There's no option on series x. But there is a performance and quality mode. The performance runs at 60fps but lower dynamic resolution. Quality runs at 30 but very high IQ people say the equivalent of high on pc. But population density must be high because anywhere inner city is just rammed with people talking, walking, driving etc.
Gaming Cyberpunk 2077 (PC, PS4/5, Xbox One)
- Thread starter DWelbz19
- Start date
There's no option on series x. But there is a performance and quality mode. The performance runs at 60fps but lower dynamic resolution. Quality runs at 30 but very high IQ people say the equivalent of high on pc. But population density must be high because anywhere inner city is just rammed with people talking, walking, driving etc.
Anybody get that stupid jump trophy? It seriously sucks and I just can't get it 
The point is that there's a lot of people who rate the actual game very highly which can get buried under the debris whereas it's important that also gets talked about a little.
Maybe it refers to a genuine DLC? They'd obviously have already worked a significant amount on add on content already rather than having to do it from scratch.DLC - fixes bugs and stabilises gameplay. Gonna be the new normpretending patches are DLC. Making people pay to fix a broken game soon enough.
Although I would have expected that to be reasonably priced and not free.
CDPR were upfront about DLC years ago for this and they will release a few free DLC for it which will be similar to that released on Witcher 3. I suspect they may throw in a bit more now to try and turn things around.
They have also said there will be paid DLC which will arrive later, but this will be larger and again similar to the experience with Witcher 3 where it will be 20 hours plus of content.
Yeah, they are very upfront with their DLC and I don't expect anything different here than what they've been doing for years with it.
And? If you want to call something a hate train then do it, just as much as people can call the otherside something equally dismissive like a fanboy train if they like. Nobody is stopping you, you don't see me pulling up people's positive posts and yet it's fine for people to pull up the negative ones for some reason. I myself have said from the start there's a game under there, yet I've been highly critical of it's flaws, am I merely on that hate train?
In any case my point was more pointing out the shear hypocrisy of someone like that calling people rightfully fecked off with how this game has turned out mere members of some hate train as if they are simply doing it when others are, when he himself was on a worse one on a game he refused to play. It's a complete lack of self awareness
You mean if the base game wasn't such a clusterfeck right? Because right now the absolute worst thing they could do would be release paid DLC!
If it's genuine DLC with new content and some big gameplay improvements, then fair fecks to them. I haven't refunded the game as I do fully expect them to at least try to turn this game around, and if they do then I don't see how people can stay so mad.
That poster didn't even quote you. Why do you think you represent this "hate train"? Making a statement that a game that has been ripped to shreds this much (and for good reason) is surprisingly excellent in general, seems a fairly normal statement. I don't see anything fanboyish or prickly about it.
If it's for "good reason" then what the issue here? Unless because you love this game so much, you can't see the dismissive aspect of "hate train". And overlooking the point about why I was referring to that specific poster doesn't help your point either.
Fanboy train is equally applicable to hate train. If one is fair, the other is. If neither of us consider ourself on either, then again, what's the issue?
I wouldn't expect a free Blood and Wine style expansion. That would be ridiculous. Improvement of bugs had to be free and I can see them adding some DLC content for free, for sure. But not something that adds that much value, whatever the state the game was in.
And? If you want to call something a hate train then do it, just as much as people can call the otherside something equally dismissive like a fanboy train if they like. Nobody is stopping you, you don't see me pulling up people's positive posts and yet it's fine for people to pull up the negative ones for some reason. I myself have said from the start there's a game under there, yet I've been highly critical of it's flaws, am I merely on that hate train?
In any case my point was more pointing out the shear hypocrisy of someone like that calling people rightfully fecked off with how this game has turned out mere members of some hate train as if they are simply doing it when others are, when he himself was on a worse one on a game he refused to play. It's a complete lack of self awareness
There's not a game under there. Now reached about 10 hours. It's pretty fantastic yeah it doesn't have all the most sophisticated systems but they all come together for something quite special for me.
Oh I agree with that, but not now not until the base game is fixed. It would be the final nail if they tried to charge people again so soon.
In any case there's no way the first DLC will be that big, they've already said it'll be content and major changes have they not? Or have I made that up, tbh honest I haven't followed lately.
Simply put, both strong cricism of the release and some praise for/acknowledgement of the quality of the content can co-exist. And that doesn't always come through which was his point.
I don't care about your beef to him. He made a fair point which didn't quote so I'm not obliged to bring you into his fair post.
That's true.
I'm planning on making this and PES 2022 the games I get with the PS5 when I buy it late next year so it would be great if they can fix it and add some content too. You're right, the first DLC will be smaller and if they are to give a bigger one it'll come later.
That's because AGAIN you refuse to see the point about his hypocrisy. It's not about a "beef" it's about using that specific phrase as all encompassing when this really isn't the game to do that on because, as you yourself say, it's perfectly fair. Sure the hate games get is shit all over twitter, it's annoying as feck. But you can't complain about that, if you yourself have been a big part of it yourself on a much less deserving game can you? (rhetorical btw)
And I clearly agree about the co-existing, which is why I made the counter-train as a point! I mean, if you sit back and chill and look at what I'm saying, then surely I'm being more than fair. Look over the past few pages, there's been plenty of people praising it, one even saying he doesn't care about the AI on this very page. You don't see anyone shouting him down or all that do you? People have always been free to make their posts and in fact if you back I'm confident you'll see just as many fans of the game picking the people venting on their points, in fact more. To act like the fans are being drowned out is nonsense, it's just that in this particular game it's pissed people off to a bigger degree, people who wouldn't usually get involved. It's not "hate" when you are disappointed or angry about being lied to.
Anyway I'm not even "hating" on the game myself, I've made it clear I'm keeping faith. But I'm not a fan of these generic all encompassing tags people throw around too easy, that's my bug bear here, not people either loving/hating a specific game.
This is why I've stopped playing Cyberpunk. Because in it's current state it's not a game that I'll even come close to enjoying as it should be, but I do see how I will if they do fix it and I can certainly see why some of you guys love it. Ironically, despite our little discussion above, I've actually enjoyed reading some positive posts from people who have found entertainment. It gives me hope that I will too.
I think the very early DLC will be pretty cosmetic and will be rolled into generic improvements like AI changes (hopefully
) as a way to sweeten those patches. They have said there will be both content and cosmetic DLC for free for a period after release. As someone said earlier there were 16 free DLC's for W3 with some being cosmetic and some new contracts and I am sure this will be similar. They will probably go a bit further than they planned to try and salvage some lost reputation.CDPR built up the fanbase they have due to treating people well after release, having no DRM and updating games for years so they would be stupid to stop that now but we'll see how it plays out.
The paid DLC will be the big changes, new areas to explore and different storylines but I'm sure they're a year-off yet. I was thinking that the base city they have built here could well do them for a good few years if they manage it well and fix what needs fixing. There's so many places that you weren't even taken to in the storyline which they could build on over a period of time.
I'm assuming you meant there is mate?
And yeah, I can see how it can be decent maybe even great. I hate the fact they've removed so much and most of the other aspects are placeholders, but that's just me and I fully expect at least some of it to be fixed. But people like you loving it gives me hope, and I'm glad it's not ruined for you! In fact I envy you guys loving it, as I was very much looking forward to it.
I think the very early DLC will be pretty cosmetic and will be rolled into generic improvements like AI changes (hopefully
CDPR built up the fanbase they have due to treating people well after release, having no DRM and updating games for years so they would be stupid to stop that now but we'll see how it plays out.
The paid DLC will be the big changes, new areas to explore and different storylines but I'm sure they're a year-off yet. I was thinking that the base city they have built here could well do them for a good few years if they manage it well and fix what needs fixing. There's so many places that you weren't even taken to in the storyline which they could build on over a period of time.
I'd be happy if they fixed the AI to a reasonable degree, made the combat more fulfilling (that's a balance thing, so can easily be done) and sorted out the placeholder stuff like junk/food. Then instead of new areas, it would be excellent imo if they opened up a lot of the buildings instead. The big deal was supposed to be a vertical city, in fact they took out the main parkour aspects to do that, so let us explore up there through the insides of the buildings and out onto ledges.
A bit like Shadowrun on the snes, where you could just wander in and hack computers/find secrets in random buildings. They could build so many interesting side quests/character into that too which would all be far less intensive and expensive than creating entirely new areas for them too (which could come later anyway). Win-Win.
I totally agree with that. It still confuses me that some doors say "locked" when interacting and some don't. I'd like to believe that they're intending to add massively to the inside spaces which would be incredible.
Opening up the train stations and enabling that as a form of transportation would be good too.
Also decided to stop playing. Hoping they can get it sorted but it's definitely not a given when you consider all the stuff they need to sort.
First 10 or so hours I found it to be very enjoyable but after 30 hours I've changed my mind, it's issues are far more obvious and I feel like I'm doing it a disservice by playing it as ridiculous as that sounds.
First 10 or so hours I found it to be very enjoyable but after 30 hours I've changed my mind, it's issues are far more obvious and I feel like I'm doing it a disservice by playing it as ridiculous as that sounds.
Has anyone received their refund yet?
Submitted my request about a week a go and not even received a confirmation email.
@Solius you refunded didn't you?
Submitted my request about a week a go and not even received a confirmation email.
@Solius you refunded didn't you?
Heard nothing, not even a confirmation email.
You really haven't read any of this thread before, have you?
As I said maybe it's coming from assassins creed vahalla but playing these 2 games side by side (both cross gen titles) I don't see how anyone can play that open world game then play this and be anything but hugely impressed.
I don't play AC.
People come at these things from different perspectives. I'm a gameplay first man, and I've played plenty of games set in a cyberpunk universe and plenty of games that cover every aspect that's in Cyberpunk, from fist fighting to the hacking, and although this game combines them all it does so in an incredibly mediocre way and that's not meaning they have to live up to the heights of other games, but they aren't even close. And that's something the CDPR devs aren't happy with either, which is why they are at least trying to fix it.
I'll take your word for it that the AI is better than in Valhalla for example, as I simply don't know. However what I do know (and remember, I used to program AI as well as gameplay) is that in this it's placeholder, they simply haven't had time to set it up properly and test it. That's not in debate or questionable. For you that's not an issue, I respect that, but for me it's a huge issue. That's why I personally am not impressed in that aspect, and I could go into all the others with similar thoughts.
However, as said, I do see the potential. It'll never be the game they repeatedly promised, it'll never be fully fixed, however I do still think it has a shot of standing above a lot of other games released in the past few years if they can pull it around, and I really hope they do. I really hope they add back in the wall running so you can get higher and higher, but I sadly don't think they will now, I think the city isn't designed for that now (and I should know, I spent nearly all my first 10hrs in game on the rooftops exploring
)I don't play AC.
People come at these things from different perspectives. I'm a gameplay first man, and I've played plenty of games set in a cyberpunk universe and plenty of games that cover every aspect that's in Cyberpunk, from fist fighting to the hacking, and although this game combines them all it does so in an incredibly mediocre way and that's not meaning they have to live up to the heights of other games, but they aren't even close. And that's something the CDPR devs aren't happy with either, which is why they are at least trying to fix it.
I'll take your word for it that the AI is better than in Valhalla for example, as I simply don't know. However what I do know (and remember, I used to program AI as well as gameplay) is that in this it's placeholder, they simply haven't had time to set it up properly and test it. That's not in debate or questionable. For you that's not an issue, I respect that, but for me it's a huge issue. That's why I personally am not impressed in that aspect, and I could go into all the others with similar thoughts.
However, as said, I do see the potential. It'll never be the game they repeatedly promised, it'll never be fully fixed, however I do still think it has a shot of standing above a lot of other games released in the past few years if they can pull it around, and I really hope they do. I really hope they add back in the wall running so you can get higher and higher, but I sadly don't think they will now, I think the city isn't designed for that now (and I should know, I spent nearly all my first 10hrs in game on the rooftops exploring
Fair enough if you are more a gameplay guy but then again I would never come to an open world rpg for gameplay. None of them have great gameplay. It's only really serviceable or at best decent. Think about all the top highest rated rpg I can't think of one with good gunplay or melee combat. Even something like gta the combat is only serviceable at best.
You really haven't read any of this thread before, have you?
No I just wanted nerd advice.
Why do you think they can't have good gameplay? Are you saying all open world games have every aspect mediocre? I'm a huge critic of "some" of the gameplay aspect in Rockstar games, but they also work as designed. In this, they are mediocre AND broken.
Also that's completely ignoring the fact that CDPR themselves think that too. They've specifically mentioned the AI/pathfinding, they've taken out aspects that were too broken to launch with and they will eventually rebalance the combat/hacking. Which leads us full circle round to why not everyone thinks this game is so great.
Besides, there's nothing wrong with wanting better (and I'm not talking about the bullshit hype). BotW has some absolutely brilliant gameplay mechanics btw (bar the daft weapons breaking so often), which bucks your trend. It's biggest flaws are the story/dungeons and yet it's still the most complete open world ever developed in terms of true sandbox/connectivity. Should we not want and hope for better of it's weakest apsects in the sequel though?
Breath of the Wild feels like a very different game to me. A far more focused one. I think he might have a point really, maybe its ubisoft lowering expectations but going into a gta style open world game im expecting maybe one or two really strong mechanics and a lot of serviceable ones elsewhere.
I've now lost all audio except music and voices. Changing settings, restarted, reloading. Nothing fixes it. fecking hell this game is frustrating.
Which open world games do you think have great gameplay? I can't think of any.
Maybe one or two good mechanics but not all round great gameplay.
Just to warned you - played brilliantly on my X at first - crashes a lot the further I got
Did you not read my post mate?
In any case, read what I'm saying a bit more. Even if they don't have "great" (which is a random term in itself) gameplay, functional is still decent enough in most of these games. And again, why can't they have "great" gameplay anyway? Why do you think that has to be a rule?
Take the shooting in Cyberpunk. It's never going to be top fps level, I don't expect bullet physics from Tarkov, it just needs to work. And for the most part it does, the guns feel ok and the collisions whilst a little wonky at times, seems ok too. What makes it mediocre is the fact it's not balanced yet, the impact rating for example is set so low mobs just run straight through and thus it feels more arcadey than it actually is and makes the difficulty trival. That and fixes to the slightly weird fov on scopes, and we suddenly get gunplay that will be more than adequate for a game like this. It's similar with the fist fighting, it's no different to Riddick from years ago but that isn't a bad thing, it just needs tweaking so you aren't as wooden seeing as the rest of the game is more flowing.
And again that brings us to the point, you are comparing it with games that have been designed their way and as such I'd give those games shit and leave them. In this, the problems are not by design and are fixable. You need to understand the difference, because that's why you don't understand why I don't compare this to other "open world" games (which I'm generally not a huge fan of anyway, in both of game genre and this whole "well they did it!" whataboutism) specifically and why the CDPR devs didn't feel they had to be confined by these rules you think exist. It's also why I'm still holding out hope, because a lot of the biggest problems are fixable. My only issue there is they never fixed the gameplay issues in Witcher 3 (which again were balancing issues over actual individual elements, the difference being in that the individual elements WERE functional to decent enough, they just weren't all interconnected well), so that's what I hoped/hope they learn from.
Best open world game I’ve played from a gameplay perspective is Breath of the Wild by far, shame the game was let down in other areas but there you go.
I’ve always wanted to get further into the Witcher 3 but always put it down because I find the gameplay awful.
I’ve always wanted to get further into the Witcher 3 but always put it down because I find the gameplay awful.
Let's see. Keeping my fingers crossed it stays fine. I am saving loads like I do in all Bethesda.
Not even had a confirmation email, I sent my refund request in over a week ago now.
Did you not read my post mate?
In any case, read what I'm saying a bit more. Even if they don't have "great" (which is a random term in itself) gameplay, functional is still decent enough in most of these games. And again, why can't they have "great" gameplay anyway? Why do you think that has to be a rule?
Take the shooting in Cyberpunk. It's never going to be top fps level, I don't expect bullet physics from Tarkov, it just needs to work. And for the most part it does, the guns feel ok and the collisions whilst a little wonky at times, seems ok too. What makes it mediocre is the fact it's not balanced yet, the impact rating for example is set so low mobs just run straight through and thus it feels more arcadey than it actually is and makes the difficulty trival. That and fixes to the slightly weird fov on scopes, and we suddenly get gunplay that will be more than adequate for a game like this. It's similar with the fist fighting, it's no different to Riddick from years ago but that isn't a bad thing, it just needs tweaking so you aren't as wooden seeing as the rest of the game is more flowing.
And again that brings us to the point, you are comparing it with games that have been designed their way and as such I'd give those games shit and leave them. In this, the problems are not by design and are fixable. You need to understand the difference, because that's why you don't understand why I don't compare this to other "open world" games (which I'm generally not a huge fan of anyway, in both of game genre and this whole "well they did it!" whataboutism) specifically and why the CDPR devs didn't feel they had to be confined by these rules you think exist. It's also why I'm still holding out hope, because a lot of the biggest problems are fixable. My only issue there is they never fixed the gameplay issues in Witcher 3 (which again were balancing issues over actual individual elements, the difference being in that the individual elements WERE functional to decent enough, they just weren't all interconnected well), so that's what I hoped/hope they learn from.
I disagree generally because I have played pretty much every rpg and open world game as that's my genre and this is not any worse than the best out there in terms of gameplay. It does some better and some things worse.
Maybe that's expectations. I can't expect an excellent huge open world, great story, great animation, with great gameplay to the level of linear games it's just not feasible.
I know it's not feasible because I haven't seen one company able to do it. Even take two who have unlimited time and resources can't.
I go into this game knowing the developer and what they are good at. Creating detailed, huge, beautiful world, great story, characters, side missions, quests,choices etc that's what I expect to be top notch. Everything else I expect to be serviceable. I'm surprised high excellent the animations and gun play are. Everything else falls in line with what I expected. Even something like the police ai I didn't expect it to be gta level because I've played the witcher and I know it's not something they excel at.
Last edited:
I just don't think you want to read and understand, as again you seem to be missing out large chunks of my posts (ignoring direct counters to boot) and then simply going with one liners that don't explain anything.
And for the last time, CDPR disagree with you just like I do. You can have low expectations all you want, but you questioned how people can't see this as great and I've gone into much more detail than anyone else would bother to to explain a different POV.
But anyway, enjoy mate. This has run it's course.
I didn't question how people can't see how good the game is because people like certain genres. I said if you are comparing to other rpgs and open world games then from a gameplay standpoint it's not behind any that I have played. But also does some things far beyond most of them in other aspects. Bugs and glitches are separate in that those actually break the experience those are non negotiables and cdpr should be pushed hard of those issues.
Maybe it's that you haven't played many open world rpgs but your expectations totally out there if you believe this has bad or even mediocre gameplay overall compared to others in its genre.
I've played plenty. I've also explained why it's wrong to simply compare like to like and set your expectations so low.
The fact is this is doesn't have mediocre gameplay elements because they simply can't be bettered in an open world, that's complete nonsense, it's because they are half finished. A fact you continue to overlook and I really don't understand why? As surely you are going to benefit from them getting better! It's pure stubbornness at this point (just like ignoring my answer to your question about an open world with decent gameplay!)
But in any case, it's new years eve so let's now focus on that and drinking. If anything you've kinda inspired me to maybe boot up the game and see if the last patches have actually done anything!