a hollow shell of an open world game. It hits all the check boxes of an open world game but doesn't really do anything with it. I feel like a smaller scope on this game would have made it an incredible experience.
Or maybe I should replay the Deus Ex games again lol
The game absolutely is a victim of scope creep. That was evident to me even before it came out when they announced cars and driving. It was just a lot worse of a problem than anyone guessed. I like the game it wants to be more than the game it maybe should have been, but that only matters in this timeline where we get the busted version.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
The game absolutely is a victim of scope creep. That was evident to me even before it came out when they announced cars and driving. It was just a lot worse of a problem than anyone guessed. I like the game it wants to be more than the game it maybe should have been, but that only matters in this timeline where we get the busted version.
This game had more Good Idea Fairy moments in the promotional material than I can remember. Complete the game without doing the main story? Never happened. Never get a Quest Failed screen? Never happened.
I see pieces of it here and there but this definitely feels like stupid fucking management making stupid fucking promises, and I can guarantee a few of those promises they spit out during the games dev cycle were first heard by fans AND the games own developers at the same time.
It’s interesting to me when people build these giant sprawling environments but whenever you take a closer look you realize how little of it is actually used; like there are tons of buildings but you can only see around 8-10% of the inside of them, half the map is a desert that is just empty, and most of the loot is just food, drinks and booze.
A smaller environment would have probably also allowed for better stability.
Also can I just point out how dumb it is that you have a whole gang whose thing is that they’re marauding nomads only chasing you in cars during maybe one segment of the game?
+1
Options
Olivawgood name, isn't it?the foot of mt fujiRegistered Userregular
I'm sure I'm in the minority in this but honestly I feel like the game would have been much better if it wasn't completely open world. Like the beginning of the game all the way up through the Heist (I think that's what it was called) were absolutely incredible (ignoring the car chase scene because it was buggy af at release). Give us a hub world around our apartment with a bar, phone, side missions for us to increase loyalty with factions, etc. I know that goes 100% against what they said the game was going to be like. Not a "living, breathing city" or whatever but this way they could have kept everything contained.
Of two minds here.
I agree if the game came out in its original timeframe that this would be the best way to do it, but if they gave the game the proper dev time I would've liked to see the open world still.
That's true. However I feel like they could build the world in a much, much better way and make it feel organic. Right now it's a hollow shell of an open world game. It hits all the check boxes of an open world game but doesn't really do anything with it. I feel like a smaller scope on this game would have made it an incredible experience.
Or maybe I should replay the Deus Ex games again lol
Yeah honestly replaying Cyberpunk just made me want to play Deus Ex Mankind Divided again
And then I did, and let me tell you it is a) criminally underrated in spite of how Square tried their best to ruin it, and b) absolutely nuts how much Cyberpunk just wants to be a Deus Ex game! You can feel the inspiration the CDPR team took from it, this game would sing in a smaller, denser, clockwork environment
Another thing to lay on the pile of regrets that is Cyberpunk's development cycle
It’s interesting to me when people build these giant sprawling environments but whenever you take a closer look you realize how little of it is actually used; like there are tons of buildings but you can only see around 8-10% of the inside of them, half the map is a desert that is just empty, and most of the loot is just food, drinks and booze.
A smaller environment would have probably also allowed for better stability.
That's just game development in general. Even a handcrafted immersive sim that only spans a few blocks like deus ex is only going to have a handful of rooms avilable per building
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
Uninteresting to you. That sentence--well, not the multiplayer part--makes my brain make grabby hands at the screen. :P
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
Uninteresting to you. That sentence--well, not the multiplayer part--makes my brain make grabby hands at the screen. :P
Yeah, the game lost like 90% of its appeal to me when they shoehorned NPCs back into it. I played the game from day 1 and loved the bleak barrenness of it that really made it feel like "damn, bad shit happened here" but interest faded fast after it become "Fallout 4 in West Virginia."
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
Uninteresting to you. That sentence--well, not the multiplayer part--makes my brain make grabby hands at the screen. :P
Yeah, the game lost like 90% of its appeal to me when they shoehorned NPCs back into it. I played the game from day 1 and loved the bleak barrenness of it that really made it feel like "damn, bad shit happened here" but interest faded fast after it become "Fallout 4 in West Virginia."
I think the problem with discourse in general today is that it's supposed to be unspoken universal knowledge that when someone quantifies something they consume with "X is bad" they're expressing their opinion that they percieve something is bad
But to me it feels like often people's awareness of that can be tenuous at best and they start touting subjective perception as factual gospel, especially when surrounded by agreement
To an extent. But there's also, I feel, an incentive; not a good one, either. Compare:
"This is bad, you need to fix it."
"I don't like this, you need to fix it."
If you get more of your way by phrasing your preferences as objective reality, many, many, many people will just... Do so. See also "broken", where yeah sure, sometimes the thing is! And sometimes it just didn't do the thing the person wanted, so obviously is defective. (Anyone who has had to work retail and accept returns understands this entirely.)
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
Uninteresting to you. That sentence--well, not the multiplayer part--makes my brain make grabby hands at the screen. :P
Yeah, the game lost like 90% of its appeal to me when they shoehorned NPCs back into it. I played the game from day 1 and loved the bleak barrenness of it that really made it feel like "damn, bad shit happened here" but interest faded fast after it become "Fallout 4 in West Virginia."
As someone who has a Fallout lunchbox and a pipboy I can wear, put a cellphone into, and use? My interest basically went:
"Do you guys want multiplayer Fallout!?"
"Holy fucking shit do I!
"Ok great we decided to make it PVP!"
"...oh, you can go fuck yourselves. And then your mothers. And then your pets."
Fallout 76 being a bug ridden god damned mess was incredibly cathartic.
Fallout 4 had already made me go "Uh, guys?" because of it's bafflingly poor main quest but Fallout 76 was an almost flawless confirmation that they were a developer not only failing to understand their playerbase but the IP they'd bought and had been milking.
Though I'm almost positive we can argue about this in a thread at least tangentially related to Bethesda instead of the CP2077 thread :P
Posts
I dunno, part of the original innovation of FO1/2 was the talking heads. And the city environments were always a much larger part of the gameplay than the "dungeons". Conversation has always been a cornerstone of the fallout series, so excising it completely is a bit weird. But I guess tactics did it first
Yeah, maybe it's me, but for me, the best part was just exploring this waste, finding logs, hacking terminals, sneaking around and occasionally obliterating a Deathclaw... It's not that I disliked or don't think the conversational/NPC aspect of FO1-4 was good--except for the damn settlements Preston--but I just always wandered, mostly.
I’m not sure you’ve actually played this game because holy hell did it have (and likely still have) serious technical issues that were obviously critical flaws at the time of release.
Now Tbf I’m playing it on a last gen console so it’s not going to look as good as the advertising, but the game shouldn’t be crashing after 4 to 6 hours or having doors that I can’t open because it doesn’t realize I have the key, or the sheer plethora of items that are clipped into the geometry of the world while being asked to pay a full 80 dollars at release
I for one am tired of hearing people making excuses for this kind of technical incompetence that has enabled developers to sell buggy beta access as an acceptable business practice.
RTX 3090: *puff, wheeze* "I can't keep up!"
Steam | XBL
However, every time I look at my remaining space on my ssd I get tempted to delete it.
What resolution are you playing at? Because besides the obvious things I cannot do I have a 1600 (super?) and crank things pretty high at 1920x1080 and still get 30 unless it’s a pretty big fight in a dense/lighted area.
I'm running RT with DLSS at 2k at around 70 fps with a 3070, things around high.
I did play Cyberpunk, and I did play it on an Xbox (One X), and frankly, it's one of my favorite games. I tried to play Control after, and nearly bounced off because of the downgrade in facial animation quality. No more crashes or issues here than, frankly, any other similarly scaled game.
I suggest you revisit my statement; sometimes things are broken, but sometimes people say a thing is broken, when what they mean is "it isn't what I wanted". FO76 wasn't "broken" because it didn't have NPCs, for instance. It just didn't have NPCs. No bug to be fixed there.
4k, using the digital foundry recomended settings except for bumping RT up a bit, with DLSS balanced. Usually getting like 40ish, which is....okay. But for VR, you need a higher frame rate to not get sick
It's not broken because of a lack of multi-player or because the cars feel kind of samey or because the various gangs and enemies have iddentical behavior. It's broken because holy crap this thing has bugs for days, many of which are still not properly adressed a yeaar out from release.
Also sometimes things can be broken in ways that you personally just don't experience. "These traits objectively do not function properly" and "if I drive too fast I fall through the road" are not matters of preference.
Perhaps it's because I did that quest-line in one go, one sentient/sapient taxi cab after another. And on patch level v1.02!
Yup. And absolutely none of this--things being broken--contradicts "sometimes people say a thing is broken when what they mean is they don't like it/it isn't what they thought", like someone complaining their burger is missing the cheese, when they didn't order a cheeseburger in the first place.
tl;dr: If the car exploded while driving because it was Tuesday, I'm not referring to you. If the lack of 3rd person perspective while driving is "clearly a bug in the engine", then well...
I can imagine that other people, especially on the platforms we know it's super buggy on, are really upset about their experiences, but at one point it becomes repetitive to see all the arguments repeated.
And while the complaining is topical and at times entertaining in the rolling con job that's Star Citizen, for CP2077 there's just not enough drama or malice involved.
Management and marketing screwed up.
People did not get what they payed for.
And bugs persist more than a year after release.
These strike me as givens at this point in time.
So maybe we (and I) shouldn't be engaging with the people who complain and just acknowledge their pain?
Anyway, my particular itch is that CP2077 is so near to being great. I keep wondering, if I beef up on physical, can I bust open all those locked doors and find interiors? Are there NPCs I could have more interaction with?
I would love for CP2077 to have more content-generation systems, because it really does deliver on so many other things.
I don't really care if that's going to be paid extra content or sold as a whole other game. I would buy!
(And if that PC mod that makes cars drivable could be rolled out to other systems that would be neat, too.)
This is a quest I did successfully my first playthrough.
Technically, barren uninteresting multiplayer game devoid of NPCs and substantial storyline is not what immediately comes to mind when “Fallout” as a franchise is mentioned. That would be ordering a cheeseburger and getting buns in your analogy.
Edit: Although in fairness, copious amounts of game breaking bugs is a franchise staple. Fallout 76 nailed that and then some
On one of them I had to reload a save. Delamain seems most prone to bugs.
That would have also been much, much more manageable to develop and likely wouldn't have lead to the clusterfuck launch.
Of two minds here.
I agree if the game came out in its original timeframe that this would be the best way to do it, but if they gave the game the proper dev time I would've liked to see the open world still.
That's true. However I feel like they could build the world in a much, much better way and make it feel organic. Right now it's a hollow shell of an open world game. It hits all the check boxes of an open world game but doesn't really do anything with it. I feel like a smaller scope on this game would have made it an incredible experience.
Or maybe I should replay the Deus Ex games again lol
This game had more Good Idea Fairy moments in the promotional material than I can remember. Complete the game without doing the main story? Never happened. Never get a Quest Failed screen? Never happened.
I see pieces of it here and there but this definitely feels like stupid fucking management making stupid fucking promises, and I can guarantee a few of those promises they spit out during the games dev cycle were first heard by fans AND the games own developers at the same time.
A smaller environment would have probably also allowed for better stability.
Yeah honestly replaying Cyberpunk just made me want to play Deus Ex Mankind Divided again
And then I did, and let me tell you it is a) criminally underrated in spite of how Square tried their best to ruin it, and b) absolutely nuts how much Cyberpunk just wants to be a Deus Ex game! You can feel the inspiration the CDPR team took from it, this game would sing in a smaller, denser, clockwork environment
Another thing to lay on the pile of regrets that is Cyberpunk's development cycle
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
That's just game development in general. Even a handcrafted immersive sim that only spans a few blocks like deus ex is only going to have a handful of rooms avilable per building
Uninteresting to you. That sentence--well, not the multiplayer part--makes my brain make grabby hands at the screen. :P
Yeah, the game lost like 90% of its appeal to me when they shoehorned NPCs back into it. I played the game from day 1 and loved the bleak barrenness of it that really made it feel like "damn, bad shit happened here" but interest faded fast after it become "Fallout 4 in West Virginia."
STALKER 2 might be right up your alley
As someone who has a Fallout lunchbox and a pipboy I can wear, put a cellphone into, and use? My interest basically went:
"Do you guys want multiplayer Fallout!?"
"Holy fucking shit do I!
"Ok great we decided to make it PVP!"
"...oh, you can go fuck yourselves. And then your mothers. And then your pets."
Fallout 76 being a bug ridden god damned mess was incredibly cathartic.
Fallout 4 had already made me go "Uh, guys?" because of it's bafflingly poor main quest but Fallout 76 was an almost flawless confirmation that they were a developer not only failing to understand their playerbase but the IP they'd bought and had been milking.
Though I'm almost positive we can argue about this in a thread at least tangentially related to Bethesda instead of the CP2077 thread :P
Also, people need to stop taking games so fucking personally.