Thread: Cyberpunk 2077

  1. #4641
    I don't even think the main issue with crafting is the UI. its having to craft a bazillion items to level up. Without 'exploits' that create materials out of thin air the entire thing wouldn't even work.

    Heck the skill leveling system in its entirety doesn't really work when I can get to 47 doing constant hacking and not maxing out the skill, let alone level any other 'weapon' skill.

    And I say 47, because I ran out of gigs and side quests to even reach 50...
    It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death

  2. #4642
    Quote Originally Posted by Jastall View Post
    Yeah, TW3's "16 free DLCs!" were pretty damn misleading, comprising like three quests and NG+ in terms of actual content, the rest being armor sets and skins. They'll have to do better if they want some PR points back this time around.

    First order of business must be a way to change your appearance. I'm positively baffled this wasn't included, and I don't care that you don't see V for 99.9% of the gameplay. Alongside a revamp of the wanted system and across-the-board UI improvements, especially when it comes to crafting.
    They just should strip armor from all clothing and let it have at least one baseline slot. 100 armor on a shirt is already pointless when i can have 6k from crafting.

  3. #4643
    Quote Originally Posted by xmirrors View Post
    This was a hard watch, but it has shattered the illusions I was under:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CymqHdNYkg

    Did I enjoy my time overall with Cyberpunk? Yes.
    Does it excuse the absolute mess of a game they gave us? No.
    Is this game good? This is of course subjective but, under the hood, and compared to similar games, no. No it really isn't.

    I'm just...sad. This game could have been something very, very special. Instead we got something rushed. We may never know the full story but it seems to me like the last delay was not to fix bugs but to hide them and the cut features as best as they could.
    Well some of his points are more exclusive to consoles, like the NPCs despawning at the drop of a hat, I didn't have that happen nearly as often, I can actually only think about 2 cases on PC. In fact I had the opposite problem, I would take out a hostile NPC and all civilians in a certain radius would start cowering at the floor, despite it being a silent takedown with 3 walls in between them. This was pretty much the hilarious standard for all missions in which you had to infiltrate a nightclub and would persist throughout the entire mission, no matter how many times I looked away or changed the floors. Same for the physics issues, those only happened rarely in the early versions, not so much later on and I spend twice the time in game as him.

    BUT, he is overall pretty accurate. My luck was that I had almost no expectations, hence their broken promises/missing features didn't affect me all that much, but even I can see how others could have issues with it and I will happily agree that the game is rather shallow in many aspects. I mean I knew a little bit and even I was disapointed that the mantis blades were relegated to just another melee weapon with a very annoying canned kill animation, instead of a stealth assassination tool. Same for the character options which I mentioned before, the choices are way below what Witcher 3 had. At the end of the day the game's story is pretty much linear while the game world is the open world type (albeit with little depth). I definetly had my fun and would rate it probably a 7~7.5/10, but they would have easily needed another 3-5 years, not to mention that they should have abandoned any kind of port for the old console generation - maybe even the new one.

    As for the DLC, I think it will be the same stuff we had in Witcher3. While it was some extra stuff that was appreciated, it's the nowadays MTX kind of DLC. Still good on them that they won't charge for it, but I'm not expecting actual content. I'd be glad if they actually worked on some of the stuff that clearly didn't make it though. Other than that, I'm waiting for the expnansions if they will happen.
    You are welcome, Metzen. I hope you won't fuck up my underground expansion idea.

  4. #4644
    You could have seen that coming:
    - Fallout 76
    - Cyberpunk 20 77
    You think you do, but you don't ©
    Rogues are fine ©
    We're pretty happy with rogues ©
    Haste will fix it ©

  5. #4645
    Quote Originally Posted by Haidaes View Post
    Well some of his points are more exclusive to consoles, like the NPCs despawning at the drop of a hat, I didn't have that happen nearly as often, I can actually only think about 2 cases on PC. In fact I had the opposite problem, I would take out a hostile NPC and all civilians in a certain radius would start cowering at the floor, despite it being a silent takedown with 3 walls in between them. This was pretty much the hilarious standard for all missions in which you had to infiltrate a nightclub and would persist throughout the entire mission, no matter how many times I looked away or changed the floors. Same for the physics issues, those only happened rarely in the early versions, not so much later on and I spend twice the time in game as him.

    BUT, he is overall pretty accurate. My luck was that I had almost no expectations, hence their broken promises/missing features didn't affect me all that much, but even I can see how others could have issues with it and I will happily agree that the game is rather shallow in many aspects. I mean I knew a little bit and even I was disapointed that the mantis blades were relegated to just another melee weapon with a very annoying canned kill animation, instead of a stealth assassination tool. Same for the character options which I mentioned before, the choices are way below what Witcher 3 had. At the end of the day the game's story is pretty much linear while the game world is the open world type (albeit with little depth). I definetly had my fun and would rate it probably a 7~7.5/10, but they would have easily needed another 3-5 years, not to mention that they should have abandoned any kind of port for the old console generation - maybe even the new one.

    As for the DLC, I think it will be the same stuff we had in Witcher3. While it was some extra stuff that was appreciated, it's the nowadays MTX kind of DLC. Still good on them that they won't charge for it, but I'm not expecting actual content. I'd be glad if they actually worked on some of the stuff that clearly didn't make it though. Other than that, I'm waiting for the expnansions if they will happen.
    As an RPG Cyberpunk is still much better than TW3 if you ask me. Maybe the latter has more narrative choices, but even then the difference is negligible. At least you have more room to build your character, more gameplay options, and your gear progression isn't locked down to a few crafted sets with literally everything else being vendor trash. Cyberpunk IS held back by overly linear quest design; if every main mission was as open-ended as the Flathead deal early in the game I'd call it a great RPG. As it is, it's just a pretty decent one. By comparison TW3 is very, very shallow with a boring ass progression system and little actual choice when it comes to, well, anything beyond a few narrative branches.

    Sure, it's more understandable that you have fewer choices since The Witcher has you play a preset character so Cyberpunk's RPG flaws stick out more given that your created character doesn't have all the freedom one would expect they'd have. But still, when it comes to the nuts and bolts of what makes a game a good RPG, Cyberpunk clearly wins to me even if it's hardly Disco Elysium or New Vegas tier by any means.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  6. #4646
    Quote Originally Posted by Jastall View Post
    As an RPG Cyberpunk is still much better than TW3 if you ask me. Maybe the latter has more narrative choices, but even then the difference is negligible. At least you have more room to build your character, more gameplay options, and your gear progression isn't locked down to a few crafted sets with literally everything else being vendor trash. Cyberpunk IS held back by overly linear quest design; if every main mission was as open-ended as the Flathead deal early in the game I'd call it a great RPG. As it is, it's just a pretty decent one. By comparison TW3 is very, very shallow with a boring ass progression system and little actual choice when it comes to, well, anything beyond a few narrative branches.

    Sure, it's more understandable that you have fewer choices since The Witcher has you play a preset character so Cyberpunk's RPG flaws stick out more given that your created character doesn't have all the freedom one would expect they'd have. But still, when it comes to the nuts and bolts of what makes a game a good RPG, Cyberpunk clearly wins to me even if it's hardly Disco Elysium or New Vegas tier by any means.
    I see where you are coming from and on paper you are definitely right. But if you look a bit deeper I have issues giving CP2077 the default win here. On the surface you can make your V how you want him/her to be, kinda.., sorta.., not really. You have 5 skill tree's but at the end of the day you have the option to melee people to death, shoot them to death or hack them to death. In W3 you could hack them to death, sign them to death or craft them to death as well. Of course you always relied on your swords somewhat, but many people will probably use a mixture in CP2077 as well. I'm also not on board with boiling the RPG aspect just down to the old RPG character stats and calling it day. Every other game these days has some RPG stat/progression system, I need more of a game to call it RPG though, especially if many of the skillpoints are as pointless as they are when you can get a multiple of the same effect from some random legendary pants.

    While you are right that W3 lacked in that regard, as you couldn't be a proper mage (believe me I'd be the first to play that instead) or archer, the narrative options in W3 were definitely more than just "a few narrative branches". It definitly felt like your choices actually had consequences, as some of those came back to haunt you. There was just more connection between your role in the world and how it shaped according to your actions. It's not like the narrative in CP2077 was a minor part of the game either, it might even dwarf the combat part for some. In that regard CP2077 has practically nothing to offer, other than not getting enough Johnny-points to get the front door ending. I would probably think differently about this if the skill system was at least fully realized, but it really isn't.
    You are welcome, Metzen. I hope you won't fuck up my underground expansion idea.

  7. #4647
    Quote Originally Posted by Haidaes View Post
    I see where you are coming from and on paper you are definitely right. But if you look a bit deeper I have issues giving CP2077 the default win here. On the surface you can make your V how you want him/her to be, kinda.., sorta.., not really. You have 5 skill tree's but at the end of the day you have the option to melee people to death, shoot them to death or hack them to death. In W3 you could hack them to death, sign them to death or craft them to death as well. Of course you always relied on your swords somewhat, but many people will probably use a mixture in CP2077 as well. I'm also not on board with boiling the RPG aspect just down to the old RPG character stats and calling it day. Every other game these days has some RPG stat/progression system, I need more of a game to call it RPG though, especially if many of the skillpoints are as pointless as they are when you can get a multiple of the same effect from some random legendary pants.

    While you are right that W3 lacked in that regard, as you couldn't be a proper mage (believe me I'd be the first to play that instead) or archer, the narrative options in W3 were definitely more than just "a few narrative branches". It definitly felt like your choices actually had consequences, as some of those came back to haunt you. There was just more connection between your role in the world and how it shaped according to your actions. It's not like the narrative in CP2077 was a minor part of the game either, it might even dwarf the combat part for some. In that regard CP2077 has practically nothing to offer, other than not getting enough Johnny-points to get the front door ending. I would probably think differently about this if the skill system was at least fully realized, but it really isn't.
    but these are different types of "choices". you want simply (for the sake of simplicity) want a deus ex machina style of consequences, when someother (myself included) like more when these choices are about how your character act, even if the outcomes are largely the same. in that, surely cp77 is a step ahead than w3, even if still bounded by the role V has in the narrative (you are an indipendent mercenary)
    12/6/2009 -23/11/2020 rip little deathstalker Ferretti. proud forsaken, enemy of the livings

  8. #4648
    Quote Originally Posted by Haidaes View Post
    I see where you are coming from and on paper you are definitely right. But if you look a bit deeper I have issues giving CP2077 the default win here. On the surface you can make your V how you want him/her to be, kinda.., sorta.., not really. You have 5 skill tree's but at the end of the day you have the option to melee people to death, shoot them to death or hack them to death. In W3 you could hack them to death, sign them to death or craft them to death as well. Of course you always relied on your swords somewhat, but many people will probably use a mixture in CP2077 as well. I'm also not on board with boiling the RPG aspect just down to the old RPG character stats and calling it day. Every other game these days has some RPG stat/progression system, I need more of a game to call it RPG though, especially if many of the skillpoints are as pointless as they are when you can get a multiple of the same effect from some random legendary pants.

    While you are right that W3 lacked in that regard, as you couldn't be a proper mage (believe me I'd be the first to play that instead) or archer, the narrative options in W3 were definitely more than just "a few narrative branches". It definitly felt like your choices actually had consequences, as some of those came back to haunt you. There was just more connection between your role in the world and how it shaped according to your actions. It's not like the narrative in CP2077 was a minor part of the game either, it might even dwarf the combat part for some. In that regard CP2077 has practically nothing to offer, other than not getting enough Johnny-points to get the front door ending. I would probably think differently about this if the skill system was at least fully realized, but it really isn't.
    On the gameplay side, I disagree. In TW3 you sworded things to death, or used Witcher senses on your way to sword things to death. That's literally the gameplay no matter how you build your character; as you said, going pure mage doesn't work, pure alchemist even less so, and obviously there's no stealth element at all. Cyberpunk has several flavors of open combat with much greater weapon variety, stealth is a viable option for most missions, and Quickhacking (IE magic) can become powerful enough to be your only required tool outside of a few bosses fights. Skills can open alternate paths or dialog options and sometimes alternate solutions to quest or at least make these solutions far easier to attain, even if that's nowhere near common enough. All in all investing heavily in a build changes the way you play on and off the battlefield much more dramatically in Cyberpunk.

    Now as you say RPGs aren't just about the gameplay but in narrative choices, consequences and such. There it's more of a tie, TW3 didn't have much in the way of impactful choices either. What you did with the Baron or who was named king/queen of Skellige, for example, didn't have a massive effect on either the story or gameplay, just on what epilogue slides you got. At least in Cyberpunk some sidequests unlock entire endings, which are close to hour-long affairs with loads of variation in between them, far moreso than TW3's endings which only varied based on how nice you were to Ciri and again had little gameplay differences. I still felt like V, at the end of the game especially, was more my character than Geralt ever was, even if I didn't have as much choice with V as I'd hoped I would get.

    Now that's not to say Cyberpunk is exemplary in terms of RPG mechanics, as I said I just think it's mostly decent where Witcher 3 was simply shallow and carried to hell and back by great presentation which Cyberpunk can't boast of due to how unfinished it is despite its amazing visuals.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  9. #4649
    The Insane rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    19,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Jastall View Post
    Now as you say RPGs aren't just about the gameplay but in narrative choices, consequences and such. There it's more of a tie, TW3 didn't have much in the way of impactful choices either.
    What most people have been complaining about from what I've seen is that the things you do in Cyberpunk are not reflected in the world state where as The Witcher 3 had a few changes based on actions in quests where a village would be wiped out or X event would happen. But that is pretty much the difference in types of games. A city game can't really changed based on that because things are more more set up when they happen in quests and stuff.

    But you do have quests in Cyberpunk that change based on your response and a few that take earlier quests in the chain/relation into account. But people don't seem to take those things the same way as they do when the an small section of the world changes or is different.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  10. #4650
    One thing I've noticed is how tentative the gaming press seem with their reviews after launch. If anything, this whole debacle has shown me just how fickle gaming reviews are when the "meta" concerning that review's creation is in question. There seem to be plenty of reviewers who will absolutely not go out on a limb and give a game a good or bad review unless the crowd agrees with their opinion. Yes there are click-bait reviewers, but I suspect there are many more who would just prefer to play it safe instead of give their actual honest opinion.
    Last edited by Zenfoldor; 2021-01-04 at 08:59 PM.

  11. #4651
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenfoldor View Post
    One thing I've noticed is how tentative the gaming press seem with their reviews after launch. If anything, this whole debacle has shown me just how fickle gaming reviews are when the "meta" concerning that review's creation is in question. There seem to be plenty of reviewers who will absolutely not go out on a limb and give a game a good or bad review unless the crowd agrees with their opinion. Yes there are click-bait reviewers, but I suspect there are many more who would just prefer to play it safe instead of give their actual honest opinion.
    Do reviewers serve any useful purpose? I guess it's fun to read reviews that agree with whatever your opinion is, but for the most part they're subjective opinions which are as relevant as your tastes are similar to the reviewer. Which of course incentivizes them to behave the way you're describing. To me watching people play a game is a much better method of figuring out if it's worth buying.

  12. #4652
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaktar View Post
    Do reviewers serve any useful purpose? I guess it's fun to read reviews that agree with whatever your opinion is, but for the most part they're subjective opinions which are as relevant as your tastes are similar to the reviewer. Which of course incentivizes them to behave the way you're describing. To me watching people play a game is a much better method of figuring out if it's worth buying.
    I think they do. Metadata is valuable. Just look at how we use Amazon user reviews. It shouldn't be the defining characteristic of a game though, but unfortunately it often is. There are still non-gamers who might buy games for their relatives or something like that, where metacritic may be a valuable quick reference guide for purchase, but it does seem that metadata gets a little worse each passing day. I'd wager this is in exact correlation with how aware we are of the metadata. As we become more aware of this metadata, it becomes less valuable, as we are able to manipulate it more easily and assign greater weight to its value than that value should actually hold.

  13. #4653
    Quote Originally Posted by Zenfoldor View Post
    One thing I've noticed is how tentative and scared the gaming press seem with their reviews after launch. If anything, this whole debacle has shown me just how fickle gaming reviews are when the "meta" concerning that review's creation is in question. There seem to be plenty of reviewers who will absolutely not go out on a limb and give a game a good or bad review unless the crowd agrees with their opinion. Yes there are click-bait reviewers, but I suspect there are many more who would just prefer to play it safe instead of give their actual honest opinion.
    In part, you can thank the response to "sensational" reviews like Eurogamers Uncharted 3 review, where they had the gall to give it an 8/10 - https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ception-review

    Which was not received well by the fandom - https://kotaku.com/that-uncharted-3-...-about-5853319

    And we have countless more recent examples of reviewers giving a game a "controversial" score and being targeted for harassment as a result. It even happened with Cyberpunk, with people both attacking Liana at Game Informer for reporting on the epileptic siezures and Kallie at GameSpot for a "low" score and for calling out the poor and apparently mostly pointless crafting system.

    It's a risk with enthusiast media vs. proper critique, and I imagine that given the love for CDPR at the time that even with the flaws in the PC version folks were looking to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    It's a bit of a chicken/egg problem on if these lower quality reviews are because of the enthusiast nature of the media or whether they're afraid of backlash from readers who take something as trivial as a low score and use it as justification to launch a harassment campaign. It doesn't help that CDPR intentionally (as is their right) withheld the console versions until launch day to present a misleading image of what the game was like at launch.

    But I'm amused at the way they're responding to gamers vs. investors right now -

    Gamers - Sorry we screwed up, really. We messed up and are wrong, and we'll fix it. Please be excited.

    Investors - No, we didn't screw up or mess up at all. We did nothing wrong. We will fight you in court to prove we did nothing wrong and didn't mess up at all.

  14. #4654
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    In part, you can thank the response to "sensational" reviews like Eurogamers Uncharted 3 review, where they had the gall to give it an 8/10 - https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ception-review

    Which was not received well by the fandom - https://kotaku.com/that-uncharted-3-...-about-5853319

    And we have countless more recent examples of reviewers giving a game a "controversial" score and being targeted for harassment as a result. It even happened with Cyberpunk, with people both attacking Liana at Game Informer for reporting on the epileptic siezures and Kallie at GameSpot for a "low" score and for calling out the poor and apparently mostly pointless crafting system.

    It's a risk with enthusiast media vs. proper critique, and I imagine that given the love for CDPR at the time that even with the flaws in the PC version folks were looking to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    It's a bit of a chicken/egg problem on if these lower quality reviews are because of the enthusiast nature of the media or whether they're afraid of backlash from readers who take something as trivial as a low score and use it as justification to launch a harassment campaign. It doesn't help that CDPR intentionally (as is their right) withheld the console versions until launch day to present a misleading image of what the game was like at launch.

    But I'm amused at the way they're responding to gamers vs. investors right now -

    Gamers - Sorry we screwed up, really. We messed up and are wrong, and we'll fix it. Please be excited.

    Investors - No, we didn't screw up or mess up at all. We did nothing wrong. We will fight you in court to prove we did nothing wrong and didn't mess up at all.
    I still do have some problems with the gamespot review's text but I do have to respect it SO MUCH MORE now just because of how reviews seem to have so easily rolled with the tide of consumer sentiment, it is hard not to respect a real opinion given early about the game, no matter what it is.

    I remember a certain Twilight Princess review like it was yesterday. I'm not saying that reviewers shouldn't be intimidated of the angry crowd(I certainly would be), I'm just saying that it really puts a damper on the legitimacy of metadata that is so easily influenced by general consumer sentiment...and well anything really that isn't directly a part of the game.

  15. #4655
    The Insane rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    19,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    And we have countless more recent examples of reviewers giving a game a "controversial" score and being targeted for harassment as a result. It even happened with Cyberpunk, with people both attacking Liana at Game Informer for reporting on the epileptic siezures and Kallie at GameSpot for a "low" score and for calling out the poor and apparently mostly pointless crafting system.
    And that is the problem with reviewers. They say one thing even if it is wrong or misunderstood and we have people that keep pushing that view and defending it. Crafting is not poor or pointless in the game. Weird right? That is the problem with most game reviews now a days. They don't care about the game. Or the systems but it is much more about their personal views rather then finding out how and if things are actually useful in the game.

    It is why reviews are largely worthless and most just look for them to confirm their bias about the game.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  16. #4656
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post

    But I'm amused at the way they're responding to gamers vs. investors right now -

    Gamers - Sorry we screwed up, really. We messed up and are wrong, and we'll fix it. Please be excited.

    Investors - No, we didn't screw up or mess up at all. We did nothing wrong. We will fight you in court to prove we did nothing wrong and didn't mess up at all.
    Well there's no legal consequences for saying you screwed up to what few gamers actually pay attention to these things and will just jump on board the next outrage train and mostly forget your transgressions. Investors who lost money in your venture tend to have a far longer attention span.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  17. #4657
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    And that is the problem with reviewers. They say one thing even if it is wrong or misunderstood and we have people that keep pushing that view and defending it.
    That's not their fault. That's on the people "wrongly" defending something you think is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Crafting is not poor or pointless in the game.
    I haven't poured over every review, but quite a few of both the "professional" critical reviews as well as plenty of user/youtube/etc. reviews call out crafting as being a largely pointless affair that adds little to nothing to the gameplay. Hell, in this thread alone we've had people commenting on how useless crafting is when they're having far superior loot thrown at them from enemies left and right.

    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    That is the problem with most game reviews now a days. They don't care about the game. Or the systems but it is much more about their personal views rather then finding out how and if things are actually useful in the game.
    That's not a problem, that's how reviews work. Why add a system if it has little value beyond being an expected "thing" in a RPG?

    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    It is why reviews are largely worthless and most just look for them to confirm their bias about the game.
    If that's what you want to believe, fine. But plenty of us don't do that, especially those of us with no preconceived biases. I never had, and still don't have, a horse in this race. I'm just a bystander enjoying the show.

  18. #4658
    The Insane rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    19,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    That's not their fault. That's on the people "wrongly" defending something you think is wrong.
    So the person making the claim is not at fault for making it in the first place? That is a weird bit of logical just to defend a person. This isn't a case of opinion. It is a case of actually being wrong about a system in a actual review. The few people commenting about crafting in this thread has been a person that hated the game since before and you jumping in to use them as a confirmation of how accurate this specific reviewers claims were. Weird right? That you keep bending over backwards to defend an inaccurate claim in a review for no reason.

    You don't have far superior loot thrown at you from enemies left and right. You can get a legendary from crafting way before you can have them thrown at you. Weird right? That a person like yourself only basis your information on reviews and posts that confirm what you want to defend rather then trying to learn and understand? That is the problem with modern reviews. People give things to much weight even after they have been shown to be inaccurate. And instead of changing they defend the review tooth and nail.

    Of course that is how reviews work which is why it is a problem. Because they are reviewing feelings rather then systems and mechanics. Crafting is added as an option which is why it is tied to stats and perks. Just like Rifles are an option, sub machine guns are an option, melee is a viable option etc. What kind of terrible gamer are that you are actually calling viable options in a game terrible game design? Seriously. That is a shitty attitude. That 100% viable, yet optional, character paths are little value and terrible.

    It isn't just what I believe. You are displaying confirmation bias in your very responses even though you deny it. Weird right? That a bystander feels they are super accurate on crafting just because they have found confirmation bias in other sources. But you totally are not using reviews and media to confirm a bias you have when you admit you have no horse in the race and can't actually find out how it works.
    Last edited by rhorle; 2021-01-04 at 10:00 PM.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  19. #4659
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    You are displaying confirmation bias in your very responses even though you deny it.
    If you're here to just tell me what I really think and believe, cool. I guess I don't have anything left to say since you'll just tell me I'm wrong and that I really believe/think something else.

  20. #4660
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    But I'm amused at the way they're responding to gamers vs. investors right now -

    Gamers - Sorry we screwed up, really. We messed up and are wrong, and we'll fix it. Please be excited.

    Investors - No, we didn't screw up or mess up at all. We did nothing wrong. We will fight you in court to prove we did nothing wrong and didn't mess up at all.
    Gamers will move on, and even if they would want to take action, they could get a refund so case closed.
    If you admit fault to investors, like saying you knew the console version was shit but pushed it anyway, then you risk losing a lawsuit and having to pay a lot of 'damage' because your admitted bad action tanked the stock price.
    It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •