By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Cyberpunk 2077 Review Thread | 83 OC, 87 Meta

 

Predict which range Cyberpunk's meta score will fall in?

98-100 4 4.94%
 
95-97 5 6.17%
 
92-94 28 34.57%
 
89-91 21 25.93%
 
86-88 9 11.11%
 
83-85 5 6.17%
 
80-82 3 3.70%
 
Less than 80 6 7.41%
 
Undecided 0 0%
 
Total:81
Captain_Yuri said:
haxxiy said:

Slightly concerned about these reports of widespread bugs. Will there truly be a first day patch?

Yes and there will be more than one apparently. Not to mention the day 1 patch gonna be big

https://realsport101.com/cyberpunk-2077/cyberpunk-2077-will-get-a-second-day-one-patch-in-addition-to-the-43gb-update-playstation-5-ps5-ps4-xbox-series-x-s-one-stadia-pc-steam-epic-gog/

We will see how much of it actually gets fixed though.

43 GB day one patch, plus another smaller day one patch 0_0 Wow, they must be updating alot of code. Hopefully the vast majority of these bugs are fixed, and the later reviews will actually be higher a result, and bring the meta up to a 92 or 93.



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:
Shaunodon said:

Main page is slow to update, but if you check critic reviews it's at 91 on Meta after 38 reviews.

Lower than expected but still great. May be a struggle to stay above 90 though. Mostly disappointed Destructoid don't have a review out yet.

If most of the serious complaints are about bugs, it seems rather petty to dock it points considering the delays and crunch required just to get it to this point, with early patches/updates already planned and on the way. Given the work environment of this year, you'd think reviewers would have some consideration for that, at least. Seems almost opportunistic, as if giving themself a way to justify a low score for the biggest game of the year, and one of the most ambitious we've ever seen.

What about it is the most ambitious?

Btw FS2020 came out this year, certainly that's the most ambitious we've ever seen.

If anything it feels more like the game is getting a pass (like FS2020 got) since it will get better or they expect the day one patch to fix most issues.

I think he means it is CD Projekt's most ambitious project to date. It was such an ambitious project for them that they had to double their dev team size compared to Witcher 3, and give it a year more development than Witcher 3 got.



Bugs seem to be the major, consistent complaint across all reviewers so far. Which is good in a way - it's something they can remedy. I haven't played Witcher 3 myself (the combat always looked off-putting so I never bothered with it), but I gather that it was also buggy at launch but got a lot of post-launch support that remedied those issues. So that bodes quite well for Cyberpunk.

Last edited by Machina - on 07 December 2020

shikamaru317 said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Yes and there will be more than one apparently. Not to mention the day 1 patch gonna be big

https://realsport101.com/cyberpunk-2077/cyberpunk-2077-will-get-a-second-day-one-patch-in-addition-to-the-43gb-update-playstation-5-ps5-ps4-xbox-series-x-s-one-stadia-pc-steam-epic-gog/

We will see how much of it actually gets fixed though.

43 GB day one patch, plus another smaller day one patch 0_0 Wow, they must be updating alot of code. Hopefully the vast majority of these bugs are fixed, and the later reviews will actually be higher a result, and bring the meta up to a 92 or 93.

43GB is not code lol, either a very inefficient update process or some widespread change to the assets. Changing the encryption / compression would cause a huge patch like that. Which would make sense, more efficient storage of the assets to streamline loading and reduce pop in.



SvennoJ said:
Shaunodon said:

Main page is slow to update, but if you check critic reviews it's at 91 on Meta after 38 reviews.

Lower than expected but still great. May be a struggle to stay above 90 though. Mostly disappointed Destructoid don't have a review out yet.

If most of the serious complaints are about bugs, it seems rather petty to dock it points considering the delays and crunch required just to get it to this point, with early patches/updates already planned and on the way. Given the work environment of this year, you'd think reviewers would have some consideration for that, at least. Seems almost opportunistic, as if giving themself a way to justify a low score for the biggest game of the year, and one of the most ambitious we've ever seen.

What about it is the most ambitious?

Btw FS2020 came out this year, certainly that's the most ambitious we've ever seen.

If anything it feels more like the game is getting a pass (like FS2020 got) since it will get better or they expect the day one patch to fix most issues.

Not sure why you're trying to make this a 'my game vs. your game' battle, but I clearly wrote "one of the most ambitious...". And there's no disputing this is the 'biggest game of the year' in terms of hype/expectation, if you're arguing that.

And when I talk about ambition, I'm not just talking about pushing visual and technological limits. There's so much level of detail they were attempting to put into this game, including and beyond the technical aspect. If you don't already see that and want to drive the conversation back to Flight Sim and VR, more power to you, but I'm not interested in indulging you.



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:
shikamaru317 said:

43 GB day one patch, plus another smaller day one patch 0_0 Wow, they must be updating alot of code. Hopefully the vast majority of these bugs are fixed, and the later reviews will actually be higher a result, and bring the meta up to a 92 or 93.

43GB is not code lol, either a very inefficient update process or some widespread change to the assets. Changing the encryption / compression would cause a huge patch like that. Which would make sense, more efficient storage of the assets to streamline loading and reduce pop in.

That's what I meant. Some devs design patches to basically redownload whole sections of the game to replace them during the patching process, it doesn't mean that the game install will be 43 GB larger once the patch is applied, as the patch is going to be completely replacing alot of the existing install. The fact that the update is 43 GB means that tons of areas of the game will be affected by this larger day one update. I suspect we will see alot of bug fixes between the two day one patches.



I was shocked to see that it was Jeff Grubb who gave it a 60 review. When I saw GamesBeat gave it a 60 I was fully expecting it to be a Dean Takahashi review, the critic who became a meme due to his inability to beat the Cuphead tutorial.



Today was just for reviews on PC - expecting the average to drop due to the performance on console systems - where a majority of people will play. They won't let any review site show footage or talk about the performance on those systems pre-launch. Will probably end up in the 80's. Hopefully next gen patches come out by early next year.



shikamaru317 said:
SvennoJ said:

What about it is the most ambitious?

Btw FS2020 came out this year, certainly that's the most ambitious we've ever seen.

If anything it feels more like the game is getting a pass (like FS2020 got) since it will get better or they expect the day one patch to fix most issues.

I think he means it is CD Projekt's most ambitious project to date. It was such an ambitious project for them that they had to double their dev team size compared to Witcher 3, and give it a year more development than Witcher 3 got.

Sure, however I doubt there are many studios that take on a less ambitious project as there next big title ;)

Anyway I read some of the lower scoring reviews (usually way more informative than the 100s) and besides the bugs the theme seems to be, lack of emergent game play, most of the world feels like superficial set dressing, nothing new (a combination of the all the best things from previous games which is always good of course), no real freedom to approach things differently or rather it doesn't matter all that much how you progress you character.

The strengths are the side quests, characters and general world building. As long as you follow the path set out by CDPR you will have a great time. However there is not much point to explore on your own or try out different things. So in the end, quite a linear rpg.

Eurogamer's early impressions also are a bit on the low side (after 40 hours of playing) mainly to do with the balance (which can be fixed)

The biggest shame there, so far, is that so much is locked away so deep in the skill trees. The worry is that you'll get too far through the story to fully enjoy even a narrow, specialised slice of what Cyberpunk offers, let alone the whole thing. For now, combat feels limited. The guns are serviceable, and melee is fun in a slightly sickening way, but very simple - think The Elder Scrolls, but even simpler: a weapon in just the one hand. The sense is I'm a good way into Cyberpunk 2077 but still waiting for its systems to really open up.

I'd say between the 30-hour and 40-hour mark is where it gets going, weirdly enough. I've already played a fair bit more since writing this - it takes a long time to earn the XP and $ you need to actually explore the game's systems, and I think they got the balance slightly wrong there to be honest, but more on that in the final review (probably).


That's a long time to get going, at least it's a lengthy game!



Zombie9ers said:

Today was just for reviews on PC - expecting the average to drop due to the performance on console systems - where a majority of people will play. They won't let any review site show footage or talk about the performance on those systems pre-launch. Will probably end up in the 80's. Hopefully next gen patches come out by early next year.

I'm hearing that the next-gen consoles already have partial optimization on launch, including a higher resolution and a 60 fps cap instead of the 30 fps cap on PS4/XB1. Hopefully some of the critics will be playing it on PS5 or Series X back compat for the better framerate, with the day one patch applied which should fix alot of the bugs that these early critics had to deal with. Might still manage 90+ on the console versions.