-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is Cyberpunk much better than Starfield?
- Thread starter BootsLoader
- Start date
Lokaum D+
Member
thats why a lot of ppl keep talking shit about No Man's Sky while praising Starfield for mediocrity, some people are so stubborn that they prefer to play a average game over a good one.
Last edited:
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Oh, sorry maybe it was the Judy quest the other guy mentioned I don't really recall any of the quests in CP2077. And sorry for your heartbreak with Pan Am.
Topher
Identifies as young
Or just have a different view on which game is actually good. Meh.....opinions and all.
FlyyGOD
Member
Starfield is far from a bad game. Just because you have your opinion about the game it doesn't apply to everyone.
Yeah. PC version was sooo great that it required complete revamp of core gameplay systems including Police system to have "finished" game.
Cyberpunk has such huge amount of bug collection videos that if you need my guide, you probably don't know how to use YouTube...
And again. I'm excluding PS4/XOne versions of the game which were literal catastrophe.
I'm just talking about game systems so badly designed, that CDPR spent 3 additional years to revamp them.
I really don't understand people trying to defend biggest scam in AAA gaming history along with No Man's Sky. Yes. Cyberpunk 2077 is now great game. Better then Starfield probably. But it took lies and 3 more years in development. Basically Early Access which CDPR did not announced.
Last edited:
balls of snow
Member
Nah starfield dwarfs cyberpunk by number of quests. Quality however...
Roberts
Member
And the clone quest
GymWolf
Member
Let's wait 3 years to see how many bugs compilations we get for starfield shall we? i'm sure that it already has more than your average game in the same span of time from release.
The one i posted in this very topic beat anything you can find for cyberpunk in terms of "broken", even cohh that is a huge bethesda fanboy was in disbelief (and rightly so)
Also lol at thinking that starfield doens't have broken systems like making a circular ship to not get hit because the hit detection system is broken, or the npcs ia completely broken that doens't react to anything or the enemy\companions ia that is somehow worse than their past games...those are all fundamentally broken systems dude, they don't work like they should at all.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Another one I haven't encountered yet.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
StueyDuck
Member
Well they shouldn't of promised that shouldn't they
Instead we got a far cry game with some rpg systems.
Again starfield delivered on their promise. Cyberpunk is barely a smidgen of what they promised so in regards of comparing the two one actually achieved their goals, the other added ray tracing and finally got a very rudimentary police system 2 years later but is still missing lots of features promised.
We can have this thread again 3 years from now when cyberpunk is actually the game they promised
That video was released 2 days after Cyberpunk 2077 launch. So what's exactly is with "just wait 3 years."
Wtf mate?
Topher
Identifies as young
Well they shouldn't of promised that shouldn't they
Instead we got a far cry game with some rpg systems.
Again starfield delivered on their promise. Cyberpunk is barely a smidgen of what they promised so in regards of comparing the two one actually achieved their goals, the other added ray tracing and finally got a very rudimentary police system 2 years later but is still missing lots of features promised.
We can have this thread again 3 years from now when cyberpunk is actually the game they promised
Bethesda hyped up exploration quite a bit and I don't think most would agree that they fulfilled on that.
Lokaum D+
Member
never said its a bad ( yeah i did, bad wording sry ) game, i said that is a mediocre ( i can use average next time for the lack of better word ) for what it offers and that is fair enough, i gave it a 6/10.
yeah, i may have being a little harsh, but i still a little butt hurt by Starfield not delivering on key points when you think about a space exploration game.
Last edited:
starfield has more meat on its bones. cyberpunk has way better characters and missions thats the main things of the two .cybeprunk is cookie cutter tho so it feels like you dont have real progression at all. the missions are there but if you really feel the urge to go threw them is another question. starfield feels like even though there is not much there you can go out and explore have fun looking for stuff, in cybeprunk you never get that feeling. after beating cyberpunk i would say starfield is the more ambitious game and it feels more like an rpg. its doing more. cybeprunk the systems arent there,the activities are not there ,it feels empty and shallow. cybperunk could have beaten easily starfield if it was in the cooker for more years with a better direction of what the game wants to be.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Agree with you there. Pretty much said the same thing a couple of posts above.
So? Is there anybody here who claims that Starfield don't have bugs and plenty of bugs? Or that some of game systems are not great?
I'm just talking about fact that it's funny that people are trying to compare product that was completely revamped in 3 years because it was literal catastrophe at launch and now trying to pretend that Cyberpunk 2077 was not busted at release with Starfield which have plenty of bugs and things that are not greatly designed, but it is nowhere near the state Cyberpunk 2077 launched in...
Last edited:
ReBurn
Gold Member
There's just so much hyperbole going around right now. Games have to be the best at every thing they do or they're the worst game ever created, and comparisons require one to the the absolute best which means the other must be the absolute worst.
I think Starfield and CP2077 are a lot alike in many regards. CP2077 had a rough start and was harshly, and rightly, criticized for its flaws. There was a good game underneath and it took a while to get there. Starfield has the same issue and in time I think the rough edges will be smoothed out. But underneath the issues I think there's a good game there as well.
Which one is better is a purely subjective thing and probably isn't all that important. It is possible to love both games or hate both games. The bickering over it is puzzling. But I guess people like the drama.
Roberts
Member
It’s pretty good with interesting moral choices. Lenghtwise probably as long as First Contact one, maybe tiny bit longer. I don’t remember the planet or a system but look for a place called Crucible.
Topher
Identifies as young
Nice. Looking forward to it. Thanks.
lol do you wanna just drag me in circles here with your selective discussions? Idk how many times I have to say I enjoyed Starfield's sidequests, especially the faction ones. Its like you won't be happy til I just focus on that though when I was responding to the equalizing of "depth" and "you can just walk around and get side missions". But thats not what depth means, and CP side missions easily have more, as we've gone over.
GymWolf
Member
And you think that i can't find a similar video for starfield? what was your point then?
Have you even watched the bug i posted? the one in the cohh video?
Last edited:
what did they not deliver on the space exploration side?
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
Starfield is my OST of the year by a landslide for 2023 so far.
Please go on
Also we can wait for 3 years if Starfield would need "2.0" version because of badly designed game systems
, recall of digital version of the game and apology letter from head of studio.
Last edited:
Lokaum D+
Member
Oh boy, i ll not enter this conversation anymore, enough has being said already on doozen of threads over here, u ll have to look out for yourself this time.
StueyDuck
Member
The constant loading is shit. Hence why I stopped playing it.
But they didn't lie or overpromise anything, watch that direct again, apart from masking loading times the game is there, they even admit most of it is procedurally generated.
Cyberpunk promised a fully fleshed out highly interactive open world sandbox/rpg with a huge amount of systems that will interact and work together like an immersive Sim, instead we got dystopian watch dogs.
And watch dogs at least let's you hack cars when the first one released
eh I think you’re looking at the wrong numbers there dude, you went straight from main story to completionist while talking about side quests, which main + sides is actually almost the same
of course completionist is longer for Starfield since those would be people going to every single damn procedurally generated planet
Main Story
24½ Hours
Main + Sides
60½ Hours
Completionist
103 Hours
All Styles
63 Hours
Main Story
20 Hours
Main + Sides
59 Hours
Completionist
140 Hours
All Styles
51 Hours
I wasn't surprised by these numbers. When you really think about all the CP side content, there is a fuck ton. I agree about quality though, and will add I am SHOCKED SF main story is 20 hours. Felt even shorter than that.
GymWolf
Member
Like i said, they are both extremely buggy, i was just more lucky with cyberpunk (at launch, now i'm having more problem ironically).
And i give 2 fucks about metacritic, i know the game was utterly broken on console but not on pc, i played the damn thing for 82 hours on my first run, and you are gonna find countless of people who had a good experience on pc.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
The police system is the only borked thing that actually needed reworking. Everything else with 2.0 are just bonuses and has fuck all to do with it's botched launch.
cybepprunk is very cookie cutter. do mission get bigger gun,its barely an rpg ,the system and progresssion are not there at all. you cant be what they promised you could be. i honestly would rather bethesda tried to take on cybperunk game ,yes they make games that are more vanilla but at least there is lots of meat on the bone of these games
Topher
Identifies as young
GymWolf
Member
We don't need 3 years, modders are gonna do in a couple of months or less what incapable devs weren't able to achieve in what? 10 years and 400 mil budget?!Please go on
Also we can wait for 3 years if Starfield would need "2.0" version because of badly designed game systems
I mean, you can't fix the dogshit writing or the other bad core elements of the game but who knows, modders are really capable these days
there you go:
I can continue all day most probably, this was with 30 sec of searching, last one is particularly juicy (start at around 5 min)
Last edited:
So...completely redone skill trees are not admission that they were badly designed in the first place?
Okay...
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
I'd love for most devs to rework their shitty skill trees, Starfields included
Dude, idk why you are so intent on acting like a child. I beat Starfield, did all faction quests, played a little ng+. What are you accomplishing by acting like a belligerent teenager? Cause surely no adult would be like "omg you didn't answer if you played everything got emmmmm!"
they need to stop redoing skill trees and add actual activities and choices into the game, it feels like a far cry game not a rpg
Fess
Member
3 year old game I’ve already played for nearly 300 hours and done all the life paths versus 3 weeks old game I’ve only played for just over 100 hours and still have multiple factions left to do.
Cyberpunk definitely have better story-telling, is more immersive and have better designs.
But today I like Starfield more, I like the game loop and enjoy the building and the stuff that happens that don’t feel scripted.
Ask again in a couple years and I might say something else.
For what it’s worth, Cyberpunk was my GOTY in 2020, Starfield is not (yet) my GOTY in 2023.
Cyberpunk definitely have better story-telling, is more immersive and have better designs.
But today I like Starfield more, I like the game loop and enjoy the building and the stuff that happens that don’t feel scripted.
Ask again in a couple years and I might say something else.
For what it’s worth, Cyberpunk was my GOTY in 2020, Starfield is not (yet) my GOTY in 2023.
Topher
Identifies as young
I didn't ask you that though, now did I? I asked if you had played those missions. You haven't. It's fine.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
What activities? Base building shite?
I have played everything. But continue to pretend otherwise like some sort of angry 13 yr old lol dk what to tell you, this is weird
the gameplay loop of cybeprunk is a weak attempt at gta and a far cry game, its nota rpg at all
Topher
Identifies as young
Apparently not.
actual things you would be doing in a cybperunk future world. where are the designated illegal activiteies like maybe be a profesional street racer. become one and actually go up the ranks etc. there is none of that in cyberpunk no factions to go up in. no progresssion at all. you get missions and it doesnt matter if your street cred is high or low
Gambit2483
Member
Ngl, Cyberpunk is probably the overall "better" game for me imo, but currently playing Starfield and just met Andreja and it's pretty much got it's hooks in me.
Ultimately, both are good games in their own respects and both do some things better than the other.
Ultimately, both are good games in their own respects and both do some things better than the other.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
That's no different to Starfield
This post is really funny when one of the more in depth series of side quests involves street racing events lmao