Thread: Cyberpunk 2077

  1. #5881
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    I was having a conversation with you in earnest.

    You made some broad claims, I said they were not true flatly. You didn't back up any of those claims or provide any objective mearsuments for the aspects which you yourself cited. I offered to help you as well.

    Whatever interpretation you have of hysteria or desperation is your own fantasy.

    This is still wrong. No such thing exists. No publication, platform or outlet does so. No school or scholarly work I know of practices under this belief.

    Can you name any?

    Yes, and these are not objective. You can measure number of words in a book but there is no standard on the quality of those words.

    Says who? What rubric is passed among critics to this measurement?

    David Yow, Iggy Pop, Glen Branca, ATDI, MBV, Spacemen 3, DEP, Black Fast, Weekend Nachos- these performers had total meltdowns on stage and have had those meltdowns judged to be some of the best performances of their careers.
    You were? Because that wasn't showing, whatsoever. You just said 'You're wrong', said that no form of art can ever be judged objectively, without backing that up, btw. And you can start saying that standards set by the industry are subjective, but that doesn't really make that true, either.

    It's very nice for them to have had these performances judged to be the greatest of their careers. I'm certain that, subjectively, that's true. And I'll also say that this is the only perception that really matters. But, objectively speaking, that's still not good. Didn't Justin Bieber also throw up on stage? Did that performance get judged as 'one of his best'? No, because that's a rather subjective way to judge things. But, objectively, be it Bieber, or Iggy Pop, or whomever, a musician not hitting notes they are supposed to hit is objectively bad, even though it can subjectively be one of the best performances they ever had.

    As I've said earlier, and what you decided to gloss over, completely, is that objective and subjective qualities are not mutually exclusive, nor are they any indication to the overall quality of any piece of art. The subjective immpression art leaves will always trump the objective qualities it may or may not have, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any.

  2. #5882
    The Insane Kathandira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ziltoidia 9
    Posts
    18,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Skulltaker View Post
    You were? Because that wasn't showing, whatsoever. You just said 'You're wrong', said that no form of art can ever be judged objectively, without backing that up, btw. And you can start saying that standards set by the industry are subjective, but that doesn't really make that true, either.

    It's very nice for them to have had these performances judged to be the greatest of their careers. I'm certain that, subjectively, that's true. And I'll also say that this is the only perception that really matters. But, objectively speaking, that's still not good. Didn't Justin Bieber also throw up on stage? Did that performance get judged as 'one of his best'? No, because that's a rather subjective way to judge things. But, objectively, be it Bieber, or Iggy Pop, or whomever, a musician not hitting notes they are supposed to hit is objectively bad, even though it can subjectively be one of the best performances they ever had.

    As I've said earlier, and what you decided to gloss over, completely, is that objective and subjective qualities are not mutually exclusive, nor are they any indication to the overall quality of any piece of art. The subjective immpression art leaves will always trump the objective qualities it may or may not have, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any.
    You are on the right track here. Something can be objectively bad, but also subjectively enjoyable. I used the example of 70's/80's punk. Where the bands weren't trained musicians. They just fumbled around their instruments and played as loud/distorted as possible. Yet, it evoked a feeling in the listener that was enjoyable to them.
    RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18

    Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.

  3. #5883
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathandira View Post
    You are on the right track here. Something can be objectively bad, but also subjectively enjoyable. I used the example of 70's/80's punk. Where the bands weren't trained musicians. They just fumbled around their instruments and played as loud/distorted as possible. Yet, it evoked a feeling in the listener that was enjoyable to them.
    Yep. And I get what Fencers and Endus try to argue, namely that all criteria we use to judge any piece of art are set by humans, and thus subjective, but that's simply not what subjective means. Subjective simply means based on things that are not factual. For example, this depiction of a human. It's just bad. Why? Because neither the human body nor perspective work that way. And those aren't subjective perceptions of reality, either. It's just wrong.

    And so is this. Poor Jon here lacks a pinky, his eyes are to big, I don't know what his mouth is doing there, his legs are to long and his ears are basically non-existant.

    As a drawing of a human, they're both not accurate. Compare it to this drawing. Now, there are still a couple of issues, but this is a considerably better likeness of a human than the other two, simply because... well, it's anatommically accurate, more or less.

    That doesn't mean that either Jon Davies' Garfield is a terrible comic, nor that Rob Liefeld is a terrible artist. Can I make the claim that either, or any, piece of art is 'bad' just because it fails scrutiny against objective measures, in this case, likeness to an actual human? No. Or rather, I shouldn't. And, subjectively, both clearly depict humans and work in their respective styles of art. I'd argue that Liefeld's Captain America here is a worse piece of art, because he strives for anatomical accuracy with the usual superhero embellishments of muscles etc, but fails miserably, while Davies never attempted to be anatomically accurate in his Garfield comics.

    None of the criteria you can judge art objectively by tell you anything about subjective quality, or the overall quality. None. Games can have terrible graphics, but still be good. Take World of WarCraft as an example. The graphics were bad when the original game released, but they suited the game just fine, and they do to this day, even though graphics have improved immensly since the original game was released. Some games have better graphics than others, or, if the term better offends, have more advanced graphics that fully make use of technical possibilities, which, in turn, makes them objectively better, in regards of graphics. Doesn't mean they are better, though. I'll take Return to Monkey Island over Call of Duty, any day.

    Endus actually gave pretty good examples of objective and subjective qualities in writing and TV a couple of pages back, I'm a little puzzled why this discussion is still going on.
    Last edited by Skulltaker; 2022-09-29 at 01:26 PM.

  4. #5884
    Quote Originally Posted by Skulltaker View Post
    You were? Because that wasn't showing, whatsoever. You just said 'You're wrong', said that no form of art can ever be judged objectively, without backing that up, btw.
    Yes, you are wrong. That's not hostile to state- it;s just a notion you are putting forth erroneously and based on limited knowledge it seems. The claim was yours that there is objectivity measure in the arts and media. It's on you to defend it as there exists no such standardization in qualitative or quantitative measurement of art and media.

    And you can start saying that standards set by the industry are subjective, but that doesn't really make that true, either.
    It completely is. These are made up. They are not even standardized for the most part and are totally transitory and culturally reflective.

    Show me any standardization otherwise.

    It's very nice for them to have had these performances judged to be the greatest of their careers. I'm certain that, subjectively, that's true. And I'll also say that this is the only perception that eally matters. But, objectively speaking, that's still not good.
    "Good" is a subjective qualifier. It has to be defined and defined in context to have an objective application. There is no such thing- what critics are following this standardization? What publications? What analysts?

    As I said earlier, I will write out and format (for free) a standardization template for you if you have the data or criteria for such. This is like $500k job I am offering to do for free if you are unaware.

    a musician not hitting notes they are supposed to hit is objectively bad.
    You'd have to know their intent and define the parameters of the performance for that to be true. Moreover, you'd also have to come up with a means to define this within a context relative to the art.

    As I've said earlier, and what you decided to gloss over, completely, is that objective and subjective qualities are not mutually exclusive, nor are they any indication to the overall quality of any piece of art. The subjective immpression art leaves will always trump the objective qualities it may or may not have, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any.
    I didn't gloss over it, it's not logical or true. What you are really describing in those "objective aspects" is the value of recognized traits. This is why I said specifically give me the qualitative and quantitative for "story". Because it's not possible. I work in the industry- no such thing exists, my brother.

  5. #5885
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Objectively no.
    Again, you don't have a leg to stand on with this line of thinking. You could say that the mona lisa took objectively more work/time to complete, but you can't say it's objectively better because of that. It's entirely possible to not give a flying fuck about the work put in or to have zero appreciation for technique. The fact that something can be viewed and valued entirely differently through someone's eyes is EXACTLY why you cannot "objectively" say something in the art world is better or not.

    Isn't your argument saying that Cyberpunk 2077 is an MMO because it is art and can't objectively be defined?
    No, MMO has a specific criteria set that allows us to see cyberpunk doesn't meet that criteria.

    Even though we know it isn't an MMO it has to be called one because "anyone who has yet to be born" could call it that. So thus it becomes that.
    No. You're fundamentally lacking the understanding and distinguishing differences here, namely that how "good" or "bad" something is... is inherently subjective and can never be objective. How much someone likes something or not (read: what is actually meant by "good" and "bad") isn't necessarily tied to anything. The definition of an MMO, OTOH, is a set of criteria that doesn't care about how much someone likes it or not. It's the difference between color and how much you like a color.

    You can't call something that's red "blue" and have it suddenly be blue. You can, however, argue that blue is better than red till you're blue in the face and vice versa.

    What about that artist that sold an invisible sculpture? Objectively it doesn't exist and isn't real. However it still sold for more €15,000 double its valuation. Clearly someone has found a subjective meaning but it doesn't change what it really is. Nothing.
    Right, but that's not what you're arguing. You're arguing whether something is objectively better than something else. It's entirely possible for someone to think that invisible sculpture is better than any other sculpture on earth and you can't say "but objectively it's not!" Because there is no objectivity to be had there. Just your own personal stipulations you've placed on value that blinds you and makes you THINK objectivity exists. Value is always subjective. Preference is always subjective. Ergo, what's "good" and "bad", what's "better" or "worse" is always subjective.
    Last edited by BeepBoo; 2022-09-29 at 04:56 PM.

  6. #5886
    Void Lord Aeluron Lightsong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    In some Sanctuaryesque place or a Haven
    Posts
    44,024
    This thread is objectively getting weird.
    #TeamLegion #UnderEarthofAzerothexpansion plz #Arathor4Alliance #TeamNoBlueHorde

    Warrior-Magi

  7. #5887
    Things have veered a bit too off-topic for this thread. Discussion on broader, related topics is fine to a point, but please keep discussion directly related to CP2077. If you want to continue any current discussions please take them to PM's.

  8. #5888
    Decided to start a new character. RTX still tanks this game's performance in crowded interiors (Lizzie's in particular murders my poor PC) but feels much better in exteriors than what I remembered.

    There's chainswords in the game now which is never a bad thing. Didn't see special aminations or executions for them yet tho.

    I wasn't expecting changes on that front or anything but the game's opening is still pretty weak. The inconsequential lifepath and training montage feels like they took the place of actually fun gameplay sequences. On the other hand grabbing the Flathead is one of the most open quest in the game when it comes to player choices; go in guns blazing, pay for it and fight because malware, don't pay and fight, execute the boss and fight, remove the malware so everything goes smoothly, there's plenty of possibilities for different builds. Sadly I can't remember the rest of the main quests being this well thought out, at best you either get a sneaky option or a shooty option.
    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. #5889
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    73,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Jastall View Post
    I wasn't expecting changes on that front or anything but the game's opening is still pretty weak. The inconsequential lifepath and training montage feels like they took the place of actually fun gameplay sequences. On the other hand grabbing the Flathead is one of the most open quest in the game when it comes to player choices; go in guns blazing, pay for it and fight because malware, don't pay and fight, execute the boss and fight, remove the malware so everything goes smoothly, there's plenty of possibilities for different builds. Sadly I can't remember the rest of the main quests being this well thought out, at best you either get a sneaky option or a shooty option.
    That quest still depresses me, because I recall the early announcements where they were discussing using the Flathead as a character-controlled drone, as a whole skill tree basically. Like, if you've played Watch Dogs 2, that kind of thing but with heavy weaponry. The mission where you DO use the thing is so toned down and that segment almost feels like an old point-and-click adventure game, getting people into the right positions for the Flathead to advance. It's so clear they had to cut it for technical/time reasons, and it's sad.


  10. #5890
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    B'ham, AL
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    That quest still depresses me, because I recall the early announcements where they were discussing using the Flathead as a character-controlled drone, as a whole skill tree basically. Like, if you've played Watch Dogs 2, that kind of thing but with heavy weaponry. The mission where you DO use the thing is so toned down and that segment almost feels like an old point-and-click adventure game, getting people into the right positions for the Flathead to advance. It's so clear they had to cut it for technical/time reasons, and it's sad.
    Agreed x2.

    I enjoyed the game, enjoyed many of the quests storylines (those that had them) and at least the illusion of options - but all of it, to me, also showed me "what could have been" if they'd had the full time and ability to do what they originally intended to do. The 'bones' of that 'better game' is there - but not flushed out. And that disappointed me on the whole thing. :/

    Even the quests that appear to present a real choice - don't. At least, outside of the few that actually effect your 'ending', the rest change nothing of the game or how the game progresses, regardless of what 'options' you choose. Sure, an NPC here or there is alive or dead - but none of those NPCs being alive/dead changes the world of the rest of the game or how your story goes.

    Coming off what they did with quest storylines in Witcher from years before - huge letdown and huge 'stepdown' in game quality, to me. What was a dev company that actually took the time and effort to create a game with *actually impactful* Quest choices that changed multiple things about the game world around the player/characters in large and small ways - to do what felt like "half the game" with their next big AAA release? Even enjoying the game - it was still disappointing.

    Don't regret the purchase. Great world/environment/setting. Fun/Entertaining game (long as you don't mind lack of balance, borked talents, being OP, etc). Good, and even great moments, in the storytelling of the quests. But after coming off the Witcher - still feeling so much 'less' than it should, or could, have been. And due to their poor, greed based, choices about the development and shit-release - destroyed whatever belief I had that this dev company was any different, or better at their craft, then anyone else.

    And that's disappointing, too.
    Last edited by Koriani; 2022-09-29 at 06:24 PM.
    Koriani - Guardians of Forever - BM Huntard on TB; Kharmic - Worgen Druid - TB
    Koriani - none - Dragon of Secret World
    Karmic - Moirae - SWTOR
    inactive: Frith-Rae - Horizons/Istaria; Koriani in multiple old MMOs. I been around a long time.

  11. #5891
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    73,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Koriani View Post
    Even the quests that appear to present a real choice - don't. At least, outside of the few that actually effect your 'ending', the rest change nothing of the game or how the game progresses, regardless of what 'options' you choose. Sure, an NPC here or there is alive or dead - but none of those NPCs being alive/dead changes the world of the rest of the game or how your story goes.
    To be fair, a lot of quests having fairly meaningless outcomes based on player choice, like "is it NPC A or NPC B who dies", while not actually having any significant effect on the worldspace in any way whatsoever, that's entirely Cyberpunk, both the RPG and the genre.

    A major genre touchpoint is that the corps are essentially untouchable in terms of power and influence, no matter what silly little meatbags might pull off while bumbling around out there. Even if said meatbag is a corpo VP or high-end journo; they're just higher class of meatbag, they're not the equals of the non-human corporate giants that rules society.

    The game lets V have about as much effect on the world as any Cyberpunk genre story does. That we're all ants and the giant corpo farmers don't care what us puny little ants are doing and the best we can often hope for is being unnoticed enough they don't get the insecticide, that's a cyberpunk genre trope.

    Coming off what they did with quest storylines in Witcher from years before - huge letdown and huge 'stepdown' in game quality, to me.
    I'm gonna disagree, here; Witcher 3 suffers a lot from similar issues; you can "flavor" the outcomes of quests but you can't fix the world setting. The best you can hope for is lower-level "let the evils of man suffer their karmic fates".

    Gorgeous game, great gameplay, but it's not nearly as responsive to player choice as a lot of people pretend. Most quests boil down to a binary choice, and that choice is often "kill the tragic monster" and "let the monster get its just revenge on the humans that wronged it". And the lasting effects of either choice, most often, are basically meaningless outside the quest reward.


  12. #5892
    Quote Originally Posted by Koriani View Post
    Agreed x2.

    I enjoyed the game, enjoyed many of the quests storylines (those that had them) and at least the illusion of options - but all of it, to me, also showed me "what could have been" if they'd had the full time and ability to do what they originally intended to do. The 'bones' of that 'better game' is there - but not flushed out. And that disappointed me on the whole thing. :/

    Even the quests that appear to present a real choice - don't. At least, outside of the few that actually effect your 'ending', the rest change nothing of the game or how the game progresses, regardless of what 'options' you choose. Sure, an NPC here or there is alive or dead - but none of those NPCs being alive/dead changes the world of the rest of the game or how your story goes.

    Coming off what they did with quest storylines in Witcher from years before - huge letdown and huge 'stepdown' in game quality, to me. What was a dev company that actually took the time and effort to create a game with *actually impactful* Quest choices that changed multiple things about the game world around the player/characters in large and small ways - to do what felt like "half the game" with their next big AAA release? Even enjoying the game - it was still disappointing.

    Don't regret the purchase. Great world/environment/setting. Fun/Entertaining game (long as you don't mind lack of balance, borked talents, being OP, etc). Good, and even great moments, in the storytelling of the quests. But after coming off the Witcher - still feeling so much 'less' than it should, or could, have been. And due to their poor, greed based, choices about the development and shit-release - destroyed whatever belief I had that this dev company was any different, or better at their craft, then anyone else.

    And that's disappointing, too.
    I'll be honest, I don't think any of the Witchers besides 2 went heavy on the reactivity either, what with the Roche and Iorveth paths being very different for the most part. Even then act 3 funneled the story backed to a mostly pre-planned route you don't have much control over and which doesn't matter one bit come game 3.

    Meanwhile 3's main story proceeds in a basically identical manner regardless of what you do, with the only major decision capstone being what happens to Ciri in the last 10 minutes of the game, alongside some major side-quests deciding the fate of some characters (such as the assassination of Radovid). As well, there are rarely several ways to resolve quests in creative fashion. You Witcher sense your way to the objective, slash what needs slashing, and sometimes get to choose the lesser of two evils at the tail end of the sidequest. At best you can use higher Axii level to force persuade but I didn't find it came up very often.

    In this manner I feel Cyberpunk is in line with previous titles, and hell at least it has a few different ending scenarios and missions (defend Arasaka from Yorinobu, storm Mikoshi on foot with Rogue or alone, assault the place with the Basilisk and the Nomads) where the endgame of the Witcher titles were basically identical. My bigger beef is more that quests like the Flathead recovery teases the idea of a game that has multiple possible paths taking various builds into account, something that never really materializes afterwards. Many story quests are almost entirely on-rails, the sidequests at best follow the Witcher 3 model and the vast majority of gigs are go there, shoot or sneak, get paid, with sometimes a Body or Intelligence check making the quest marginally easier. It's not bad, mind you, but it's not great either.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

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

  13. #5893
    The Lightbringer vian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Random
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertoCarlos View Post
    "Day 1 jank" doesnt excuse the shit show that was performance on earlier consoles. They shouldnt have sold the game on those platforms like they are not with the DLC which is the correct call.

    The games won me over and once I updated my drivers I stopped having crashes but come on lets not pretend the game didnt have problems. We also dont need to harp on about it either.

    CD projekt red is not the promised developer to bring balance to the gaming force. At least they corrected their mistakes and moving forward are not repeating the same shit as I said by selling to earlier consoles so you cant have a go at them for admitting their flaws and not just taking customers money and pissing people off with poor performance which is what happened and you can understand why some people would be pissed.
    Don't care about consoloids nor do I care about people with barely can run it systems.

    All that matters is if I enjoyed it, and oh boy did I.
    Quote Originally Posted by bizzy View Post
    yeh but lava is just very hot water

  14. #5894
    Quote Originally Posted by tikcol View Post
    So how is the game at the moment? Is it worth a replay?
    If you wanna replay the story then... sure?
    Not alot has changed, its like replaying witcher 3 basegame again atm... some dlc missions and lots of QoL and completely revamped talent trees. But other than that its the same game.

    Mods are there too to change it even more if you fancy... they just released the modding tools so some mods on that side too.

    The game seems to have a memory leak atm (perhaps the newest patch?)... can play a few hours no problem but at some point the game usually goes to 15 fps and doesnt improve at all, so have to restart to fix it. Very unfortunate...

    EDIT: Oh and the revamps have made it possible to do a knife-build. Ive already been scouting out a knife-netrunner build.
    The perk for knives makes them throwable and recall to you automatically... so wielding 3 knives means you can throw them all and most likely the first one has already returned by the time the third one is being thrown, depending on the knife ofc (different recall times).

    I tried with one knife and once thrown it auto-equipped my next weapon which was a gun... so wielding only knives might be more fun so it has a rotation.
    Last edited by Otaka; 2022-09-29 at 11:46 PM.

  15. #5895
    Quote Originally Posted by vian View Post
    Don't care about consoloids nor do I care about people with barely can run it systems.

    All that matters is if I enjoyed it, and oh boy did I.
    Subjective opinion doesnt allow one to hand wave away issues as if they didnt exist.

    Props for enjoying the game but that doesnt mean you can say "day 1 jank" with a straight face when the game issues went beyond performance on ps4 etc
    Suri Cruise and Katie Holmes are SP's.

  16. #5896
    The Lightbringer vian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Random
    Posts
    3,538
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertoCarlos View Post
    Subjective opinion doesnt allow one to hand wave away issues as if they didnt exist.

    Props for enjoying the game but that doesnt mean you can say "day 1 jank" with a straight face when the game issues went beyond performance on ps4 etc
    Considering i had zero issues, yes, yes I can.
    Quote Originally Posted by bizzy View Post
    yeh but lava is just very hot water

  17. #5897
    Quote Originally Posted by vian View Post
    Considering i had zero issues, yes, yes I can.
    And I'm sure a lot of people driving ford explorers in 2002 said the same thing and looked just as stupid.
    Suri Cruise and Katie Holmes are SP's.

  18. #5898
    The Insane rhorle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    17,032
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertoCarlos View Post
    And I'm sure a lot of people driving ford explorers in 2002 said the same thing and looked just as stupid.
    That is so incredibly random. Have you been holding a grudge against the car for 20 years and just waiting to use it in a sentence?
    "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. #5899
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    That is so incredibly random. Have you been holding a grudge against the car for 20 years and just waiting to use it in a sentence?
    It was one example of possible millions where most people can expect normal conditions from a product in this case a car or video game.

    And if others notice an issue because there is a bug or defect that effects 1% of users, then they have a valid claim to complain and point out said bug/defect and hope for a fix or replacement.

    That doesnt mean someone can say "it didnt happen to me so It cant be true those issues were just paper talk from dem haters" as that is being painfully unaware of ones experiences does not alter someone elses and certainly doesnt alter objective facts.
    Suri Cruise and Katie Holmes are SP's.

  20. #5900
    The salt over this game is insane. The game launched two years ago, it was a dumpster fire release and now it's been patched to high heaven to be a serviceable open-world RPG. It's crazy that a top-tier anime based on the source material gave the game a second chance, and gamers are still full of incredible levels of salt that the company offered to refund you for anyways. It must really grind folks' gears the game is getting a second chance and a bunch of people that didn't have any expectations or heard it was trash years ago is now having a blast.

    It's going to be interesting to see with CDPR does with this massive morale boost. I've got a feeling that even if they stick to only a single expansion, the sales/concurrent player count is probably going to push them to make an expansion campaign that's pretty ambitious. Cautiously optimistic about this Cyberpunk renaissance. After playing through 1.6 it's clear they got their house back in order enough to do some serious work. Fingers cross they surpass folks' expectations with this expansion and let the IP take a breather on a good note like TW3 before we get the inevitable 20XX sequel in UE5.

Posting Permissions

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