I like Cyberpunk a lot better than the Witcher. It’s a much better shooter than the Witcher is a hack and slash.
The Witcher is better in terms of world building and story choices, but gameplay? It’s no contest to me. The swordplay in the Witcher isn’t good, and spells, grenades, and oils are mostly just passwords to memorize for different monsters that don’t really play different
It doesn’t matter. We’re not comparing two mechanics. Cyberpunk is not a narrow shooter like Quake 3 or something like that. Both are tremendously ambitious games and both should be judged as a whole. Awards, recognition and cultural legacy of TW3 speak for themselves.
Which means subjective opinions are allowed to exist. The Witcher is not an objectively better game than Cyberpunk. You like it better. You don’t have the right to say someone is wrong for enjoying a game that has gameplay that isn’t terrible more than a game that does.
You’re the one telling someone he’s wrong about something opinion based because he values actual gameplay in a video game. That is not a statement that is capable of having legitimacy.
Yes… But there are people who professionally do this. Worldbuilders. They are clearly material dependent. Witcher 4 will probably meet the high expectations.
Yes… But there are people who professionally do this. Worldbuilders. They are clearly material dependent.
Of course they are. World builders can only spend so long on one given project, and have to tie their work in with prior material, then on a sequel they get a chance to explain events in the time gap as well as expand on more bits.
Look at the Elder Scrolls series. A lot of the lore in Skyrim was written nearly 20 years before the release of that game. And Oblivion massively expanded on things introduced in Daggerfall
Cyberpunk 2077 is now a really fucking good game. Seriously. Play it nowadays. It’s very much a NMS story.
TW3 is a really fucking good game. CP2077 is fine, better than it was.
I like Cyberpunk a lot better than the Witcher. It’s a much better shooter than the Witcher is a hack and slash.
The Witcher is better in terms of world building and story choices, but gameplay? It’s no contest to me. The swordplay in the Witcher isn’t good, and spells, grenades, and oils are mostly just passwords to memorize for different monsters that don’t really play different
It doesn’t matter. We’re not comparing two mechanics. Cyberpunk is not a narrow shooter like Quake 3 or something like that. Both are tremendously ambitious games and both should be judged as a whole. Awards, recognition and cultural legacy of TW3 speak for themselves.
You’re comparing subjective things.
Which means subjective opinions are allowed to exist. The Witcher is not an objectively better game than Cyberpunk. You like it better. You don’t have the right to say someone is wrong for enjoying a game that has gameplay that isn’t terrible more than a game that does.
And who are you to say what rights I have? Stay on the topic or stay quiet.
I am entirely on topic.
You’re the one telling someone he’s wrong about something opinion based because he values actual gameplay in a video game. That is not a statement that is capable of having legitimacy.
That speaks a lot about the dev Commitments but the lore is simply not at the same standard.
What did you expect? Witcher is based on a book series and CP77 is based on a TTRPG.
The books have a lot more lore already written than you can expect of a TTRPG.
Yes… But there are people who professionally do this. Worldbuilders. They are clearly material dependent. Witcher 4 will probably meet the high expectations.
Of course they are. World builders can only spend so long on one given project, and have to tie their work in with prior material, then on a sequel they get a chance to explain events in the time gap as well as expand on more bits.
Look at the Elder Scrolls series. A lot of the lore in Skyrim was written nearly 20 years before the release of that game. And Oblivion massively expanded on things introduced in Daggerfall