Cyberpunk 2077 guess the critic scores

Avatar image for andy24king24
andy24king24

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#1 andy24king24
Member since 2018 • 34 Posts

So everyone. We’ve had some big big game releases in the past few years, GAT 4, GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 1 & 2, Halo to name a few but come on peeps this game was talked about back in 2012 before the PS4 was even made, so 8 years in the making, and the studio CD Projekt Red this is their 2nd big game release. So come on folks, reviews are due we think Monday, but what do you think the scores will be from the major critics? My answer, the minimum is 9, and most if not all will be 10. There will be the odd 8 or really critical 7 but I’m optimistic this will be the highest rated game released.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#2  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

If I had to guess, 87 overall. Could be a tad higher depending on the below_

  • Majority sites will blow-out the zeitgeist and call it the greatest game ever after an hour, regardless how it actually handles/ plays. It's open world, easy on the eyes, and very cinematic. That's appealing to a lot of peoples taste, not to mention the volume of marketing will shape a lot of influence.
  • Some will have a more logical point of view and give it an 8/10, I assume just like The Witcher be praised for world building and questlines. Mechanics will be so-so. Level design, questionable.
  • And then you'll have one or two that fight against the cult-praise and give an overly negative review stating "it bad"

-

I won't personally have a true say myself till I try it. The Witcher III for me wasn't the greatest in any noteworthy aspect, gameplay was mediocre. I've played a lot of ARPG games that feel better to play. However respected everything else the game did so well. I assume my feelings will be similar for Cyberpunk. They go more for a jack of trades master of non, than a particular focus.

We’ve had some big big game releases in the past few years, GAT 4, GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 1 & 2

Yeah, you seem to be the target audience for this game.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#3 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

84 would be perfect

Avatar image for ahrequenomori
AhReQueNoMori

255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#4 AhReQueNoMori
Member since 2020 • 255 Posts

94

Avatar image for ahrequenomori
AhReQueNoMori

255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#5 AhReQueNoMori
Member since 2020 • 255 Posts

@RSM-HQ: What game would you say is OVERALL better than the witcher 3 and why? Just curious.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#6  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts
@ahrequenomori said:

@RSM-HQ: What game would you say is OVERALL better than the witcher 3 and why? Just curious.

Don't understand the question, what do you mean with 'overall better'. May want to elaborate what you are asking. As it doesn't break it down very well.

If you are looking at me stating 'I've played ARPGs that handle "gameplay" better'; the main aspects I'm referring to is A.I., Combat, Stat Systems, and Level Design. All of which The Witcher III: The Wild Hunt doesn't do a great job with in all respects. And I've never seen fans really lean on this being the selling point at anyrate.

If you want a sum-up of ARPG games that handle those aspects better- Soulsborne games, Dragon's Dogma, Monster Hunter (gen3-4-5) are games I would personally put over.

However your question of "overall better" doesn't follow what I mentioned. In fact I noted TW3 as a jack of all trades, so 'overall' it does a decent job.

People tend to like TW games because they like the graphics, story, atmosphere, immersion, and world building.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

6632

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#7 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 6632 Posts

9.2

Avatar image for ahrequenomori
AhReQueNoMori

255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#8  Edited By AhReQueNoMori
Member since 2020 • 255 Posts

@RSM-HQ: Well, you said that you don't consider TW3 the greatest game (me neither btw), but is it just because the combat is not as good as in other games?

I don't consider the witcher 3 a jack of all trades, master of none. There are definetely many things that it does better than most games of the same genre, such as sidequest, presentation, believable characters, immersion and such, which, taking into account that it is a massive open world RPG, is surprising. Sure, there are many games that excel in some particular aspect and hence are better in that regard, but personally I don't think there is a single game that does as well in as many areas. Souls games have a few selling points in which the game is exceptional; Dragon's Dogma's exploration is probably unparalleled, but OVERALL? TW3 is the full package.

Playing the game from start to finish is a delight (DLC included), and very hard to surpass IMO. I'm not a fan of the game, in fact there are many games that I consider better, but then again I'm not really objective when it comes to "better". If someone said that TW3 is a better game than my favourite game of all time, they'd probably be right (somewhat).

So you mentioned a couple of games that you think do a better job in some areas (sure), but what games do you consider better than TW3 overall? Or is it that you put more weight on something in particular? I hope I'm being clear enough.

Avatar image for quickeshop
quickeshop

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#9 quickeshop
Member since 2020 • 1 Posts

Hi,

Looking somewhere between 90 to 98.

Let's wait till 9th December 2020.

Avatar image for firedrakes
firedrakes

2844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#10 firedrakes
Member since 2004 • 2844 Posts

50!

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#11  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

@ahrequenomori: I've read most people see Rockstar as the developer that does openworlds best. Then again I haven't played one since the original Read Dead Redemption.

Also The Witcher IIIs openworld is segmented to make it look nicer, which from a level design point of view makes it worse. And while gameplay related no area seems designed for combat in mind, with enemies commonly getting stuck and not knowing how to react in the zone, and that sometimes breaks up the immersion.

While it is pretty for openworld standards, even upon release better looking games existed. Batman: Arkham Knight, Mortal Kombat X, Bloodborne; all these games released the same year and in many if not all aspects are better looking games.

Only aspect I can faithfully agree upon is side quests not being the standard we are familiar with. Perhaps it does that better than other games. However sidequests are commonly known as eye rolling padding, so it being less than bad is still, what exactly? So doesn't pull it enough for me to give it much head-way.

As for games that I think are better? I would probably list too many, but to narrow down more recent games not so long ago a top ten of the decade was done here. And while completely different genres are noted here I truly believe these games are the peaks of each genre and are extremely well made products.

Far too many from all kinds of genres. Only game excluding from those ARPG games in my previous post is Dragon's Dogma, because while I love the game, it is flawed in many, many aspects.

Well, and again it depends what you are looking for. Can only speak to my own personal interests.

A lot of what The Witcher III does well is wasted on my preferences as I tend to dislike openworld design that holds no real value, romance options, and hundreds of side quests, while arguably better than other games that use them, is barely a compliment. It is the same as praising a game filled with quick time events making them less a chore.

Do I think The Witcher III is worthy of its praise? Absolutely! for its intended market, it's the kind of game I expect an Assassins Creed or Fall Out 3 fan to enjoy (two examples).

As I think it is designed for people who lean towards story focused open worlds, and while that's a huge market. It is also one lacking in a lot of areas for anyone else who wants a little more spice in its systems, namely when ARPGs have come along way.

*Pardon the blog sized reply, hopefully it's the kind of answer you was looking for ツ

Avatar image for girlusocrazy
GirlUSoCrazy

10975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#13  Edited By GirlUSoCrazy
Member since 2015 • 10975 Posts

8

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

33433

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 33433 Posts

I’d say that it gets a 10/10 here at GameSpot and a 92 Metacritic. I found The Witcher 3 to be worthy of a 10/10 and this game looks like it should be equally amazing as well. I’m very hyped for it, can’t wait.

Avatar image for speedytimsi
speedytimsi

1413

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 speedytimsi
Member since 2003 • 1413 Posts

Gamespot LOL....they gave it a 7.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#16  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

@speedytimsi said:

Gamespot LOL....they gave it a 7.

I mean, they've played the game. While fanbois haven't. And while Gamespot have more than not been off the mark, another outlet gave it a 6/10 so. . .

Perhaps Cyberpunk is just flawed in many ways. That doesn't mean it's awful, 7/10 last I checked is above average.

Just means those thinking it was going to be the greatest game ever made need to welcome a thing called reality.

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

33433

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#17 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 33433 Posts

Well so much for my 10/10 here but my Metacritic guess is pretty close to the mark so far. I’m still very hyped for this game and am really looking forward to playing it myself.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

6632

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#18 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 6632 Posts

I was one number off not bad.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#19 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

I was hoping its a 84 but heh I will settle for 89/100 for some reviewers probably scared to be honest.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#20 RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts
@sakaixx said:

I was hoping its a 84 but heh I will settle for 89/100 for some reviewers probably scared to be honest.

Same could be stated for a lot of outlets for various projects.

Even Soul games likely get special treatment to avoid some backlash on the sites from its dedicated fandom. While I love Demon's Souls Remake, not many had the courage to note how the level design is still pretty awful in many sections of the maps.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#21 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

@RSM-HQ:

I think personally on Demons Souls many reviewers that reviewed the game never played it on PS3 so their impressions is positive and for others its nostalgia bait.

The lower scores mostly comes from people who played it before and they all agreed that if you want a better souls experience go play everything else.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#22  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

@sakaixx: "everything else" is perhaps too excessive for me to agree with. Demon's Souls does certain things the other Souls games simply don't, and never went back to, a lot of those key features is why some prefer it over Dark Souls. Ledge-hopping being one of them.

However level design is certainly among the weakest when compared to its brethren. That aspect isn't very debateable. A lot of narrow hallways and stairways giving no room for strategy; either have to cheese it or muscle through.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#23 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

@RSM-HQ: thats what I mean I just keep it simple. For many reviewers its probably their first game and thinks its normal while people who remembered the original game suggest you play other games because it offers better design and whatever else.

Same thing with Dark Souls 2. Level design and gank squads really hurts the experience for many but many reviewers then loved it as its their first souls game when u read the reviews.

*I love DS2 more than DS3 though.

Avatar image for Starshine_M2A2
Starshine_M2A2

5401

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 19

#24 Starshine_M2A2
Member since 2006 • 5401 Posts

Was a little bit surprised by the GS score but I stand by their right to their own opinion. I’ve got a feeling I won’t agree with it when I play it but if it’s as buggy as the reviewer said, it explains the 7.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#25 RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

@sakaixx: I never disliked Dark Souls II, good game. But its base game certainly had a few issues, one being weak level design, just not as bad as DeS. The A.I. rotating on an invisible disc to avoid backstabbing always looked real stupid and came across as cheap too. Certainly could have been handled better (Later games added a lot of back attacks for enemies).

At least the Crown DLCs fixed level design, even has some of the finest in the series. Never got the hate for "dudes in armor" either for DkSII; Mirror Knight last I checked was the best version of Old Monk.

Solid game. Yet probably my least favorite out the list. Doesn't make it bad though.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#26  Edited By sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

@RSM-HQ: we are opposites I guess on DS2 DLC. The DLC is certainly much better in level design, visual and added verticality is welcomed but then they even have gank squad as bosses and I really, really hated that. I think its the cave city DLC and the 2 tigers in the frigid outskirts.

Still I love DS2 more than DS3. What it attempts and the original ideas it tries to do resonated with me more than the nostalgia crap of DS3.

Avatar image for johnd13
johnd13

10357

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 johnd13
Member since 2011 • 10357 Posts

@Starshine_M2A2 said:

Was a little bit surprised by the GS score but I stand by their right to their own opinion. I’ve got a feeling I won’t agree with it when I play it but if it’s as buggy as the reviewer said, it explains the 7.

Personally, I wouldn't be concerned if bugs (albeit one too many and serious) are the main flaw of Cyberpunk. I never paid them much attention, unless they're game-breaking, and they will most likely be fixed with upcoming patches. Of course, it's no excuse for a developer to release a buggy mess but I can get past that.

All I want is the quality in writing, quest design and world-building that CDPR has spoiled us with in the past. What is also encouraging is the fact most reviewers seem to be enjoying the combat, which is CDRP's main weakness.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#28  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts
@sakaixx said:

@RSM-HQ: we are opposites I guess on DS2 DLC. The DLC is certainly much better in level design, visual and added verticality is welcomed but then they even have gank squad as bosses and I really, really hated that. I think its the cave city DLC and the 2 tigers in the frigid outskirts.

Oh the DLC is far from perfect. Yet in all honestly base game already had ganged-up squads and bosses. The Ruin Sentinels are most peoples first wall, then the final boss wave is Watcher and Defender. Poorly designed and thought out, requires either a lot of health to tank and learn what you are in for, or need before-hand knowledge. Otherwise are overwhelmed. As DkS combat doesn't work very well for multiple enemies, not aggressive and fast ones anyway.

Base game did have some fun bosses, with the already mentioned Mirror Knight, plus Dark Lurker, Velstadt, and Sinner. However overall the DLC just seems less messy than the base game. And while the noted tigers are a pain, so too is the laziness of palette swap Smelter. Because everyone wanted to fight a beefy version of that ******. .

Still I love DS2 more than DS3. What it attempts and the original ideas it tries to do resonated with me more than the nostalgia crap of DS3.

I think DkSIII is probably my favorite of the lot, well refined, paced, ton of variety, and gives plenty of possibilities to early builds than demanding people wait for end-game for that consideration. DLC while short is also really good too.

DkSIII has a slew of its own faults (bonfire overload. . what the hell From Software) don't understand this 'nostalgic crap' statement. It does many of its own mechanics, systems, and gives off its own identity. All while having nods to the past games, including DeS. DkSIII for all intent is the last Soul game we may ever get.

True DkSIII is a more direct sequel. Sequels typically are. As such if you ever got that Bloodborne 2 you've been craving, I bet it will be closer to Dark Souls III than DkS II.

*At anyrate we may have to continue this some other time. I don't think OP or other Cyberpunk fans appreciate we've turned this into a Souls thread. lol

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

10427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#29 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 10427 Posts

@RSM-HQ said:
@sakaixx said:

Still I love DS2 more than DS3. What it attempts and the original ideas it tries to do resonated with me more than the nostalgia crap of DS3.

I think DkSIII is probably my favorite of the lot, well refined, paced, ton of variety, and gives plenty of possibilities to early builds than demanding people wait for end-game for that consideration. DLC while short is also really good too.

DkSIII has a slew of its own faults (bonfire overload. . what the hell From Software) don't understand this 'nostalgic crap' statement. It does many of its own mechanics, systems, and gives off its own identity. All while having nods to the past games, including DeS. DkSIII for all intent is the last Soul game we may ever get.

True DkSIII is a more direct sequel. Sequels typically are. As such if you ever got that Bloodborne 2 you've been craving, I bet it will be closer to Dark Souls III than DkS II.

*At anyrate we may have to continue this some other time. I don't think OP or other Cyberpunk fans appreciate we've turned this into a Souls thread. lol

I probably just disliked DS3 nostalgia baits strongly. From Anor Londo reuse to even the dead giant smithy easter egg. Everything about DS3 seems to try to evoke ur nostalgia for DS1 with all the references to even onion knight I just felt its lazy. The whole ringed city ending about creating new worlds I just like meh, in the end the world still ended why I even bother linking (or not) the fire. Not only that gameplay wise I think I have mentioned it many times how linear it is. Sure level design is excellent, but linear world progression is the worst, I hate it.

Personally Bloodborne direct sequel works well as Bloodborne has a very cohesive story. Everything that happens in Bloodborne happens within ur grasp of time while in Souls time and place is relative, some events passed hindreds or thousands of years.

I agree. Should continue this in another thread if we want to discuss. See u ~ ~

Avatar image for xandard
XandarD

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#30  Edited By XandarD
Member since 2020 • 1 Posts

@speedytimsi: 7/10 when reviewer didn't care about inventory because "not enough time", used crafting once, never upgraded weapons, didn't play side quests where u help Police because obvious reasons, weapon is behaving differently than in CoD (that's why it's not 8 probably :D), reviewer thought Cyberpunk is funny place and not utopia, doesn't know what Cyberpunk really is, and "minority" was attacked.

So, yeah, they should give this review to head chef or vice chef of Gamespot, not to a worker, someone who can bias a game with self centered beliefs. So, when u consider all of this, REAL review is probably around 90-9/10.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

27066

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Litchie
Member since 2003 • 27066 Posts

@xandard: Why should they let a chef do the review?

Avatar image for sban83
SBan83

102

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#33 SBan83
Member since 2019 • 102 Posts

@Litchie said:

@xandard: Why should they let a chef do the review?

He means chief obviously. Don't think Gamespot's kitchen staff are on the payroll anymore since the pandemic.

Avatar image for ghost_of_phobos
Ghost_of_Phobos

1227

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#34 Ghost_of_Phobos
Member since 2020 • 1227 Posts

I would love to know the creative justification for changing the Voodoo Boys from a gang of white middle class people to black. Not being woke, just honestly curious of why this change to the source material.

Avatar image for Baconstrip78
Baconstrip78

1613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36  Edited By Baconstrip78
Member since 2013 • 1613 Posts

It’s 8/10 if you stick to to the main game and some side quests and assume all bugs will be patched soon. Game is beautiful (on PC), story is good, but gun play feels about like FO4 only bullet spongey, voice acting is not great, and driving missions are on rails.

If you’re hoping for a next gen free roam experience, then it’s 6/10...maybe worse. The AI in all aspects of the game outside of quests feels 15 years old.

It’s sad too because the longevity of the game will be reliant on that unscripted part.

I’d say Gamespots score is probably about right if you’re on PC.

If you’re playing on console the game is 4/10 and ethically should never have been released.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

9685

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 88

User Lists: 1

#38  Edited By RSM-HQ
Member since 2009 • 9685 Posts

GFAQ let many us know both Destructoid and Easy Allies gave it a 7.5/ 10 very recently.

Seems accurate from what I've read about the game. From my original guess it wasn't going to be as buggy. But adding that onto its flaws I think a 75 is reasonable.

GFAQ has also debunked that a lot of those 100 scores are from outlets that haven't reviewed a game since Red Dead Redemption 2, in which they also gave a 100. Seems odd. And some others have also not reviewed a game in years. Am surprised sites such as Metacritic are considering these outlets valid.

Wonder what the logic behind all this is? hmm