Entire city blocks that can't be traveled to in addition to scores of buildings that can't be accessed or entered?

Additionally, consider many of the major inanimate objects of the city itself not as interactive -- in an era of open-world games where we should very soon focus less on gfx and visual corpuscular/granular detail, but more on logistical details (layouts/geography) and asset behaviours? (Except for sands, some rocks and other natural textures.... For the love of God, devs, even games being published in 2024 have grounds that look like mush or toy plastics. Keep pushing graphics for those).

Yes, there's tons of potential virtual places in Night City, ripe for the taking, that could make a sequel rife with "content." Absolutely would've made CP2077 better tbw if it had focused a little less on visuals and tech.

However, it's more important that they have a pipeline and system ready for the next game, which is at least half of the essential argument you've made. The layout is there; nuanced tweaks to an existing template and urban expertise could make obsolete the act of handcrafting a new city layout from scratch. In addition a pipeline for asset creation itself - a fast way to build buildings and such. They already have modern urban architecture down pat.

If I'm not mistaken, one COULD think that because they are switching to UE5 that they've rendered existing pipelines a bit moot, but UE5 has Nanite and other methods for expediting raw development. I guess in this day and age it's tedious to craft variations of bricks, concrete, grass, etc.

Anyway, good read.

@nintendians: yeah, sorry, you're kinda all over the place -- and I'm not proferring up a "replay," let alone any indication that I've played the game or not. I spoke from an abstracted, game-agnostic sense (but genre-specific) which is the only relevancy in the end.

Btw, it's "worsened," "[has/had] become worse;" "worser" is archaic and hasn't been necessary for generations, and "gotten" (and got) has NEVER been necessary to throw in there for any phrasing.

@nintendians: um, one only has an idea if they're a decent player if they've truly matched with & against equally-skilled players, regularly -- and/or did some formal training/assessment.

On the flip side - CBMM (which is inherently nonsensical for preparing you to know what's what about yourself) -- one would also need to consistently face opponents of much higher skill WITHOUT "hiding behind" sheer numbers in asymmetrical fights (meatbag teammates), or being carried by a much better teammate.

And not playing to the meta. That's how we really know if we're good. Only other way is to be told as such by a bunch of different people, especially in a more "formal" setting like a tournament.

Otherwise the experience you described sounds like a severe lack of self-awareness mixed in with poor attitude, some form of confirmation bias and whatever else that plagues it.

I guess "high-skilled" players have forgotten what it's like to live for the fight itself, or forgotten what it means to lose fairly or even unfairly on a more regular basis. I guess they ultimately forgot how they got good tbw.

You add to the cacophony of voices when you consolidate, not take away.

Notice the word I chose: cacophony. It's not a chorus when more people are thrown into the room.

Chipmakers and console proprietors: Should've thought about game preservation before you started making new hardware.... In an effort to "help" devs chase new gfx & software techniques, or was it those chasing the hardware?

@ives74: I guess I feel a little better for clogging up my hard drives with finished and more unfinished games (I deliberately left Ori 2 near the end bc I wanted to play it at 120 fps on a new PC or the then-impending Series X, but by the time I got a new PC later that year I had nothing left for a 120 Hz display... damn pandemic economics).

You ever just look at a list and think, "nah there's no way that's [36] items long" and then proceed to count each item, line-by-line?

I'm an itemizer, so I guess that's why I am prone to do that lmao. (It's not really my job title but it's a necessary fundamental part of it).

They are leaving October 1st. I've done this enough times to know that on that day (but not at midnight when the day just starts), maybe even the next day, the games are still playable via Game Pass.

In fact, the apps indicate October 1st (the day they're leaving, but not NOT necessarily the last day they're playable).

To backup my point: most range indications of logic in common parlance are inclusive, not exclusive. For example, nobody says "I'll be there between Monday and Wednesday" and just mean exclusively Tuesday; they mean Monday, Tuesday and/or Wednesday (depending on context it could be all 3 days, some or one). Today's a Tuesday btw so that's amusing.

So when Microsoft says that we have until October 1st to play a title (or play "content" if I spoke as Phil Spencer does), they are not saying September 30th. In fact I beat Metal Hellraiser on September 16th, this last Friday, the day it left Game Pass.

@bestdad94: primarily play for what now....