Official "Last game you played" Thread

[Sloth15]

I've been playing it on my one x since launch and while it clearly suffers in graphical areas to try and maintain some performance, its overall glitches have as you said been nothing more obscene than what I've experienced in other open world rpgs like elder scrolls or even games like mass effect.

Prior to the last update I did have a few hard crashes that shut down the game, I havent had that since the update but it still occasionally stalls on occasion then kicks back into gear and keeps going.

I've had a few oddball and even comedic glitches but nothing I couldn't get over or move on from. I'm enjoying the game for what it is, I dense game full of random shit to do and I actually enjoy the visits from Keanu.

I do wish the gear customizing was different, I hate wearing really stupid ass outfits to maintain high armor levels. I know I dont really see my character but a pink bunny eared pilot cap, belly shirt, daisy dukes and a saiyan power level reader aren't the kind of gear that I feel make my guy look intimidating....

I've been playing Cyberpunk on my regular PS4 and am enjoying the game quite a bit after 30 hours. Sure it's had some occasional graphical quirks, but they aren't game breaking. And like you said, nothing we don't see in other large games. I haven't had any crashes since the second or third hot fix (I think they are on six now).

I like the hacking portion of the game way better than something like the first Watch Dogs. I find riding motorcycles way easier than driving cars when traveling about town. I've wasted a few hours just exploring the various nooks and crannies of Night City. Hopefully I didn't catch anything on Jig Jig St.

Even 30 hours in, I still have a lot of game ahead of me I think. The game reminds me a lot of Sleeping Dogs which I loved. I also find myself looking forward to Johnny's (Keanu's) cameos.

[KnightDamien]

Cyberpunk is getting shit on because the game is a bit of a buggy mess. But Valhalla just came out recently and is also a mess and no one seems to care. I honestly don't think it's about the game itself but the developer. Like.. we expect a kind've shitty game from Ubisoft so as long as it doesn't crash our entire console then it's fine, but if CDPR's game isn't the second coming of Jesus then the world has ended? I don't know.

I have no interest in Cyberpunk, though. The game looks stupid to me and I can't generally stand actiony first person games. Give me a good over-the-shoulder view any day. Same reason I've never played more than an hour of Skyrim.

[TheSameIdiot]

I also bought Cyberpunk and I think the game's problems are a lot bigger than a few bugs and game crashes. I'm about 20 hours in on an Xbox One X and I think it's about a 6/10.

The city acts more like a small villa than a metropolis. There are less than 10 pedestrians on-screen at all times. The city isn't living, it's waiting on you. Traffic stops when you step out of your car. Cars going through intersections will stop more than a block in advance in case you run a red light. Most of the game mechanics can't even compare to a game from 2008.

The driving physics feel like moon physics, which is unacceptable in a GTA clone. Driving is clunkier in Cyberpunk than any game in the last decade or more. Sleeping Dogs is probably the second-worst driving sim I've played in the same timeframe, and even that was worlds better. Cars handle so poorly that I only drive motorcycles now. Motorcycles aren't without their problems, though. When you run into an object on a motorcycle you will either go through it, bounce off of it (this happens more often than not), or get thrown from your bike (this happens very rarely). You can hit the same concrete barrier three times and get a different result each time. If you hit something on a bike in a GTA game, you are probably going to die.

The hand-to-hand combat is OG Xbox-level bad. Not a huge deal because most combat relies on guns, swords, or mantis blades (giant blades that come out of your forearms), but whenever I find myself in a hand-to-hand fight, it's so poorly executed that it takes me out of the experience. And of course there's a bare-knuckle brawler sidequest.

Small things that were hyped up before launch, like your character's look, aren't customizable. The character creation tool is severely limited. There are no in-game barbers even though The Witcher 3 had them, so I hope you like the hairstyle you picked when you started. You can't transmog gear, so you're stuck constantly upgrading your kit to whatever's in your inventory. I'm currently wearing a life vest and red high tops because those items have the most armor.

When you throw in the game crashes and bugs, it becomes a tough cookie to swallow. It's easily the buggiest game I've ever played, and I'm an avid Bethesda gamer. The game has straight-up crashed on me about five times, and gameplay bugs have forced me to reload approximately the same number of saves. I won't even mention the cosmetic/physics bugs, which are so common that you're forced to ignore them.

Some story/narrative issues have also stuck in my craw. People have rightfully called CD Projekt out for the lack of a nonbinary gender option and forcing a character with a male voice to identify as male and a female voice to identify as female. Beyond that, the game is full of posters sexualizing transgender people, yet it has nothing critical to say about the objectification.

There's an abundance of dildos and sex toys scattered around the city that have taken away from serious story beats on more than one occasion during my playthrough. It seems like they lost sight of creating a world that made sense and instead went for the most extreme environment they could think of. It's juvenile.

It's an exercise in frustration when it comes to something that could've been the game of the year. It badly needed another 18 months of development.

[KnightDamien]

Absolutely not saying Cyberpunk isn't a bad game, but I kind of love the idea of doing a 1:1 on some of this stuff with what's become my most hated game since Fallen Order... AC: Valhalla. If you don't mind....

The city acts more like a small villa than a metropolis. There are less than 10 pedestrians on-screen at all times. The city isn't living, it's waiting on you. Traffic stops when you step out of your car. Cars going through intersections will stop more than a block in advance in case you run a red light. Most of the game mechanics can't even compare to a game from 2008.

I can't even count how many times in Valhalla, during major battles (mostly "raids" but also the standard quest-end setpiece sieges) where enemies will just stop attacking me if I stop attacking them. Like.. in a huge battle. And for whatever reason I stop in the middle of a battlefield and enemy soldiers will also just stop doing stuff and forget we're fighting. To the point where I am guaranteed first hit on at least two of them as I run over and they slowly start to realize that we were, in fact, fighting.
I don't know if it's better on XBox X, since I'm using the One X, but the 'huge battles' are also pretty.. barren. I'd say it's rare to see more than 10 enemies on screen at once, along with several friendlies - who are useless and sometimes also seem to forget what they're supposed to be doing.

The driving physics feel like moon physics, which is unacceptable in a GTA clone. Driving is clunkier in Cyberpunk than any game in the last decade or more. Sleeping Dogs is probably the second-worst driving sim I've played in the same timeframe, and even that was worlds better. Cars handle so poorly that I only drive motorcycles now. Motorcycles aren't without their problems, though. When you run into an object on a motorcycle you will either go through it, bounce off of it (this happens more often than not), or get thrown from your bike (this happens very rarely). You can hit the same concrete barrier three times and get a different result each time. If you hit something on a bike in a GTA game, you are probably going to die.

You can ride a horse in Valhalla. But I never want to unless I have a fairly smooth path to where I'm going because the horses maneuver like drunken battle pigs, and slow down to a ludicrous degree if going uphill. And despite that you are a warrior armed with weapons, you cannot attack people from the back of a horse... for some reason. Shitty indy games can figure this out to at least a passable level, but Ubisoft's billions of dollars can't afford the thinktank necessary to work it out, I guess.
Also, because it's related to traversal, you can climb things. Because it's Assassin's Creed. But Eivor (main character) sucks at it. He (I play a male, so I'll be referring to the character as male here) is slow at it, and constantly fails to anticipate where you actually want him to go, completely misses parkour elements specifically set in your path to use (like he'll just drop off a building instead of jumping to the pole that's OBVIOUSLY been placed there specifically for you to hop to as you chase this mission item). This is literally the worst parkour I've seen in an AC game yet.

The hand-to-hand combat is OG Xbox-level bad. Not a huge deal because most combat relies on guns, swords, or mantis blades (giant blades that come out of your forearms), but whenever I find myself in a hand-to-hand fight, it's so poorly executed that it takes me out of the experience. And of course there's a bare-knuckle brawler sidequest.

Why does it seem like ALL modern video games have at least one really, really awful gameplay element that not only makes it into the game, but gets at least one story quest, or otherwise important gameplay element tied to it so that you HAVE to do it at least once? Valhalla has [email protected]#$ fishing.. which sucks super hard and you miss out on some reward items in your village if you don't do a bunch of Gosh Darn fishing. And Valhalla also has an absolutely trash 'dice' game that you have to play and win at in order to find one particular enemy that you need to kill to complete the Order assassinations.

Also, talking about combat, the Valhalla combat sucks in general. The weapon system is so poorly thought out.

The game has straight-up crashed on me about five times, and gameplay bugs have forced me to reload approximately the same number of saves.

Same. At least 3 of those times the game actually froze up completely -right- after I loaded my game. Because I'm on One X, I gotta turn the game on and sit around for 5 minutes while the game loads up and boom.. the second my character fades in on screen, the screen freezes up. 3 different times. Plus other random times the game has frozen while I was playing. Plus the time I was playing and the entire console just turned off. Plus all the times that quests have bugged out and the person I have to talk to to end the quest disappears entirely, or quest items don't show up to interact with...

Some story/narrative issues have also stuck in my craw. People have rightfully called CD Projekt out for the lack of a nonbinary gender option and forcing a character with a male voice to identify as male and a female voice to identify as female. Beyond that, the game is full of posters sexualizing transgender people, yet it has nothing critical to say about the objectification.

The Valhalla story is pretty trash. It's super boring. And it's actually just one basic sequence played out a dozen different times. Pledge to area. Find your contact in that area. Do several samey follow/kill/find item/destroy resource quests for contact. Do giant siege battle for contact. Make some meaningless choice about who is going to run the kingdom you're fighting about. Go back home and tell everyone how great you are at making alliances. Pledge to next area. Rinse and repeat. Forever.

Also.. Ubisoft has rewarded and protected, and continues to reward and protect, rapists and sexual abusers. But cannon Eivor is a girl so.... ~thumps chest~ solidarity.

There are no in-game barbers even though The Witcher 3 had them, so I hope you like the hairstyle you picked when you started.

I've got no equivalent here. THAT is bullshit. No 'RPG' style game current year argument should get away with not having at least a decent set of pre-game customization options AND mid-game options. I'd like more in Valhalla, but it does okay with that - several hair color options and several hair and beard options.

You can't transmog gear, so you're stuck constantly upgrading your kit to whatever's in your inventory. I'm currently wearing a life vest and red high tops because those items have the most armor.

Valhalla is a latex-wearing sub to Ubisoft's never-ending greed and desire to fleece customers for every possible loot box bullshit 'time saver.' I may think most of them look like shit or are stupid, but Valhalla has a good amount of weapons and armor. The problem is that you need to upgrade them yourself as you play to keep them relevant. What that means is that you have to basically pick a few items that you know you'll always use because you WILL NOT be able to upgrade multiple sets of armor and multiple weapons/shields during a regular playthrough without grinding the shit out of every single side quest and map marker.
It's worse when they bill this new two-weapon combat system as 'try out different things' but by the time you start collecting a reasonable variety of weapons and armor, you're already started spending resources to upgrade your existing kit because you can't spend 1/3 of the game with low-grade junk weapons until you figure out which combo you like best. Giving players options but no reasonable ability to employ those options is bullshit.

There's an abundance of dildos and sex toys scattered around the city that have taken away from serious story beats on more than one occasion during my playthrough. It seems like they lost sight of creating a world that made sense and instead went for the most extreme environment they could think of. It's juvenile.

The entire game of Valhalla looks like what a person who has done no research at all thinks that 'Viking' England looked like. I'm sure it's just me, but I find it insanely distracting and it kills my immersion to run around 9th century England seeing towering 5-story castles and huge stone churches EVERYWHERE. Legitimately half of the buildings in this game shouldn't even exist yet.


Also, couldn't figure out where to drop this.. the 'hide from crowd/blend in' feature in this game flat out doesn't [email protected]#$ work. And it's stupid. And it's unnecessary. And it seems like the game punishes you (via some dialogue interactions) for not using stealth, but also makes stealth almost impossible to use because they cover every entrance to every place with guards that spot you almost immediately. Unless you 'blend in' - in which case they'll stand around and stare at you not noticing you at all.. until you try to walk away because this [email protected]#$ game is already too Gosh Darn boring for me to sit on a park bench for 20 minutes waiting for guards to stop looking at me.

It's an exercise in frustration when it comes to something that could've been the game of the year. It badly needed another 18 months of development.

Valhalla needed more than just time to be a good game. It needed more team members that gave a shit about actually making a good game that paid at least passing respect to the period and place the game is supposedly set. It needed better writers to make an actual compelling story out of this pile of nonsense they strung together. It needed a better art director to give Viking age England the same fidelity that the previous art director gave to classical Greece. It needed so.. so much. I have no hesitation in saying Valhalla failed on -every- level. The amount of 'fun gameplay' you can get out of this will be worth it when the game is in the old bullshit bin at GameStop for 15 dollars, but not for 70+ dollars.


Hope you didn't mind me bouncing my complaints off yours, TSI. I thought it was fun to get the complaints out of my system while also showing how, as I said before, one game is getting way worse reviews while both games have a similar amount of absolute [email protected]#$ going on. It really does show the tendency for fanboys to reward Ubisoft for squeezing a wet turd on the floor while the same fanboys will hold their more 'darling' developers to much higher standards. If Cyberpunk is a bad game, so is Valhalla. If Valhalla is 'game of the year!' ( ) then so is Cyberpunk. Fair's fair.

[TheSameIdiot]

The parallels are pretty funny. I swore off the Assassin's Creed franchise after Unity and Syndicate. I broke my own promise when a friend of mine lent me Odyssey earlier this year, but I loaded the game and was exhausted by it. I hated the combat so much that I didn't get more than an hour in. I think they killed my interest with the subpar annual releases a few years ago. Odyssey seems like a great game, but until Ubisoft fixes some of the bigger issues (historical inaccuracy, the nonsense modern plotline, and the big battle sequences), I'm out.

I probably wouldn't bother to finish Cyberpunk, but I'm neurotic about finishing games that I buy. I beat them pretty much without exception.

On the plus side, Dragon Age Origins is next on my list. I've never played any Dragon Age game, and I'm a big BioWare fan. At least, I was before the studio went to shit. Then I'm going back to Skyrim for only the second time.

[KnightDamien]

Odyssey seems like a great game, but until Ubisoft fixes some of the bigger issues (historical inaccuracy, the nonsense modern plotline, and the big battle sequences), I'm out.

Odyssey -is- a pretty great game. Less buggy and nonsensical than Valhalla. And the historical inaccuracies aren't nearly as egregious in -most- ways, and the ones that are pretty bad you can at least understand why they felt the need to do it. Oh, and I simply hate the modern era stuff in the AC games. I hate it so much. Bugs and all.. the modern stuff is legitimately the worst part of every AC game.

As for Valhalla.. dude, I didn't even take the time to explain how every empty house in this entire game has all of its doors barred -from the inside- somehow, and that you cannot break in but you CAN shoot a single arrow through a nearby window to -break- the huge plank of wood holding the door shut. Jesus this game sucks....

I probably wouldn't bother to finish Cyberpunk, but I'm neurotic about finishing games that I buy. I beat them pretty much without exception.

You have my sympathy.
I don't have time for that. I'll give any game a fair shake (I played 90 hours of Valhalla). But at some point, finished or not, I'm going to stop if I'm not enjoying it.

On the plus side, Dragon Age Origins is next on my list. I've never played any Dragon Age game, and I'm a big BioWare fan. At least, I was before the studio went to shit. Then I'm going back to Skyrim for only the second time.

I love DAO so much. But I also hate it. For whatever reason, all of my DLC stopped working years ago so I've never been able to give it another playthrough because it's just not the same. But I have... three?.. complete playthroughs of that game. So good. Although I have to be honest, these days I find it almost impossible to go back to a non-verbal protagonist. It's why I could never play Red Dead Online.
But DAO probably still ranks as one of my favorite games of all time.

Skyrim has such a massive fanbase that it makes me wish I could enjoy it. I -want- to like it so badly.

[TheSameIdiot]

It's much more logical to give up on a game if you aren't enjoying it. I wish I could do that, but my brain considers it wasteful and I eventually go back to finish it.

Ugh, is the protagonist non-verbal in DAO? Silent dialogue kills the atmosphere for me. It took me like three years to finish Breath of the Wild for that reason.

[KnightDamien]

Ugh, is the protagonist non-verbal in DAO? Silent dialogue kills the atmosphere for me. It took me like three years to finish Breath of the Wild for that reason.

Yeah. Same really good dialogue options and stuff that BioWare games are popular for, but the character isn't actually voiced. To be fair, though, DAO came out in 2009. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure voiceless protagonists in RPGs were still very much the standard at the time, despite BioWare themselves having Shepard be voiced for the first Mass Effect.

(DAO's protagonist technically has a few voices you can choose from, but it's only used for in-combat quipping/grunting, really.)

Voiceless protagonists used to never bother me, probably because it was so normal. But yeah, nowadays I find it almost impossible to go back to it. Even for DAO which still ranks as one of my favorite games of all time.

[Magnuz]

I keep seeing more reports about how bad cyberpunk is and now the ceo is apologizing and what not and I don't get it.

I know it was overhyped and had a long development but it delivered what I expected, rpg elements fps shooter with driving free roaming and tons and tons of side missions beyond the fairly expensive story.

I feel like anyone complaining about this game, didn't play anthem. That was a disaster game that I wasted way too many hours going nowhere in. Zero worthwhile story, little to no depth, little to no customization, big map that was completely devoid of interesting life or characters. Along with a ton of bugs. I probably experienced more bugs in a them than this game.

I get the complaints about things about the game play mechanics or driving and what not but those aren't game breaking. Their just game standards you get used to and I dont find them that ridiculous. Explore enough and you open the fast travel points you basically don't have to drive anywhere unless you go outside the city.

I've completed all the story missions save for the last, and most of the side missions(at least the major ones) im working my way through the city slowly clearing gigs and crime activities. I'm full [email protected]#$ robo cop mode now and I enjoy myself plenty.

Its not game of the year or mind blowing but its good and I'm getting my money worth and that's more than I could say for anthem which I only paid 15 dollars for because I had credit on my Xbox account when that game came out.

[TheSameIdiot]

I don't think whataboutism is a good way to evaluate games. If I'm comparing it to anything, it's GTA, Sleeping Dogs, and The Witcher 3. Cyberpunk doesn't compare favorably to any of those titles.

Cyberpunk was supposed to be the next great open-world game. It's mediocre at best.

[Magnuz]

Its all dependant on taste and how you go into the game. If you let yourself be hyped up about a game before playing it enough to think its gonna be the next great game of the year your risking alot. I can't think of a single triple a title that has come out and not needed some amount of work post release either with patches or large changes.

I dont think it wise to go into any game over hyped or expecting too much. It also as I said depends on taste. People laud witcher 3 like its a masterpiece but I got bored in it. With issues much like ones mentioned about this game. Poor customization no transmog, start the game in a badass armor and quickly ditch it for higher level pantaloons and a puffy shirt. I didnt care much for the combat and magic system or some of the story or interactions and say what you will about Henry Cavill but geralt in the game has all the range and depth of a toothpick.

This game at least has held my attention compared to witcher, and while it's no mind blowing experience it's not something awful or truly bad. Mediocre maybe but still interesting in its own ways and good in others and depending on your tastes it can be great on occasion. Definitely not the worst game I've played and undeserving of the hate it gets.

Too much is levied on what everyone expected it to be not what it is. This isn't no man's sky or anthem, its not a completely over promised unfinished game its just not the blow your mind block buster it was hyped to be.

[TheSameIdiot]

Other than the customization, it isn't about the hype for me. I can excuse The Witcher 3's lack of customization because it was based on a pre-existing IP and the fantasy setting is more restrictive than dystopian science fiction. The Witcher 3 had solid gameplay, a compelling story, and depth. I don't think Cyberpunk has any of that. Depth is a war-torn countryside, a fascinating NPC, or an immersive sidequest. Cyberpunk skipped all the hard work and added sex toys.

I just think Cyberpunk is a poorly constructed game. I played for about 40 hours and Judy is the only thing I'll remember about it long-term.

Part of it is my own fault. I only buy games that score 8.5+. If the Metacritic is less than an 80, I don't bother. I made an exception for Cyberpunk because I wanted to be part of the conversation and CDPR had earned a lot of goodwill from The Witcher 3, but that isn't a mistake I'll make again. The worst games I've played in the last five years are Jedi: Fallen Order, Mass Effect: Andromeda, and now this. I broke my cardinal rule to play all three. Fallen Order and Andromeda are serviceable, but not memorable. I don't think Cyberpunk is serviceable or memorable.

For a game of this stature, from this developer, with this kind of budget, the final product is completely unacceptable. I had more bugs in the final mission of Cyberpunk than any 50+ hour Bethesda game. My game crashed five times in 30 minutes. My weapons wouldn't work. I could reload, couldn't shoot, and couldn't melee. I had to reload two different saves. That kind of stuff happened all the time during my playthrough. I would guess I had a major bug once every half hour. If it was playable, I could've cut it more slack.

[Magnuz]

That all is still personal perspective and experience and I can't say a games complete trash because some people had trash experience with it or felt it was trash when it works for me.

After the first big patch I havent had a single crash. Ive had one occasion where I had to reload because a mission stuck on a glitch and a few times I've had to approach something different to make it work but these are all things I've experienced 10 fold in fallout or elder scrolls. It becomes habit to save every time you do something in these games and expect to reload if not for a glitch, for the option to do something differently.

Also we clearly have different views on games, I found witcher just as if not more boring npc and content wise as this game except this game the tech and stuff I can do is more fun than plodding along on a horse or hacking away and endless monsters. Here I get to shoot, chop, jump over large obstacles and land on people, hack and hide stealth down entire situation without killing a single person and generally get to make my own fun. Plus I get occasional visits from Keanu reeves which I find charming and more entertaining than geralt ever was in witcher.

I also think fallen order was a perfectly fun game, nothing amazing but I probably liked it more than unleashed since it didn't bastardize star wars Canon as much a game where a wanna be jedi pulled down a star destroyer with the force.

Andromeda was boring but I didn't find that drastically different than the other 3 mass effects I played so it didn't bother me that much.

Games like anthem and no man's sky are games that i feel merit the kind of reaction cyberpunk is getting, games that promised and didn't deliver at all. Not just didn't work well or were glitchy or not as interesting as it seemed, but flat out didn't deliver a full game or a real game experience.

Its still different strokes for different folks, I get why people could hate cyberpunk but you are still telling me you played for 40 hours, if it was so bad you should have quit early and got a refund, 40 hours of a bad game still means you wanted to play it and playing for 40 hours even if it wasn't as good as you thought it should be means you still got your moneys worth.

[gunbuster718]

Bought Blasphamous a few weeks ago during the Switch sale, mostly... _{from me watching some stream from a vtuber......}

It is a fun little Metrovania that reminds me of Symphony of the Night. There are many Spanish/Catholic imageries and you can kinda see the love in this game. The lore is pretty brutal too, the boss designs are pretty nice and bizarre. On my second NG+ and the restrictions all add challenges to the game anew. I hope the rumor is true and there will be another dlc to this. Also hope that Hollow Knight Silksong will finally come out soon, but Blasphemous really scratched my itch at the moment.

Also bought Hyrule Warriors and.... it is just ok. I will beat it later and revisit but some characters just feel clunky and I haven't figured out how they work yet.

[CO_Alex]

I’ve been playing Assassin’s Creed Odyssey lately. I never buy new anymore and wait for games to drop down at GameStop before I buy them. I am really enjoying it except for any ship battles. I absolutely despise all of the ship battles where they have four ships against you. I love the older Assassin’s Creed where you could happily assassinate people without getting on a ship, lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk