I keep seeing articles about how 2.0 completely revamps the game and makes it a fantastic RPG in a way that it wasn’t before.
Take this article for example: [https://www.gamespot.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-2-0-update-rebuilds-its-gameplay-to-make-a-fantastic-rpg/1100-6517704/](https://www.gamespot.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-2-0-update-rebuilds-its-gameplay-to-make-a-fantastic-rpg/1100-6517704/)
But what isn’t fantastic is why the author thinks 2.0 makes it a fantastic RPG. Instead of going over all the new stuff 2.0 adds, they go over shit that’s already in the game, acting as if the game played like some basic bitch cover shooter before 2.0
“Perk tree only provided numeric buffs before.” ???
“Cyberware is how you can truly tune your build.” ???
And this is just one example. The PCGamer article isn’t any better either. Look at this gem:
>… the more I test the limits of cyberware in Cyberpunk 2.0, the more I aspire to become the spitting image of David Martinez at the end of Edgerunners. I’m getting pretty close, too: with my current build I have two different ways to slow down time, an air dash, dense marrow bones that make my melee hits harder, “microrotors” in my circulatory system that make me swing swords faster, and Doom-like glory kills that sap HP from everything I kill.
Did these people not actually play the game until now and are making shit up on the go? Now I recognize that a large portion of these articles does mention 2.0 stuff, but it’s mixed in with pre-2.0 stuff as well, as if they can’t separate between what’s coming and what’s already in it.
If they think being able to swing mantis blades faster or quicker down-sights aiming or cyberware having a massive impact on your playstyle is what makes the game better than before, then it was always a fantastic RPG, 2.0 or not.
30 Comments
I think you underestimate how much on absolute shit show launch was and how much it soured people. Majority of these outlets didn’t play after launch because why would they and specific details are hard to remember for a game you haven’t played for 3 years.
I think you should focus on their overall impression and not nit pick specifics. Its hard to keep track of things that have changed. If people that didn’t like launch version are positive about this version then its a good sign.
i noticed the same thing, certain claims by “journalists” really feel like they didnt play the game since release…which is fine but they make points where im like “i already did this before”
Hate to break it to you but most game journalists have no fucking idea what they are talking about especially when it comes to anything besides the most surface level stuff in games. Now its understandable they cant really get super into the nitty gritty of every single game they play but that still doesnt change the fact that their articles are pretty much useless for any sort of deep or even shallow dive.
“did these people not play the game before”
No it’s worse than that cuz they did but not enough to formulate a valid opinion on a subject as complex as RPG progression so instead the common line gets pushed out cuz that’s what people believe without going in depth. It’s them seeing the first perk in a tree giving you 3 percent more damaged and tuning out after that or seeing the common biomon and claiming all cyberware are boring passives(see zero punctuation video for an example). This is why reviewers are difficult to take seriously when going into in depth topics another example being when skillup claimed crafting is bad and useless on launch which lol lmao even
You have beheld the true face of games media and modern journalism
And it was utter bullshit
They are letting chatgpt write them and the author changes a few words.
Idk dude I do think that perks were really mostly just number buffs even after a lot of updates. I think the best changes I remember were the ones to throwing knives and the removal of that useless underwater one. But even now there are some really incredibly confusing ones still present like the level 20 athletics one or the one that reduces fall damage.
Looking at the build planner alone, even the most basic perks can really change how you play with investment. There are some that I’m on the fence about (body car crashing skill, tech bolt shot perks), but overall the skills seem much more meaningful to invest in than before. And I don’t even think there’s any reasonable argument out there that can change my mind about the removal of the crafting tree and replacing it with real benefits for your cyberware.
There’s also the new stamina system and new cyberware functionality that also synergizes with skills and a lot of this looks pretty massive in terms of changing up how gameplay looks and feels. And netrunning sounds a lot more fine tuned than it was before.
I saw a post on here claiming they couldn’t use sandevistan before and how it’s a massive change. I’m over here, like, wtf?
You’re assuming integrity, don’t.
> Did these people not actually play the game until now and are making shit up on the go?
Most of them? No, not really. They make money posting online, making sense is entirely optional. Especially nowadays…
Most opinions you read on web on the release day of any game are valuable only as first impression opinions. How much someone can tell about the game, when they played like 40-60 hours – enough to complete main questline, do a handful of gigs, side questlines, and drive around the city a bit? Same with youtubers and one-man-reviews, who complete the game by rushing the campagin, completing all the side quests just to get achievements, watching easter eggs on youtube and then, when you ask them, everythin they can say about is “Cyberpunk?… … …it’s shit.” or they just repeat the things they already read on web – someone else’s opinion is better than having no opinion. All day-one reviews are worth nothing.
Theres a embargo on more detailed game reviews. As far as I know it will be lifted on the 20th but Im not sure about that.
Modern-day gaming journalism is terrible. It’s that simple
“gaming journalists” aka the whole fucking circus
From what I’ve read about how the review content mill works a lot of people barely get time to play the games they’re supposed to write articles on so a lot of reviewers will only get bits and pieces in the end and many will straight up get things wrong. Everyone is overworked by default now and game reviewers are no exception unfortunately
A lot of these articles will be paid promos? Have we not learned from all the 9/10 reviews prior to release? Remember when reviewers could only use provided footage? Take everything in gaming ‘journalism’ with a grain of salt.
I’m not implying the expansion will be bad, however, when gaming journalists sense the internet’s excitement for a new game or expansion they will write articles that play into the fandom’s popular opinion to generate clicks. Most social media users these days don’t want to be challenged, they want their point of view reinforced.
Not only that, but they also seem to be incredibly late on a lot of stuff.
I keep seeing new articles going over new stuff that i already know off because of the announcements a couple weeks or months prior.
My favorite is from [this article](https://www.pcgamer.com/cyberpunk-2077-20s-single-best-change-is-letting-me-become-a-chromed-up-cyborg/)
>with my current build I have two different ways to slow down time, an air dash, dense marrow bones that make my melee hits harder, “microrotors” in my circulatory system that make me swing swords faster, and Doom-like glory kills that sap HP from everything I kill
These kinds of articles are so funny. I remember when people first started talking about 2.0 they were saying things like “bro AI is so much better now they actually take cover and stuff” and I was like the AI already does that. What the fuck are you talking about? Might be just me but it feels like a when a game earns a relatively negative rep people feel less inclined to actually pay attention to things and just start complaining about things that aren’t actual issues.
So I ignore everything from anywhere except if it’s developer confirmed I dismiss all theories and info again unless it’s developer confirmed.
Only fan site that I 100% trust is serebii for pokemon
Your first problem is, why are you reading articles about gaming, 98% of “gaming journalists” are hacks that lie, exaggerate and do whatever they can to get clicks. So of course these articles are straight up bullshit
Yeah a lot of “Journalism” is complete fabrication to get you to click on something.
One dude wrote that you can pet the cat outside Misty’s shop now!
We’re probably going to see articles writing things like, “CDPR has added more purpose to the once barren open world. The seemingly random gigs and NCPD scanner hustles now have a loosely connected narrative thread that tells a broader story of the criminal underworld.”
🙄
PR articles, and I think they are targeted to new players more, so instead of all those new features, a more brief introduction to the game is needed
PCGamer is uniquely turning into garbage. Between them and IGN it’s tough to know what’s BS and what isn’t.
Most gaming journalism and modern journalism as a whole is about quantity of articles, not quality.
That’s why clicbait, low-effort, and numerous articles are made.
There really isn’t much point to most of these sites anymore.
You gotta remember they “played “release” cyberpunk and then this one “2.0” plus they are journalists, not gamers. They aren’t gonna do any real substantial gameplay
A lot of gaming journalists are people getting paid 100bucks per article, nowadays it is very frequently just copy pasting from chapgpt XD
You’re not wrong. Its journos being journos
You just cracked the code for gaming journalism.
It’s all bullshit clickbait, choom.