How y'all even comparing a game made by an indie company with almost no budget nor experience at game development with a giant Polish studio that gave us The Witcher Series???
Played Starfield for 60 hrs, started to get a bit bored but couldn't figure out why. Took a break and thought I'd have a look at the CP 2.0 update, 90 hrs later I'm still playing and having a blast. Starfield just feels lifeless compared to CP. Night City feels so alive and looks outstanding, the gameplay is awesome and the storytelling is amazing. Starfield now sits gathering dust because there's just nothing to pull me back in.
Cyberpunk made me I doesn't need to buy starfield. 300+ hours since bought it at 1.5 version. and when starfield came out, nah still want to play more cyberpunk 🎉
Honestly, I didn't think the launch was that bad - sure, I probably just got lucky and didn't encounter any major bugs; but narratively and gameplay-wise the game was an absolute banger from the get-go... It just needed a lot more polish before it'd been shipped. Certainly not comparable with No Man's Sky, which was (as I understand it) completely bereft of content at launch, and people were complaining that the gameplay itself was boring as well as buggy.
Game may be impressive now, but it still doesnt excuse them to release the game as a bug fest. I hope this doesnt become the new norm where games will be released with shyt tons of bugs then get those fixed later.
Cyberpunk now is what I expected on launch day, I love how the developers didn't give up on and work to improve it , just watching people streaming starfield alot of look like there was not much life on the planets maybe Bethesda will change that in future, I am with you 13 hours b4 the story is going is crazy to me
The problem is that at its core, Cyberpunk is an excellent game that had a bad launch... At its core, StarField is a mediocre game with little to talk about... And with a poor launch
Quite honestly, I’m not sure Bethesda will bother changing Starfield. That’s simply how they do things, they build games as if Skyrim/Fallout was the hit of last year and not 20 years ago, and build their games as such.
Of couse its bethesda's fault, they made the freaking game. Every aspect of it is made by them, every creative decision, EVERYTHING. They made this loading-screen simulator, and they deemed it good.
@@gabriel897100 That's a better question and it sounds more like it's being asked in good faith. Does it matter if characters in video games are attractive? TLDR: Yes, but it is not a deal breaker and it does not dictate the games quality on its own. Aesthetics will always greatly impact a visual medium, this is obviously my opinion and I think it is reasonable while having much evidence. The importance of aesthetics is the reason different art styles, dynamic lighting and certain color palettes can totally alter games that are mechanically similar, for better or worse. That is also the reason studios and directors have almost always employed physically attractive men and women to play the lead roles in their movies. Character actors (common, average looking, ugly, old or fat people) used to have more roles in movies. That has changed a lot and I miss them. Now almost everyone in a movie is attractive no matter the role, age, time period or setting. It's not realistic and somewhat bland in its "sameness". Is a game with all unattractive or ugly characters automatically a bad game? No. Would I play a game like that? I would be open to it, I played Starfield for quite a few hours after all. Must a game have sexually attractive characters for me to play it and think it's good? No. I have played many different games that have all non-human, strictly mechanical or super low poly characters and had a blast. When a game has many, many design flaws and problems like Starfield (my opinion) the deliberate decision to make 99% of the characters unattractive is simply salt in the wound and can be representative of a flawed philosophy (different topic). This is made worse when compared to other games that have characters that are nice to look at and adds to the world-building and lore.
Would of loved a DLC with a handful of missions with you and jackie, like prequel DLC. Scrub merc jobs, bonding with jackie, more interaction with T Bug, meeting fixers, living with momma welles and the jackster.....
CP2077 obviously had issues at launch, but it was never boring. People were frustrated with CP bugs because they loved playing the game. People are frustrated with Starfield because they can't find a good reason to play.
I think it also has to do with how CP presents the story to you compared to SF. In SF It felt like another fallout were the character just talks to you as the camera zooms in on them. In CP I felt like I was part of it, the angles, the characters expressions, the tension, not every decision being right or wrong. It just pulls you in. There's a side mission in Phantom Liberty for example were you help 2 cops deal with a drug lord and at the end I thought I was gonna make everyone happy by making it out alive and not having to fight the drug lord and everything seemed fine until right before he lets us go he asks one of his bodyguards to scan the building we just left and as soon he said they're all flatlined, my blood started pumping cause I knew things were about to come crashing down. Never expected that
I didn't even shoot at anyone in this mission and the outcome was the same. This really is one thing I don't like, but anyways Cyberpunk is a million times better!
I did the same thing. Got bored playing Starfield. Figured I would check out the 2.0 update and never look back. Starfield is the first Bethesda game that I didn’t finish, and honestly, I have no desire to finish it.
I had about the same experience. Played a lot of Starfield, didn't got exactly bored, but Cyberpunk update came, I installed, and had a blast. Seeing the characters interaction and acting, made realize how uninteresting Starfield NPC are. I will play it eventually, but had much more fun with a melee unarmed character on cyberpunk.
This is exactly what happened to me to the T. Well, I stopped playing cyberpunk in the beginning since other games caught my interest at the time but I knew CP was really good even with bugs which I barely got on Series X. Played Starfield when it came out and played it until the new DLC came out for me Cyberpunk even though I barely played it, stopped at Takemura missions. I never went back to Starfield. CP2077 is just so immersive and packed within Nightcity.
after playing cyberpunk I just cant see the usual bethesda NPC dialogue screen anymore. its just not appropriate for a 2023 game. they are just robots.
CP2077 2.0 + Phantom Liberty is the best singleplayer gaming experience I ever had. And I'm 33, actively playing PC-Games (and PlayStation games earlier) for 18, 19 years now. I think the possibility to mod Bethesda games always had a huge impact on making these games re-playable for many, many years and the same phenomenon also can be attached to CDPR-Games since The Witcher 3. The modding community of CP2077 is amazing - and it's one of the few games for which I'm even creating my own mods (Skyrim and Elden Ring as well). So I think the Creation-Kit for Starfield, which should be released in Q1 2024 will def. revive the game. But beside of that - things that make up the core of the game, can't be changed by modders. The problem of Starfield is the missing variety. You have a good main storyline, you have some cool RPG factors like building your own ship, your own bases and stuff - but the fighting is so damn linear, the NPCs are stupid as hell, the core planets look cool, but they don't even offer the same level of experience as Night City - a place where you can't do a lot when it comes to NPCs, but the city still feels alive and looks beautiful. And the other "thousands" of planets are just empty, boring places with some stations + pirates which you can fight and weird creatures on them, which you can scan. There are no cool storylines with interesting lore attached to those simple missions, unlike in CP2077. In CP2077 you also have now two insanely good storylines + many, many great side-missions and you can create so many different fighting builds that it's almost unfair to compare these games. You have a lot of Cyberware and mods for everything... the fighting itself is bloody, gory and interesting... you can be a Cyberninja with Katanas and Mantisblades, a damn Terminator smashing everything with blunt weapons and Gorilla arms, you can go super Stealth, you can use throwing weapons, you can use Quickhacks with Monowire for more variety or use your Projectile Launch System for your builds and you have many different guns - Tech, Smart, Power with SMGs, ARs, Sniper rifles, Shotguns, DMRs, Revolvers, Pistols and even a god damn Cyber-Chainsaw thingie. You can use Berserk, Sandevistans or Quickhack-Cyberware with every build - or even all together with the Cyberware-EX mod. The variety and ability to re-play and re-enjoy CP2077 is absolute S-Tier at this point. I still have hopes for Starfield and it's def. a good game, but CP2077 is playing in a different league with 2.0 and Phantom Liberty.
@@thorwaldjohanson2526 I don't know if that works in the stock version, because I have several .yaml and .lua files with Tweaks that I've written on my own... and they change hotkeys and other stuff - like that only a special version of the Canto activates the Blackwall hacks mod and stuff like that. I always do a lot after downloading the mods to make them fit my needs. I also saw people doing that with my mod... and I highly recommend doing that. Just do whatever you like when it's just for your own purpose. *Edit: okay, I checked: Go to a Melee weapon or Cyberarms / fists and then press BLOCK + your ability key (let's say it's Q) to toggle the Berserk. For toggling the Sandevistan you do the same with ONLY pressing Q (nothing else) - and for overclock you activate the Focus mode (Scanner) and THEN you press Q. It works in stock - and for myself I only changed the hotkeys a bit.
I put 100 hours in star-field. I tried. I couldn’t keep going. Since 1.6 I’m 600 hours into cyberpunk. 6 different character builds, and I still love it. Some nights I just get high and walk around night city
Thats one of the best things to do is just run around the city. i can get stuck just running around forever doing parkour everywhere. Meanwhile im actually suppose to be going to a mission somewhere but I get sidetracked by the city and having the urge to just run around and explore and see where your wandering takes you. If u aimlessly run around the city you can find and endless amount of scenarios or awesome scenery. Top tier 10 outta 10 game fr.
I think one of the biggest differences between Starfield and CP2077 is how the company and devs responded to criticism. CDPR has been very receptive of the backlash that was received. Meanwhile, the Starfield team is too busy trying to do damage control because they told us that our OPINION about Starfield is wrong.
Cyberpunk is a better game with better writing, imo. It's gritty and had more realistic characters- at least from an adult perspective. Starfield is more the idealistic teenage version of me, while Cyberpunk is more the reality of the struggle and being an adult. I haven't even played the 2.0 update yet, so I'm comparing it to the most recent version I have played/ (after the minor Edgerunners update) I love all sci-fi and really really want to like Starfield. I'm still playing it, but it's not as captivating a story as Cyberpunk universe is. It is a good game (that desperately needs optimized) in concept- but could be so much more. IMO both games had very grand ambitions that they fell short of on release. The potential for both is there, but ony time will tell if Bethesda puts the time and effort into making it really shine. Starfield is like PG movie game, where Cyberpunk is like the unrated directors cut of a NC-17 movie. Sure you find some messed up stuff in Starfield for sure, but in CP you're living that whole reality. The writing lends well to actually feeling like you are V. While the game and writing of CP2077 isn't perfect, its still engaging and evocative. It makes you think, feel and question existence, especially with AI developing at such an incredible rate in the real world.
Funny you say that because I think Cyberpunk 2077 has a garbage story. Starfield has side quest that are better...CDPR completely failed with the story of the game its not memorable...there's very little agency and they were heavy handed with the story and didn't tell the story through gameplay... the best cyberpunk story is easily the edgerunners anime....which is amazing and does a way better job at conveying the style and feel of the world than the game....and tells a moving story ,letting you get to know and love characters in a very short period of time..while the game shows V and and is best friend(i dont remember his name. Like i said forgettable) become best friends in a montage ..only to die in the next job...it was ham fisted and really bad story telling....then tried to have an emotion funeral for him...really bad writing.
@@86lanzolol your comment comes off as incredibly salty and disingenuous. i do not believe that you were not at all engaged when you had to say make a deal with maelstrom to get the flathead, or escape the tower while being shot out by security while trying to protect the relic. or when youre betrayed be dex and resurrected by the relic that is also killing you. like, im trying to comprehend how you go through all this nicely paced experience of a game and honestly think starfield is in the same league as cyberpunk 2077 which is miles ahead of starfield. its funny you brought up the anime when cdpr had a huge part in creating the story for it but pretend cyberpunk wasnt interesting. lmao keep trying kid and keep crying your salty tears.
@@mitchhamilton64 @86lanzo sort of has a point about the Jackie montage. It's a bit glossed over, and they could have done a few minor side quests with Jackie before the heist. That said, I have memories of friends and well, life that kinda play back like a montage so perhaps it's more relatable as an experience with life thing. All things said, Cyberpunk by nature is more about the struggle of life which is imo far more relatable. It's characters all have flaws and scars from fucked up things happening, where that doesn't seem present in Starfield.
@@mitchhamilton64 "your comment comes off as incredibly salty and disingenuous." how ironic when you say so haha... you need to calm down, stop crying and puking bs and accept the truth: CP77 story is atrociously bad. Or just stay bvtthurt CDPR adoring fangirl 😀
oh yeah more options to do the same thing: shoot... Cyberpunk was a massive disappointment. They promised a next-gen rpg and instead delivered a gta-clone with so many features missing, you can't even repaint cars! Night City is an empty city where all you can do is shoot people; so boring... people that say CDPR "rede3emed themselves" are not very smart and were simply duped
Cyberpunk has a lot of things that could have been done better, sure. BUT, at the same time, I think that Starfield's biggest issue by far isn't the content, or even the bugs - it's simply how that content is presented. Everything in Starfield is slow, clunky, illogical, and counter-intuitive. There's a loading screen every couple of steps, everything is done through menus that take up the entire screen and have to load, if I want to talk to an NPC I have to walk up to them, press a button, wait for the camera to zoom in, wait for them to say their lines while standing still, press a prompt (which does not offer real choices btw) and then wait for the camera to set me free. Then we have Cyberpunk. Conversation trigger based on proximity, the character I'm talking to behaves in a certain way, which is especially great in cinematic set-pieces like talking to Judy on the rooftop where you can see she's restless and anxious just from the way she's shaking her leg and can't sit still. They move around, use gestures, reply and acknowledge the protagonist who also has a voice and interacts with the world, using gestures, has a body in first person. The menus aren't as intrusive as in Starfield, because they don't have to load, they're pretty streamlined, in-game terminals don't take up the entire screen and the animation for using them is very fluid, button prompts are integrated well into the HUD and the gameplay, as the devs tried to limit the use of full-screen menus, and only use them when absolutely neccessary. Gameplay mechanics work as you'd expect them to work, there are virtually no loading screens aside from loading up a save or fast traveling somewhere (that is also optional, because the open world is, indeed, open). Playing Starfield feels like working in a shitty Windows 98-feeling professional software for a job, while Cyberpunk feels like working in the latest version of a well-designed SPA on a Mac.
In Cyberpunk the NPCs feel alive and dynamic In Starfield the NPCs feel dead and static That's my perspective of the two. One has incredibly immersive characters to interact with while the other is just some talking heads.
@@DanakarEndeel Yep, the Starfield NPCs have no emotive facial expressions when they're happy or sad and definitely no gestures and posturing to suggest it. In Cyberpunk they're animated with motion capture so they're the movements of actual actors. Oh, and they have eyelids, which is a big plus. Starfield is basically not open world. You just teleport between realms that are pretty small and empty. In Cyberpunk you don't even wanna fast travel because it's much more immersive to drive (or take the train now) and you get beautiful scenery. Immediately after starting Starfield, the mute protagonist and the oblivion camera made it feel very outdated.
@@billyskittles1036 Well, in their defense, CDPR did need something like 2 years to fully figure out Cyberpunk 2077 after that botched release, and that's not good. But even in the initial state of the game, it was obvious that they were very ambitious and a person who's semi-well-versed in video games could see that there's a real gem in there somewhere, buried under the bugs and the cut features. With that being said, I think folks who really wanted more out of Cyberpunk generally tend to come from 2 perspectives: one such perspective is that there is an IMMENSE amount of potential in the world, gameplay and storytelling that CDPR has created and people just want to see that potential realized - either via updates, or in a sequel. The other perspective is that pre-launch people were promised this great big huge masterpiece that was about to revolutionize videogaming and it would have EVERYTHING. Now, if you get on that hype train, and don't consider that this is a team that has previously mainly worked on medieval TPP fantasy RPGs that were based on stories and characters from a book series; and this would have been their first sci-fi FPP shooter game with original stories and characters... yeah, that could lead to disappointment. I pretty much got what I expected from CP2077 (barring the bugs, but I was lucky enough to not encounter many of them) and it only got better over the years.
I have never had a harder time making a main quest decision as in Phantom Liberty. CD Projekt knew its a big dilemma, so they bring Johnny to the rescue and what does he say? "I dont fucking know, its a tough choice." At that point you feel really immersed: you really want to ask the questions that V asks and you feel just as disappointed with his answers as V is. Brilliant - you think like your character, you feel like your character, you truly are your character. Starfield... There is a point where you need to make a choice between your 2 "favorite" companions - you can only save one. I didnt care about either. I would not care if they both died - they were horribly annoying and I only had them follow me because the game made me do it. Then the character's funeral was the most unbearable time I had in Starfield where other characters try to sound sad and you just dont care. I wish you could skip the dialogues entirely in Starfield and just shoot until you get bored.
@@MADguyfps It did in Morrowind, it did in Skyrim, it did in Fallout 4. I started a bunch of faction quests but the game reset after the main quest, then I started over but couldnt get myself to really care about them for some reason - I cant say I completed faction quests. A lot of the quests starts really slow as a fetch mission and I just feel like IM wasting time.
@@stubb1qaz There are a little of side quests gem in this game, deciding the fates of cloned historical characters, blackmailing governor. The faction quests are one of the best I have played. The UC Vanguard is exceptional.
'Hey come to Dtown, it's urgent' I arrived 5 days later. 'Hey my name is Songbird, you can see me in your head because biochip can be whatever writers want to be at any moment, let me instantly shut down Johnny because I'm super powerful, hey you need to save President Hilary Clinton, I mean Myers, because who else, and she is actually stronger than you, and hurry the airplane is waiting for you to fall at the worst possible place.' There is nothing immersive in this entire game. Cyberpunk story is so weak, even cringe, nonsensical yet pretentious trying to steal ideas from Matrix, Blade Runner, Tarantino, Kurosawa... yet failing in almost every aspect. Yeah Starfield is equally bad but it doesn't make CP77 something amazing.
@@bdleo300 Cyberpunk 2077 universe was created BEFORE Matrix, Blade Runner, Tarantino so I guess they stole from Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk characters are alive - they move, they talk, they use natural gestures, Starfield has all ragdolls that always give you a dead stare. Immersion in an RPG game is up to you - you can always break it if you want to but just compare Starfield Neon City club dancers to Black Saphire ballroom performance. It is an entirely different league of game development. Cyberpunk makes you want to stop and enjoy the scene, Starfield is mostly fast travel loading screen.
The same thing happened to me!!! I had got done with all the faction quests in Starfield, got up to level 62 doing various XP grinds and traveling around the Serpentis System via Loading screens to farm XP by blowing up VA'Ruun fanatics. I got caught up in the Starfield hamster wheel, then one day I just booted up Cyberpunk after putting it away a year ago and started a brand new character and MAN talk about getting hit with the perspective hammer! I immediately got hooked back into V's story, and was completely immersed into Night City and the NPCs I interacted with. Even seeing Jackie dying again had hit a nerve and I was finding myself really liking the dynamic of character personalities between Panam and Takemura. Then i loaded up Starfield to pick up where I left off and was like....this is fn boring! Then disappointment sank in...even though Fallout 4 was a disappointment to others I actually enjoyed it because I made it a point to really play as if I was really a General for the Minutemen and it really directed how I interacted with the rest of the game. With Starfield there isn't any of that...I realized it's mostly just ham fisted and after doing one of those floaty temples (I think it was the 9th time) I was done. Starfield has a wonderful premise and there are some great things in it but it seems Betheseda built this game for modders to flesh it out and make it better and essentially make modders do what the devs of No Man Sky had to do to fix their own game for them.
I recently beat cyberpunk like 2 months before starfield came out. I said yeah I don’t think imma be playing cyberpunk for a while cause I was burnt after 80 hours. Played starfield and oh boy cyberpunk was loaded onto my pc so fast 😭
Wild, I legit put 60hrs into Starfield and went back to Cyberpunk with phantom liberty and can’t stop! I haven’t touched the game since launch and I’m blown away by the 2.0+ changes.
12:00 Cyberpunk's issues were the bugs that were mainly on the old-gen consoles (PC had a way better launch, I'd say it had Witcher 3 level of bugs). The game has always had superb story telling and gameplay since day 1, that's the main difference between CP77 and SF. Starfield is designed badly, Cyberpunk was just buggy. You always had the ability to be the time-slowing street samurai, or a net runner that never fires a single shot. Gameplay variation, side content, the City atmosphere and the characters were there since day 1. Thats why bug fixing was enough to revive the game after v1.5 and with Edgerunner anime. I don't see that happening in Starfield, it has too many fundamental issues like all the things you mentioned. They cant rewrite the story, they cant remove loading screens, they cant overhaul the graphics since it barely runs as is, all the can do is add few more weapons maybe.
Fundimental diffrence is: When 2077 works, it's great. When Starfield works, it's clunky and outdated enough to feel like a follow up to Fallout 4 from 2 years post release. Works in this case meaning "No bugs, working as intended."
yeah have 88 hours in starfield,. will never go back it bored me so god damn much,.. have 600 hours in Cyberpunk,. all in VR, still play it all the time. The whole time I was in Starfield I was like,. how can they say this is next gen? It feels and looks 20 years old!
You could tell even from the preview videos that they're still hanging on to their run down old engine, with new bits cobbled onto it to make the graphics look "next gen" (even though they really don't). That's why there are so many loading screens; the Creation Engine is made to work units called "cells" that contain objects and landscape. That's fine with Skyrim where you can have a world cell that has all the terrain and then load caves and interiors separately, but that's an old design idea that breaks in outer space. There's no way you can have a cell big enough to contain all the planets and everything on them and all the space in between. So instead of making a new tool more suitable to building their vision, they half-ass it and compromise the game to fit the tool, rather than make a new tool to build with. Makes you wonder how dedicated to their vision they really were, instead of being dedicated to pinching development pennies.
@@SolCrown80 omg the load screens and animations for every little thing just killed me. The constant fast traveling. It just never felt like you were exploring anything. Just a bunch of tiny little hubs between loading screens. Huge fail.
It makes it even worse when you can't even run Starfield smoothly because it's just so horribly optimized. There's just this CONSTANT stutter every few seconds that makes playing it impossible, which is blatantly unacceptable because it looks like crap and I can run Cyberpunk looking FANTASTIC without ANY issues. Not that there's really anything worth playing there. CERTAINLY not the story, yikes.
Didn't even finished the Starfield. When Phantom Liberty dropped, haven't touch Starfield at all ever since. Right until this moment. Starfield is just too boring. Even with mods.
It’s funny I did the exact same thing. PC tho. Cyberpunk had a major positive changes with 2.0 and the DLC. The graphics on PC are a given. Amazing with a 4090. But the music, voice acting, quests. The story is so much deeper. It feels like a movie not a game.
Great video. I had the same experience you had. I was hyped for starfield, I liked it but Cyberpunk nowadays is a great game with a lot to offer. Btw Phantom Liberty is amazing and brings the story together beautifully.
Even back in launch, Cyberpunk already had a good amount of variety in its gameplay (try to find some of the "lore accurate V" videos where people show off the combat system). 2.0 just made the combat system even more insane and meaningful when it comes to building. And actually, we can blame Bethesda for making Starfield uninteresting: better writers and scenario directors could have made the main story more engaging and interesting, and they really could have scaled back on the 1,000 planets thing to focus on less planets that are more interesting.
Less planets but more interesting planets is a great point. I’d argue this kind of an issue with the characters too. Cyberpunk has layered characters with deep personalities, good and bad qualities etc. Jesus the constellation crew are mostly just such bland nice guys. Most of the other characters are one note too. Cyberpunk characters are messy, they’re funny they’re jerks they’re people.
Star field wouldn’t be a masterpiece in any time because it’s so poorly optimized that top end PCs can’t run it on mid settings without lag and lower end pcs can’t run it at all, it would be entirely unplayable
This is the same thing that happened to me. Bought Starfield, played for about 30 hours, Cyberpunk 2.0 update dropped, left and never went back. Starfield is uninstalled and I have zero interest in Shattered Space. It's sad because I've been a long time Bethesda fan since Morrowind.
Cyberpunk is a city that’s alive. The people talk like real people, the graphics are dirty but beautiful, and the choices sometimes matter. Starfield is Skyrim in Space.
cyberpunk at Launch felt like beta version of the game that is almost finish while Starfield felt like an indie early access at launch that require few more years to get to Alpha
In Cyberpunk it takes me 30 min to do a bunch of gigs for the district, maybe even finish the gigs for the district, take the final reward for completing it, move on. In Starfield it takes me 30 minutes to do one mission. Not because they are big or im dumb. Its because it takes me around 15 min tops to get over all the loading screens, loot everything I wanna loot (and you dont know what loot is important at the start), maybe hop to the trader two times to replenish ammo (cause I cannot craft it, wtf) and then maybe finish the boring ass mission. Im not saying that side gigs in Cyberpunk are interesting. They are at the same level as Starfield (excluding actual writing, the fun you have in combat or stealth and the overall dialogues) but in Starfield THERE IS A LOADING SCREEN EVERYWHERE. I wanted to cross a street on Neon. 3 loading screens. I wanted to reach the inner balcony in the club. 2 loading screens. In Cyberpunk its just a matter of how fast can you run up the stairs.
Hey there! Great video. I mean, yeah... I totally agree with you! Cyberpunk was a fine game when I played it in 2021. Just fine. And it was still "just fine" when people went crazy over it because of Edgerunners. It was a very pretty game with a gorgeously rendered open world city. But it lacked a design core and sensibility that prevented me from really getting HOOKED on playing the game. I likened Cyberpunk pre-Update 2.0 to be like the video game equivalent of a very glossy coffee table book: something to be picked up and flipped through - admired a little bit - but to be put down just moments later. After Update 2.0 (and Phantom Liberty)... I can't put the game down. The game systems click together far, far better. And because the game now has a grounding in a more cohesively designed set of systems, it's allowed me to appreciate other aspects of the game, like exploring Night City, the narrative and the overall world-building more than ever before.
What’s funny is that I’m in the exact same boat. Got starfield early access, played for a few days and it was good, then Phantom Liberty came out and derailed me from Starfield. Haven’t been able to get back to playing it since
Cyberpunk is the most fun I've had with a game since the first Witcher. I am on my 7th play through and every one has been different - over 200 hours in all told. Phantom liberty and patch 2.1 made it a whole new game. Damn near perfect.
Play CP77 on Hard mode. So much more challenging because there's actual risk involved in the combat. I picked up CP77 2 weeks before 2.0 and Phantom Liberty dropped. I hadn't touched it since launch week in 2020. Haven't been able to put it down. My favorite game this year!
Seriously? I played on hard, never upgraded anything for most of the game, never ever used most of perks, the only challenge were boss fights, but not much. And no, I'm not saying 'I'm that good', the game is super easy.
@@HexxuSzcap. Enemies scale with you and even a max armor, hp tank build dies in seconds if caught out. Unless your a netrunner, than yeah its still easy
starfield felt like going through the motions. i didnt finish it, but put in probably 60+ hours. then i tried cyberpunk for the first time and it completely blew me away. like how elden ring blew me away. its so amazing and i absolutely loved having johnny silverhand along for the ride.
After the 2.0 update and the Phantom Liberty expansion, I played Cyberpunk for the same time. I couldn't stop playing. I am already on my second playthrough and i'm still having a blast with different builds. I feel like the game finally became what it was suposed to be and it can only get better from now.
Fuuny I was saying last night how I played cyberpunk DLC after binging starfield. Even with my reset stats and kind of ruined character I had more fun in that session than I ever did playing starfield. Sword on motorcycle made me uninstall starfield .
In cyberpunk, you don't just watch a cutscene, you participate... And the characters movements, mannerisms, facial expressions and body language,etc...are the most immersive of any game.
Just talking to people was a whole experience, in cyberpunk they have animation, they do thing while talking, fixing something, pacing, smoking, rolling/spining on a chair, etc. in starfield they just stand there with google eyes. So un immersive
I wanted to love starfield but I just can’t get into it even after about 50 hours I feel like I have to force myself to play it. On the other hand I picked cyberpunk back up a few weeks ago and I can’t wait to get home to play it everyday. Even listening to a cyberpunk Audio book at work lol
Ten years ago Starfield would have impressed me so much, but now it’s a pretty generic rpg experience with a huge map. But I feel like that’s all it has to offer. Skyrim was a much better experience. I think the issue was that they hyped it up so much. Cyberpunk 2077 had a rocky launch, but I still had fun playing it. I didn’t experience much bugs and the story and side-quests really wowed me. Now it’s even so much better. Cyberpunk 2077 is the best game of the twenties.
i had the same experience, played starfield for 20 hours, the new upgrade parts of my pc arived so i had to format my computer, downloaded cyberpunk after one year and never looked back
I have been playing 2.0/phantom liberty for four months straight. I’m finishing up my third playthrough now, and all I can think about is what my next build and backstory will be.
Jackie doing the shimmy towards you is my favorite part of cyberpunk. Shows the brotherhood between him and V. Cyberpunk has so much character depth that is real. Loved starfield but it lacks in that department.
I have about 10 hours total in Starfield, which is more than I actually have in Baldur’s Gate III before I uninstalled it. I have about 80 hours in Cyberpunk and I plan on putting a lot more hours into it. They really did a complete turnaround on this game from the initial disaster of a release.
I was enjoying BG3 and 33 hours into that game when I bought Cyberpunk at the 2.0 PL release and I've not played anything since, I have 200 hours in CP already and starting to think about a new start since I've finished pretty much everything. CP is one of the best games I've played and I've been gaming since the C64/ZX81 era lol. I would rate it above my experience with heavily modded Skyrim which I also thought was amazing by CP has blown that experience out of the water. I'm lucky though, I didn't experience the problems of CP when it was in a bad state and I'm so glad they finally game people what was promised, it's really nice to see so many people commenting on Reddit etc about how much they love it now.
@@JagdgeschwaderX absolutely agree with this. I actually just picked up the Ultimate Edition of Cyberpunk 2077 for the Series X since I also have it on Steam (it plays incredible on the deck btw). I’m glad that I passed on it at launch because it was just horrendous (even worse than Lords of the Fallen at release). Ever since they patched the game, they showed what an incredible and immersive world and story. CP2077 is everything that Starfield wished it could be. I’m going to try and give BGIII another shot, probably on console, and see if I like it more.
@@stakesishigh516 BG3 is fun if you like Divinity Original Sin and games like that, the acting is great as well but I can see why it's not for everyone. As soon as I started playing Cyberpunk I had no desire to go back to BG3, Cyberpunk is 100% fun and takes a lot less effort to play in my opinion, I find D&D type games to require a lot more commitment and I have to really be in the mood to play them, I loved the first Divinity but never got round to playing much of the second for that exactly reason, I always feel like I have to spend loads of time researching everything. I will go back to complete BG3 at some point but I started a second play through as the female V to see the different acting and as Corpo as I did Street kid on my previous one. On my first playthrough of CP I made loads of mistakes or didn't really understand what I was doing or the mechanics like crafting etc so I plan to try to play through in a more structured way and not dive into the main stories too quickly. I was thinking about doing all the NCPD missions first, the start on the gigs until I'm leveled up enough to really enjoy the Cyberpsychos and other story line missions. I feel sorry for the people who are disappointed with Starfield, I was skeptical about it myself because I didn't really enjoy Fallout 4 and felt that had been hyped up a bit on the back of New Vegas and Skyrim, I was playing it and feeling like I was missing something because I wasn't really having any fun. These days I always wait for a game to be released and to see the reviews and almost never buy early access as it's become too common for developers to over promise and them let everyone down. My one wish for CP would be that they add another DLC or two and maybe respawnable missions like the NCPD ones, it's horrible when you get closer to the end and the map is bare.
Having the house for oneself for a couple days, and play video games, it's gotta be one of the greatest feelings. You know that feeling you still have a few more hours, and cannot decide what to play and then the time goes by and you end up not playing nothing and kinda feeling stupid?
Cyberpunk has been awesome for a few years. First through an amazing modding community, and then through CD Projects Reds updates. They deserve absolute praise for a) allowing their work to be modded completely, and b) getting things right as a matter of principle. Great Studio, great games.
My experience went something like this “man this game sure feels like a Bethesda game just without the mods” then I proceeded to stop playing to wait for mods instead, then accidentally sunk 80 hrs on phantom liberty alone.
After hearing you talk about the build you used in cyberpunk I gotta suggest you do Body, Technical, Reflex with the berserk OS and gorilla arms. Some of the most adrenaline filled gameplay out there as you just run in head first taking everything and throwing people across the room
Something to note about the opening montage in Cyberpunk (the one at the start of this video, which plays after you've done your opening background mission) - it's in-engine. Take a moment to consider the technical implications of that. All those rapid cuts, all those environments and character assets, all being loaded and transitioning that fast. Not only would Bethesda never have such slick style... their engine is entirely incapable of it.
I am happy to see cyberpunk's redemption arc. It’s an amazing game. Starfield is a good gane but it looks like it came out 15 years ago by comparison. If Bethesda are using the same engine for elder scrolls 6 then it will crash and burn on launch.
I have too much time in Cyberpunk. I love to try out different specks and gameplay. Also the city is a masterpiece. There are still a few bugs but nothing like state it was in 2020. Perhaps Starfield will do the same.
I just want to let you know that you hooked me at the beginning of your video, me being an Xbox fan the fact that you made it very clear that you don't give a s*** about the war between the two consoles you like what you like, that's what has me engaged to watch the rest of this video just want to let you know🤌🏾🤌🏾 and equally I'm at a frustrating point with Starfield and have been watching a lot of gameplay and hearing a lot of good things about cyberpunk I can't wait to try it out💯
Cyberpunk Ultimate Edition was worth the 3 year wait after the disastrous and heartbreaking launch back in 2020. That release was finally the moment I stopped being over hyped for videogames and learned to be patient when it came to launches. Now that Cyberpunk is finally finished and at its full potential, it feels like a game ahead of its time.
They made Cyberpunk 2077 amazing after the disastrous launch. After playing through Phantom Liberty, I am not comfortable saying that CP is the best game CDPR made. Love it.
Starfield, actually, was deliberately designed the way it was to pad out time out of the player. -Procedurally generated planets with no vehicle to drive around -Fast travel is almost necessary to complete quests -Loading screens and even more loading screens Cyberpunk has none of these problems. Granted, it took 3 years to actually deliver on everything promised. So, maybe Starfield needs 3 years too.
Another 3 years wouldn't do anything. Bethesda would, at best, just make more features to chop out of the main game and put into DLC. Not to mention their engine just sucks. It literally can't handle anything a space exploration game needs to be good. Do you wanna know why there aren't any land vehicles? It's because the engine can't function if the players are moving too fast. It's the same reason Horses in Skyrim are so damn slow. Speaking of, Skyrim Horses, we all know how fucked they are. So yeah, Bethesda wasn't going to even attempt to figure out freaking land rovers and cars and shit. That's also why they used Vertibirds in Fallout 4 and no cars, even though cars should be possible to have. Wanna know why fast travel and loading screens are everywhere? Because the engine requires everything to be built from CELLS. Cells can only be so big. If you fuck with the cells, the game starts to break in a lot of ways. That's why cities in Skyrim along with every cave and dungeon and building were all behind loading screens. Large seamless worlds aren't possible, so having a planet you can fly off of and go into space then punch it to ANOTHER planet in the same system? Yeah, never gonna happen. Everything needs to be behind a loading screen or at least an animation so their engine doesn't get screwy. Bethesda just doesn't know how to make better games and they're not even going to try and learn. Skyrim came out 13 years ago, has had MANY MANY updates and literally been SOLD dozens of times more, and unmodded it's pretty much the EXACT same game with a majority of the bugs still in there and NO new features added since LAUNCH. They've added small GIMMICKS (nearly all of which you need to buy), but not FEATURES, nothing that properly changes how you play the game. A game like this they've decided to repackage and resell this many times, I'd expect it to do at LEAST one thing Cyberpunk 2.0 did, let alone Phantom Liberty. To date the content Bethesda puts out for Skyrim for real money, is consistently far below what modders do for FREE. Starfield's biggest resurgence in public attention since it released, is videos coming out explaining why it's so bad.
@@haku8135 Quite the essay, but accurate. It's simply a flawed design philosophy of Bethesda. They are not willing to get out of their comfort zone, and they are relying on outside sources to keep their old sources relevant (Fallout tv show, community mods that are controlled and profited by Creation Club, various editions, reliance on same engine, etc.) At this poiny, many companies that attempt Triple-A are slowly killing themselves to stay relevant because they refuse to take risks, even though their budget can more than afford to. Indie games have proven to give more with having less, even Baldur's Gate 3.
50-60hrs in only two days!? record gaming man, that’s nearly impossible! jokes aside, thought that line was hilarious lmao loved the vid and completely agree. been having the time of my life playing Cyberpunk, feel like my younger self!
I only played about 20 hours of starfield I got bored with it fast. I decided to try it with Xbox game pass which I’m really glad I did and didn’t pay the $70 for it. But as soon as cyberpunk 2.0 came out I stopped playing it. I already loved cyberpunk before but I love it even more now. It’s definitely my favorite game.
I straight skipped Starfield. Reasons: AMD CPU, Nvidia GPU, Baldurs Gate 3 and Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty. Those 2 (especially BG3, as I have playthroughs in CP2077 already) will 'feed' me until the spring. Maybe then I will take a look at Starfield.
Cyberpunk got me back into first person games lol, the world, lore, characters, immersion, graphics, little details, i could go on and on. Cyberpunk is like an NFL team that started its season 0-6, and ended up going to the superbowl and winning when it was all said and done.
Cyberpunk fully path traced on pc with ray reconstruction is a truly next gen experience, I’m also using the HD reworked 2.0 mod to tidy up some of the lower quality assets in the game, this is PS6 level graphics available now if you have the hardware.
They finally fixed ray tracing on console, on Xbox Series X since release, frames noticeably drop below 30 FPS when you turn on ray tracing. Almost 3 years later and it's fixed, and it looks phenomenal and runs so smooth.
I feel ya man , I played 3 hours and just knew it wasn’t for me . And I am now loving cyberpunk I never got more than 10 into cyber cause I wanted to wait for it to be fixed and I am so happy I did .
Had the same experience. Started playing Starfield and really tried to enjoy it, and then Cyberpunk 2.0 and Phantom Liberty released and now I can't go back. The writing in Cyberpunk is S tier, while Starfield is B tier at best. The gameplay feels 100 times smoother, the world feels livelier and the graphics just can't compare. Everything's better in Cyberpunk 2077.
First, totally different games, no idea why people constantly compare them. Second, both are mediocre... like saying: Starfield is so much better than Gollum, so yeah Starfield is amazing 😀
I was playing fallout 4 and I hit a plateau that made me try a little bit of cyberpunk and I played like 5 minutes of it and got to the free roam part of the map and I had to put it down because it was already blowing fall out 4 out of the water and I know if I continued I probably wouldn't have finished fallout 4. Which the game still sits now gathering dust.
@@Immopimmo A lot of people still consider CP2077 to be mediocre. To be fair, I haven't tried the 2.0 update yet, so maybe that pushes it over the line from "mediocre" to "pretty good." But overall I agree that SF and CP are both pretty mediocre games. Pretty much every game in the "AAA" space is mediocre. The best games these days are coming from AA's and indies. Sometimes smaller experiences, or they don't have the big budget graphics, but overall just better and more interesting games. Baldur's Gate 3 is doing for Larian what TW3 did for CDPR - where the game blows up enough to turn the developer from AA to AAA. Hopefully Larian doesn't fumble the bag like CDPR did.
@neofromthewarnerbrothersic145 With the 2.0 update and Phantom Liberty, I'd say Cyberpunk is a pretty great game and far from mediocre. I'd rank it up there with BG3 when it comes to writing, voice acting and overall design, and the gameplay feels really good.
Starfield also just feels like a huge missed opportunity; if they literally just rewound the clock a few decades to their big ass war between the UC and Freestar with mechs and bio warfare and a cult picking at the scraps it could have been much more interesting than the bullshit we actually got.
I’m 5 days of playing time into Starfield, gave it more than enough time to become interesting but it only gets worse. Nothing gets better or exciting after the bland main story or bland main side missions. Everything you said was factual, not even subjective opinions, just straight up facts.
I was a cyberpunk lover since the game came out. Yes it was a mess, but I still had a good time with the gameplay and story. After I got it for PC I had an even better time. The 1.6 update felt perfect and then the 2.0 update along with phantom liberty just made things even better. Cyberpunk is one of my all time favorite games.
Overall, I think 2077 did things better since the launch (been playing since day one, never regretted it) is how they handle the lore. For those not in the know, the tabletop games are canon to 2077, and there are a ton of references to it in the game (Biggest example being Johnny himself), and instead of this being a game where either they would need to dial things back to explain everything to you, or being a game that requires you to play the tabletop games to understand it, they go their own way. Stuff happened, some people know more than others, some people may be lying, some people may be telling the truth. There's a ton of exposition with the Morro Rock Radio station, but it's presented as mostly conspiracy theories, which is great because it reflects on how players of the tabletop could have handled certain situations, and it makes a reference to that on a lot of points in the game, my favorite being how you handle Royce. You could get Militech involved, if you do, you can side with Stout or you can side with Gilchrist, or you could go solo. If you go solo you can pay Royce with your own money and have the gang laugh at you, or you could just say "Fuck it" kill Royce and fight your way out of the factory. From an RP point of view, the lifepaths also reflect your potential position with this game, prior playing it, my knowledge of the lore was limited, so, I played a Nomad, an outsider who has no idea what goes on in Night City and has only heard a few things, learning things as one goes. Eventually in future playthroughs and after absorbing the lore, I played a Corpo, insidious guy looking for a way to the top, but also knowing how to push people's buttons and manipulate them to get what I want (As seen in many instances, such as the Konpeki Plaza check in, getting the Spellbook from R3no, or hell, even sweettalking a street vendor so they would let me purchase Samurai bootleg tapes), whereas Nomad has a different focus, my favorite being that you can get to talk Jackie into tuning his bike and you'll see it reflected in the future. For the most part, I only have two issues with the game, one that we didn't get to spend more time with Jackie or bring him along for more gigs (Would of been great to have him tag along for gigs before meeting Dexter, for example), and two, the lack of third person outside vehicles. Mainly because in the tabletop games, it's a reference burned into your brain: You won't get far in Night City if you're on your own, you need a crew. And in the universe of Cyberpunk, looks are everything, so if I get a badass biker jacket, you can be sure I wanna show it off at any chance I get. But of course, those gripes are personal, I still love every single minute in the game, I'm still discovering new things three years after the launch, and I can 100% say this is my favorite game of all time. There is a lot of cut content in the game, don't get me wrong, there is evidence of places that had to be cut off, or omitted (Arasaka Waterfront being probably the biggest one, with a lot of spaces that ultimately had to be abandoned), and a lot of speculation within the community runs rampant, early game shots from the character creator implies that the Relic would have been vastly different (There's an option to pick "Childhood Hero", and the options are Johnny Silverhand, Morgan Blackhand, and Saburo Arasaka), and even some of the trailers point to what seemed to be a very different line of production (Keanu being signed was a relatively late decision in the game, I love him in the game, but sometimes I wonder what would things be if he had never be signed, what would have been the big part of the story overall). And well, it all boils down to a big "What if" On the other side, however, for a game that for a long time was referred as "Skyrim in Space", Bethesda seems to have missed its mark. Horribly. A game that came three years before, with a troublesome launch, with a lot of divisive opinions within its own community still manages to top and surpass it even though Starfield is supposed to be newer and better. I can only hope the devs take this as a learning experience.
The thing about the Starfield story that I didn't like was that nothing unique happened to me as the player. Right off the bat, I hear about someone else having visions when interacting with the artefact. In CP2077, you are the most unique individual in the entire game. There is no one more interesting than V which makes it more enticing to play. In starfield, anyone could've collected all the artefacts and gotten the powers. Theres nothing else interesting about my character. I also don't like that my player doesn't speak. V having a voice actor really immersed you into the game and you really got to develop a relationship with V, making the game even more immersive and fun.
So weird seeing people praising Cyberpunk like it wasn’t roasted over hellfire on release. If we’re gonna even remotely compare these games, let’s take first month Cyberpunk, exploding cars and all, and make it fair.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
How y'all even comparing a game made by an indie company with almost no budget nor experience at game development with a giant Polish studio that gave us The Witcher Series???
Congrats. You've earned the pinned comment awards! Gg.
@@PlayerVersusGame Hell yeah!
this has to be satire
Poor Bath Ez Da. Vietnamese studios should really get more love. Poor Todd. How can a single dev studio get the budget for a development?
i know this is satire, but no mans sky
Played Starfield for 60 hrs, started to get a bit bored but couldn't figure out why. Took a break and thought I'd have a look at the CP 2.0 update, 90 hrs later I'm still playing and having a blast. Starfield just feels lifeless compared to CP. Night City feels so alive and looks outstanding, the gameplay is awesome and the storytelling is amazing. Starfield now sits gathering dust because there's just nothing to pull me back in.
Basically, entirely the same story here.
Cyberpunk made me I doesn't need to buy starfield. 300+ hours since bought it at 1.5 version. and when starfield came out, nah still want to play more cyberpunk 🎉
Don't abbreviate Cyberpunk.
Look up what "CP" means.
@@GeorgePerakis Nope
Same
So happy to see more people giving praise to Cyberpunk. What CD turned it into today is actually impressive.
Yea they pulled a No Man's Sky with it. Props to cdpr
I feel sad for the ppl that can’t get over how it launched. Yea it was a huge bummer but I got more excited with each update
Honestly, I didn't think the launch was that bad - sure, I probably just got lucky and didn't encounter any major bugs; but narratively and gameplay-wise the game was an absolute banger from the get-go... It just needed a lot more polish before it'd been shipped.
Certainly not comparable with No Man's Sky, which was (as I understand it) completely bereft of content at launch, and people were complaining that the gameplay itself was boring as well as buggy.
Game may be impressive now, but it still doesnt excuse them to release the game as a bug fest. I hope this doesnt become the new norm where games will be released with shyt tons of bugs then get those fixed later.
@@danniton9831 I'm pretty sure it has been the norm for some time already - before Cyberpunk. It's called "Patch Culture"
Cyberpunk now is what I expected on launch day, I love how the developers didn't give up on and work to improve it , just watching people streaming starfield alot of look like there was not much life on the planets maybe Bethesda will change that in future, I am with you 13 hours b4 the story is going is crazy to me
The problem is that at its core, Cyberpunk is an excellent game that had a bad launch... At its core, StarField is a mediocre game with little to talk about... And with a poor launch
@@Chukedcyberpunk 2077 had an amazing storyline and tremendous lore. Starfield doesn’t
Quite honestly, I’m not sure Bethesda will bother changing Starfield. That’s simply how they do things, they build games as if Skyrim/Fallout was the hit of last year and not 20 years ago, and build their games as such.
Even more awesome stuff today. Another huge Update.
💯
Of couse its bethesda's fault, they made the freaking game. Every aspect of it is made by them, every creative decision, EVERYTHING. They made this loading-screen simulator, and they deemed it good.
They outsourced to 28 different studios
@@nicholaspowell8174 that explained all the jankiness of their game
@@nicholaspowell8174which was their choice
@@nicholaspowell8174 But they forgot to tell them that they need 16 times the detail.
Cyberpunk has like 3 loading screens. One for the main menu, one for starting the safefile and one for respawn
That moment you realize one random NPC in Cyberpunk is hotter than every single person in the entire multiverse of Starfield.
You play games based on how attractive the characters are?
@@gabriel897100 Did I say that?
@@vincer7824 why does it matter if characters in video games are attractive
@@gabriel897100 That's a better question and it sounds more like it's being asked in good faith.
Does it matter if characters in video games are attractive?
TLDR: Yes, but it is not a deal breaker and it does not dictate the games quality on its own.
Aesthetics will always greatly impact a visual medium, this is obviously my opinion and I think it is reasonable while having much evidence.
The importance of aesthetics is the reason different art styles, dynamic lighting and certain color palettes can totally alter games that are mechanically similar, for better or worse.
That is also the reason studios and directors have almost always employed physically attractive men and women to play the lead roles in their movies.
Character actors (common, average looking, ugly, old or fat people) used to have more roles in movies. That has changed a lot and I miss them.
Now almost everyone in a movie is attractive no matter the role, age, time period or setting. It's not realistic and somewhat bland in its "sameness".
Is a game with all unattractive or ugly characters automatically a bad game? No.
Would I play a game like that? I would be open to it, I played Starfield for quite a few hours after all.
Must a game have sexually attractive characters for me to play it and think it's good?
No. I have played many different games that have all non-human, strictly mechanical or super low poly characters and had a blast.
When a game has many, many design flaws and problems like Starfield (my opinion) the deliberate decision to make 99% of the characters unattractive is simply salt in the wound and can be representative of a flawed philosophy (different topic).
This is made worse when compared to other games that have characters that are nice to look at and adds to the world-building and lore.
@@gabriel897100 if it doesn’t matter, then why do they need to be ugly?
“Ladies and gentleman, Jackie Welles!”
Dual wielding his pistols like a boss.
F in chat for Jackie
Jackie was the Best I still Miss Him 😢
Would of loved a DLC with a handful of missions with you and jackie, like prequel DLC. Scrub merc jobs, bonding with jackie, more interaction with T Bug, meeting fixers, living with momma welles and the jackster.....
@@BlackVulcan22 Prequel DLC with life-path specific questlines along with Jackie missions would've been amazing.
CP2077 obviously had issues at launch, but it was never boring. People were frustrated with CP bugs because they loved playing the game. People are frustrated with Starfield because they can't find a good reason to play.
HANK, DONT ABBREVIATE CYBERPUNK! HAAAAAAAANK!
That's what I say. Bugs can be fixed, but bad story and presentation can't be.
I think it also has to do with how CP presents the story to you compared to SF. In SF It felt like another fallout were the character just talks to you as the camera zooms in on them. In CP I felt like I was part of it, the angles, the characters expressions, the tension, not every decision being right or wrong. It just pulls you in. There's a side mission in Phantom Liberty for example were you help 2 cops deal with a drug lord and at the end I thought I was gonna make everyone happy by making it out alive and not having to fight the drug lord and everything seemed fine until right before he lets us go he asks one of his bodyguards to scan the building we just left and as soon he said they're all flatlined, my blood started pumping cause I knew things were about to come crashing down. Never expected that
I didn't even shoot at anyone in this mission and the outcome was the same. This really is one thing I don't like, but anyways Cyberpunk is a million times better!
@@dezpotizmOFheaven if you didn't shoot anyone but neutralized them with no lethal takedown and dumped them in a box then they die in there.
@@accursiusx13 Nope. I just sneaked past without anything. Only took down - non-lethal - the guy at the door where the two cops are inside.
@@dezpotizmOFheaven not sure what your dialogue options were but on my second file I didnt fight them but they did kill the 2 cops.
I took everybody down by stealth or hack System failure, and I did no hide any body, well, except move to other rooms. It worked fine for me (PC)
I did the same thing. Got bored playing Starfield. Figured I would check out the 2.0 update and never look back. Starfield is the first Bethesda game that I didn’t finish, and honestly, I have no desire to finish it.
same
Same
I had about the same experience.
Played a lot of Starfield, didn't got exactly bored, but Cyberpunk update came, I installed, and had a blast.
Seeing the characters interaction and acting, made realize how uninteresting Starfield NPC are. I will play it eventually, but had much more fun with a melee unarmed character on cyberpunk.
The first play thru with star field I didn’t hate it i just didn’t like it cyberpunk is more realistic
This is exactly what happened to me to the T. Well, I stopped playing cyberpunk in the beginning since other games caught my interest at the time but I knew CP was really good even with bugs which I barely got on Series X. Played Starfield when it came out and played it until the new DLC came out for me Cyberpunk even though I barely played it, stopped at Takemura missions. I never went back to Starfield. CP2077 is just so immersive and packed within Nightcity.
after playing cyberpunk I just cant see the usual bethesda NPC dialogue screen anymore. its just not appropriate for a 2023 game. they are just robots.
Stealth pistol build is really fun too, I prefer it over melee build tbf
@@nxhu. I loved play with throwing knives too. Every build seems fun in this game
CP2077 2.0 + Phantom Liberty is the best singleplayer gaming experience I ever had. And I'm 33, actively playing PC-Games (and PlayStation games earlier) for 18, 19 years now. I think the possibility to mod Bethesda games always had a huge impact on making these games re-playable for many, many years and the same phenomenon also can be attached to CDPR-Games since The Witcher 3. The modding community of CP2077 is amazing - and it's one of the few games for which I'm even creating my own mods (Skyrim and Elden Ring as well). So I think the Creation-Kit for Starfield, which should be released in Q1 2024 will def. revive the game. But beside of that - things that make up the core of the game, can't be changed by modders. The problem of Starfield is the missing variety. You have a good main storyline, you have some cool RPG factors like building your own ship, your own bases and stuff - but the fighting is so damn linear, the NPCs are stupid as hell, the core planets look cool, but they don't even offer the same level of experience as Night City - a place where you can't do a lot when it comes to NPCs, but the city still feels alive and looks beautiful. And the other "thousands" of planets are just empty, boring places with some stations + pirates which you can fight and weird creatures on them, which you can scan. There are no cool storylines with interesting lore attached to those simple missions, unlike in CP2077. In CP2077 you also have now two insanely good storylines + many, many great side-missions and you can create so many different fighting builds that it's almost unfair to compare these games. You have a lot of Cyberware and mods for everything... the fighting itself is bloody, gory and interesting... you can be a Cyberninja with Katanas and Mantisblades, a damn Terminator smashing everything with blunt weapons and Gorilla arms, you can go super Stealth, you can use throwing weapons, you can use Quickhacks with Monowire for more variety or use your Projectile Launch System for your builds and you have many different guns - Tech, Smart, Power with SMGs, ARs, Sniper rifles, Shotguns, DMRs, Revolvers, Pistols and even a god damn Cyber-Chainsaw thingie. You can use Berserk, Sandevistans or Quickhack-Cyberware with every build - or even all together with the Cyberware-EX mod. The variety and ability to re-play and re-enjoy CP2077 is absolute S-Tier at this point. I still have hopes for Starfield and it's def. a good game, but CP2077 is playing in a different league with 2.0 and Phantom Liberty.
ho 39 anni e per me CP è secondo solo al primo Deux Ex
Can you still activate overclock and Sandi separately with the EX mod? For me only one works.
yeah phantom liberty is fuckn awesome. the story, the side quests and what they add to the world building is so good.
@@thorwaldjohanson2526 I don't know if that works in the stock version, because I have several .yaml and .lua files with Tweaks that I've written on my own... and they change hotkeys and other stuff - like that only a special version of the Canto activates the Blackwall hacks mod and stuff like that. I always do a lot after downloading the mods to make them fit my needs. I also saw people doing that with my mod... and I highly recommend doing that. Just do whatever you like when it's just for your own purpose.
*Edit: okay, I checked: Go to a Melee weapon or Cyberarms / fists and then press BLOCK + your ability key (let's say it's Q) to toggle the Berserk. For toggling the Sandevistan you do the same with ONLY pressing Q (nothing else) - and for overclock you activate the Focus mode (Scanner) and THEN you press Q. It works in stock - and for myself I only changed the hotkeys a bit.
For real cyberpunk made me felt that it's not the end for good video games yet
Starfield is an absolute JOKE compared to Cyberpunk.
I put 100 hours in star-field. I tried. I couldn’t keep going. Since 1.6 I’m 600 hours into cyberpunk. 6 different character builds, and I still love it. Some nights I just get high and walk around night city
I just download clothing mods and then find cool spots to take photos and make up scenarios
Thats one of the best things to do is just run around the city. i can get stuck just running around forever doing parkour everywhere. Meanwhile im actually suppose to be going to a mission somewhere but I get sidetracked by the city and having the urge to just run around and explore and see where your wandering takes you. If u aimlessly run around the city you can find and endless amount of scenarios or awesome scenery. Top tier 10 outta 10 game fr.
Touch some grass my boy 😂
@@thefirsttrillionaire2925lol innit, 100 hours and you didn't like it the whole time? like bro just go do something else.
@@estbgti424 Too many cutscenes in Cyberpunk. Boring.
I think one of the biggest differences between Starfield and CP2077 is how the company and devs responded to criticism. CDPR has been very receptive of the backlash that was received. Meanwhile, the Starfield team is too busy trying to do damage control because they told us that our OPINION about Starfield is wrong.
Cyberpunk is a better game with better writing, imo. It's gritty and had more realistic characters- at least from an adult perspective. Starfield is more the idealistic teenage version of me, while Cyberpunk is more the reality of the struggle and being an adult.
I haven't even played the 2.0 update yet, so I'm comparing it to the most recent version I have played/ (after the minor Edgerunners update)
I love all sci-fi and really really want to like Starfield. I'm still playing it, but it's not as captivating a story as Cyberpunk universe is. It is a good game (that desperately needs optimized) in concept- but could be so much more. IMO both games had very grand ambitions that they fell short of on release. The potential for both is there, but ony time will tell if Bethesda puts the time and effort into making it really shine.
Starfield is like PG movie game, where Cyberpunk is like the unrated directors cut of a NC-17 movie. Sure you find some messed up stuff in Starfield for sure, but in CP you're living that whole reality. The writing lends well to actually feeling like you are V. While the game and writing of CP2077 isn't perfect, its still engaging and evocative. It makes you think, feel and question existence, especially with AI developing at such an incredible rate in the real world.
Funny you say that because I think Cyberpunk 2077 has a garbage story. Starfield has side quest that are better...CDPR completely failed with the story of the game its not memorable...there's very little agency and they were heavy handed with the story and didn't tell the story through gameplay...
the best cyberpunk story is easily the edgerunners anime....which is amazing and does a way better job at conveying the style and feel of the world than the game....and tells a moving story ,letting you get to know and love characters in a very short period of time..while the game shows V and and is best friend(i dont remember his name. Like i said forgettable) become best friends in a montage ..only to die in the next job...it was ham fisted and really bad story telling....then tried to have an emotion funeral for him...really bad writing.
@@86lanzolol your comment comes off as incredibly salty and disingenuous. i do not believe that you were not at all engaged when you had to say make a deal with maelstrom to get the flathead, or escape the tower while being shot out by security while trying to protect the relic. or when youre betrayed be dex and resurrected by the relic that is also killing you.
like, im trying to comprehend how you go through all this nicely paced experience of a game and honestly think starfield is in the same league as cyberpunk 2077 which is miles ahead of starfield.
its funny you brought up the anime when cdpr had a huge part in creating the story for it but pretend cyberpunk wasnt interesting. lmao keep trying kid and keep crying your salty tears.
@@mitchhamilton64 @86lanzo sort of has a point about the Jackie montage. It's a bit glossed over, and they could have done a few minor side quests with Jackie before the heist. That said, I have memories of friends and well, life that kinda play back like a montage so perhaps it's more relatable as an experience with life thing.
All things said, Cyberpunk by nature is more about the struggle of life which is imo far more relatable. It's characters all have flaws and scars from fucked up things happening, where that doesn't seem present in Starfield.
Gollum and Super Mario have better story than Starfield. It doesn't mean CP77 is something amazing, it's actually mediocre.
@@mitchhamilton64 "your comment comes off as incredibly salty and disingenuous." how ironic when you say so haha... you need to calm down, stop crying and puking bs and accept the truth: CP77 story is atrociously bad. Or just stay bvtthurt CDPR adoring fangirl 😀
Starfield made me quit Starfield, having a blast with Cyberpunk 👍
Cyberpunk always had this versatility but the 2.0 update made it easier to move between specializations by redoing the trees
oh yeah more options to do the same thing: shoot... Cyberpunk was a massive disappointment. They promised a next-gen rpg and instead delivered a gta-clone with so many features missing, you can't even repaint cars! Night City is an empty city where all you can do is shoot people; so boring... people that say CDPR "rede3emed themselves" are not very smart and were simply duped
Cyberpunk has a lot of things that could have been done better, sure. BUT, at the same time, I think that Starfield's biggest issue by far isn't the content, or even the bugs - it's simply how that content is presented.
Everything in Starfield is slow, clunky, illogical, and counter-intuitive. There's a loading screen every couple of steps, everything is done through menus that take up the entire screen and have to load, if I want to talk to an NPC I have to walk up to them, press a button, wait for the camera to zoom in, wait for them to say their lines while standing still, press a prompt (which does not offer real choices btw) and then wait for the camera to set me free.
Then we have Cyberpunk. Conversation trigger based on proximity, the character I'm talking to behaves in a certain way, which is especially great in cinematic set-pieces like talking to Judy on the rooftop where you can see she's restless and anxious just from the way she's shaking her leg and can't sit still. They move around, use gestures, reply and acknowledge the protagonist who also has a voice and interacts with the world, using gestures, has a body in first person. The menus aren't as intrusive as in Starfield, because they don't have to load, they're pretty streamlined, in-game terminals don't take up the entire screen and the animation for using them is very fluid, button prompts are integrated well into the HUD and the gameplay, as the devs tried to limit the use of full-screen menus, and only use them when absolutely neccessary. Gameplay mechanics work as you'd expect them to work, there are virtually no loading screens aside from loading up a save or fast traveling somewhere (that is also optional, because the open world is, indeed, open).
Playing Starfield feels like working in a shitty Windows 98-feeling professional software for a job, while Cyberpunk feels like working in the latest version of a well-designed SPA on a Mac.
Cyberpunk feels like you're in a big budget action movie.
Starfield feels like you're in a bad puppet show
In Cyberpunk the NPCs feel alive and dynamic
In Starfield the NPCs feel dead and static
That's my perspective of the two. One has incredibly immersive characters to interact with while the other is just some talking heads.
@@DanakarEndeel Yep, the Starfield NPCs have no emotive facial expressions when they're happy or sad and definitely no gestures and posturing to suggest it. In Cyberpunk they're animated with motion capture so they're the movements of actual actors. Oh, and they have eyelids, which is a big plus. Starfield is basically not open world. You just teleport between realms that are pretty small and empty. In Cyberpunk you don't even wanna fast travel because it's much more immersive to drive (or take the train now) and you get beautiful scenery.
Immediately after starting Starfield, the mute protagonist and the oblivion camera made it feel very outdated.
I think Cyberpunk did everything just fine. I’ll never figure out why people say otherwise. Like, what else do you want out of a video game, dude?
@@billyskittles1036 Well, in their defense, CDPR did need something like 2 years to fully figure out Cyberpunk 2077 after that botched release, and that's not good. But even in the initial state of the game, it was obvious that they were very ambitious and a person who's semi-well-versed in video games could see that there's a real gem in there somewhere, buried under the bugs and the cut features.
With that being said, I think folks who really wanted more out of Cyberpunk generally tend to come from 2 perspectives: one such perspective is that there is an IMMENSE amount of potential in the world, gameplay and storytelling that CDPR has created and people just want to see that potential realized - either via updates, or in a sequel. The other perspective is that pre-launch people were promised this great big huge masterpiece that was about to revolutionize videogaming and it would have EVERYTHING. Now, if you get on that hype train, and don't consider that this is a team that has previously mainly worked on medieval TPP fantasy RPGs that were based on stories and characters from a book series; and this would have been their first sci-fi FPP shooter game with original stories and characters... yeah, that could lead to disappointment.
I pretty much got what I expected from CP2077 (barring the bugs, but I was lucky enough to not encounter many of them) and it only got better over the years.
I have never had a harder time making a main quest decision as in Phantom Liberty. CD Projekt knew its a big dilemma, so they bring Johnny to the rescue and what does he say? "I dont fucking know, its a tough choice." At that point you feel really immersed: you really want to ask the questions that V asks and you feel just as disappointed with his answers as V is. Brilliant - you think like your character, you feel like your character, you truly are your character.
Starfield... There is a point where you need to make a choice between your 2 "favorite" companions - you can only save one. I didnt care about either. I would not care if they both died - they were horribly annoying and I only had them follow me because the game made me do it. Then the character's funeral was the most unbearable time I had in Starfield where other characters try to sound sad and you just dont care. I wish you could skip the dialogues entirely in Starfield and just shoot until you get bored.
Have you not played the faction quests lol? Bethesda games' main quest has never mattered.
@@MADguyfps It did in Morrowind, it did in Skyrim, it did in Fallout 4. I started a bunch of faction quests but the game reset after the main quest, then I started over but couldnt get myself to really care about them for some reason - I cant say I completed faction quests. A lot of the quests starts really slow as a fetch mission and I just feel like IM wasting time.
@@stubb1qaz There are a little of side quests gem in this game, deciding the fates of cloned historical characters, blackmailing governor. The faction quests are one of the best I have played. The UC Vanguard is exceptional.
'Hey come to Dtown, it's urgent' I arrived 5 days later.
'Hey my name is Songbird, you can see me in your head because biochip can be whatever writers want to be at any moment, let me instantly shut down Johnny because I'm super powerful, hey you need to save President Hilary Clinton, I mean Myers, because who else, and she is actually stronger than you, and hurry the airplane is waiting for you to fall at the worst possible place.' There is nothing immersive in this entire game.
Cyberpunk story is so weak, even cringe, nonsensical yet pretentious trying to steal ideas from Matrix, Blade Runner, Tarantino, Kurosawa... yet failing in almost every aspect.
Yeah Starfield is equally bad but it doesn't make CP77 something amazing.
@@bdleo300 Cyberpunk 2077 universe was created BEFORE Matrix, Blade Runner, Tarantino so I guess they stole from Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk characters are alive - they move, they talk, they use natural gestures, Starfield has all ragdolls that always give you a dead stare.
Immersion in an RPG game is up to you - you can always break it if you want to but just compare Starfield Neon City club dancers to Black Saphire ballroom performance. It is an entirely different league of game development. Cyberpunk makes you want to stop and enjoy the scene, Starfield is mostly fast travel loading screen.
I agree. Starfield feels like a game, cyberpunk feels like an experience.
The same thing happened to me!!! I had got done with all the faction quests in Starfield, got up to level 62 doing various XP grinds and traveling around the Serpentis System via Loading screens to farm XP by blowing up VA'Ruun fanatics. I got caught up in the Starfield hamster wheel, then one day I just booted up Cyberpunk after putting it away a year ago and started a brand new character and MAN talk about getting hit with the perspective hammer! I immediately got hooked back into V's story, and was completely immersed into Night City and the NPCs I interacted with. Even seeing Jackie dying again had hit a nerve and I was finding myself really liking the dynamic of character personalities between Panam and Takemura. Then i loaded up Starfield to pick up where I left off and was like....this is fn boring! Then disappointment sank in...even though Fallout 4 was a disappointment to others I actually enjoyed it because I made it a point to really play as if I was really a General for the Minutemen and it really directed how I interacted with the rest of the game. With Starfield there isn't any of that...I realized it's mostly just ham fisted and after doing one of those floaty temples (I think it was the 9th time) I was done. Starfield has a wonderful premise and there are some great things in it but it seems Betheseda built this game for modders to flesh it out and make it better and essentially make modders do what the devs of No Man Sky had to do to fix their own game for them.
I recently beat cyberpunk like 2 months before starfield came out. I said yeah I don’t think imma be playing cyberpunk for a while cause I was burnt after 80 hours. Played starfield and oh boy cyberpunk was loaded onto my pc so fast 😭
Wild, I legit put 60hrs into Starfield and went back to Cyberpunk with phantom liberty and can’t stop! I haven’t touched the game since launch and I’m blown away by the 2.0+ changes.
12:00 Cyberpunk's issues were the bugs that were mainly on the old-gen consoles (PC had a way better launch, I'd say it had Witcher 3 level of bugs). The game has always had superb story telling and gameplay since day 1, that's the main difference between CP77 and SF. Starfield is designed badly, Cyberpunk was just buggy. You always had the ability to be the time-slowing street samurai, or a net runner that never fires a single shot. Gameplay variation, side content, the City atmosphere and the characters were there since day 1. Thats why bug fixing was enough to revive the game after v1.5 and with Edgerunner anime. I don't see that happening in Starfield, it has too many fundamental issues like all the things you mentioned. They cant rewrite the story, they cant remove loading screens, they cant overhaul the graphics since it barely runs as is, all the can do is add few more weapons maybe.
Fundimental diffrence is: When 2077 works, it's great. When Starfield works, it's clunky and outdated enough to feel like a follow up to Fallout 4 from 2 years post release. Works in this case meaning "No bugs, working as intended."
yeah have 88 hours in starfield,. will never go back it bored me so god damn much,.. have 600 hours in Cyberpunk,. all in VR, still play it all the time. The whole time I was in Starfield I was like,. how can they say this is next gen? It feels and looks 20 years old!
You could tell even from the preview videos that they're still hanging on to their run down old engine, with new bits cobbled onto it to make the graphics look "next gen" (even though they really don't). That's why there are so many loading screens; the Creation Engine is made to work units called "cells" that contain objects and landscape. That's fine with Skyrim where you can have a world cell that has all the terrain and then load caves and interiors separately, but that's an old design idea that breaks in outer space. There's no way you can have a cell big enough to contain all the planets and everything on them and all the space in between. So instead of making a new tool more suitable to building their vision, they half-ass it and compromise the game to fit the tool, rather than make a new tool to build with. Makes you wonder how dedicated to their vision they really were, instead of being dedicated to pinching development pennies.
@@SolCrown80 omg the load screens and animations for every little thing just killed me. The constant fast traveling. It just never felt like you were exploring anything. Just a bunch of tiny little hubs between loading screens. Huge fail.
I What's even worse is playing Baldur's Gate 3 for weeks, then Cyberpunk 2.0, THEN trying Starfield.
Couldn't last a couple hours...
It makes it even worse when you can't even run Starfield smoothly because it's just so horribly optimized.
There's just this CONSTANT stutter every few seconds that makes playing it impossible, which is blatantly unacceptable because it looks like crap and I can run Cyberpunk looking FANTASTIC without ANY issues. Not that there's really anything worth playing there. CERTAINLY not the story, yikes.
What did Cyberpunk got so right? That Jackie dance at 0:46
Didn't even finished the Starfield. When Phantom Liberty dropped, haven't touch Starfield at all ever since. Right until this moment. Starfield is just too boring. Even with mods.
It’s funny I did the exact same thing. PC tho. Cyberpunk had a major positive changes with 2.0 and the DLC. The graphics on PC are a given. Amazing with a 4090. But the music, voice acting, quests. The story is so much deeper. It feels like a movie not a game.
I'm running it on a 4070ti maxed out and with RT I just stopped and thought to myself "holy crap this looks amazing"
Great video. I had the same experience you had. I was hyped for starfield, I liked it but Cyberpunk nowadays is a great game with a lot to offer. Btw Phantom Liberty is amazing and brings the story together beautifully.
Even back in launch, Cyberpunk already had a good amount of variety in its gameplay (try to find some of the "lore accurate V" videos where people show off the combat system). 2.0 just made the combat system even more insane and meaningful when it comes to building.
And actually, we can blame Bethesda for making Starfield uninteresting: better writers and scenario directors could have made the main story more engaging and interesting, and they really could have scaled back on the 1,000 planets thing to focus on less planets that are more interesting.
Less planets but more interesting planets is a great point. I’d argue this kind of an issue with the characters too. Cyberpunk has layered characters with deep personalities, good and bad qualities etc. Jesus the constellation crew are mostly just such bland nice guys. Most of the other characters are one note too. Cyberpunk characters are messy, they’re funny they’re jerks they’re people.
Starfield is a masterpiece... If it was released in 2010
Let's go back in time with it then lol
I pretty sure mass effect 2 came out around then. Starfield would still struggle back then
Star field wouldn’t be a masterpiece in any time because it’s so poorly optimized that top end PCs can’t run it on mid settings without lag and lower end pcs can’t run it at all, it would be entirely unplayable
It would be mediocre in any year
This is the same thing that happened to me. Bought Starfield, played for about 30 hours, Cyberpunk 2.0 update dropped, left and never went back. Starfield is uninstalled and I have zero interest in Shattered Space. It's sad because I've been a long time Bethesda fan since Morrowind.
I’ve loved Cyberpunk 2077 from the release, and still stand as my favorite game of all time
Starfield made me quit Starfield. Game put me to sleep.
Cyberpunk is a city that’s alive. The people talk like real people, the graphics are dirty but beautiful, and the choices sometimes matter. Starfield is Skyrim in Space.
Its more like fallout in space, without any of the violence or adult content.
@@karlkoskie2891 yeah honestly this whole kid friendly approach BGS takes disgusts me.
cyberpunk at Launch felt like beta version of the game that is almost finish while Starfield felt like an indie early access at launch that require few more years to get to Alpha
@@ZzVinniezZ yeah I remember at launch the story was great but the gameplay was so subpar I came back after a year to replay it.
In Cyberpunk it takes me 30 min to do a bunch of gigs for the district, maybe even finish the gigs for the district, take the final reward for completing it, move on.
In Starfield it takes me 30 minutes to do one mission. Not because they are big or im dumb. Its because it takes me around 15 min tops to get over all the loading screens, loot everything I wanna loot (and you dont know what loot is important at the start), maybe hop to the trader two times to replenish ammo (cause I cannot craft it, wtf) and then maybe finish the boring ass mission.
Im not saying that side gigs in Cyberpunk are interesting. They are at the same level as Starfield (excluding actual writing, the fun you have in combat or stealth and the overall dialogues) but in Starfield THERE IS A LOADING SCREEN EVERYWHERE. I wanted to cross a street on Neon. 3 loading screens. I wanted to reach the inner balcony in the club. 2 loading screens. In Cyberpunk its just a matter of how fast can you run up the stairs.
Hey there! Great video. I mean, yeah... I totally agree with you! Cyberpunk was a fine game when I played it in 2021. Just fine. And it was still "just fine" when people went crazy over it because of Edgerunners. It was a very pretty game with a gorgeously rendered open world city. But it lacked a design core and sensibility that prevented me from really getting HOOKED on playing the game. I likened Cyberpunk pre-Update 2.0 to be like the video game equivalent of a very glossy coffee table book: something to be picked up and flipped through - admired a little bit - but to be put down just moments later. After Update 2.0 (and Phantom Liberty)... I can't put the game down. The game systems click together far, far better. And because the game now has a grounding in a more cohesively designed set of systems, it's allowed me to appreciate other aspects of the game, like exploring Night City, the narrative and the overall world-building more than ever before.
What’s funny is that I’m in the exact same boat. Got starfield early access, played for a few days and it was good, then Phantom Liberty came out and derailed me from Starfield. Haven’t been able to get back to playing it since
Cyberpunk is the most fun I've had with a game since the first Witcher. I am on my 7th play through and every one has been different - over 200 hours in all told. Phantom liberty and patch 2.1 made it a whole new game. Damn near perfect.
I'm getting the distinct impression from social media that Starfield may have caused a sales bump... For Cyberpunk.
Play CP77 on Hard mode. So much more challenging because there's actual risk involved in the combat. I picked up CP77 2 weeks before 2.0 and Phantom Liberty dropped. I hadn't touched it since launch week in 2020. Haven't been able to put it down. My favorite game this year!
Seriously? I played on hard, never upgraded anything for most of the game, never ever used most of perks, the only challenge were boss fights, but not much. And no, I'm not saying 'I'm that good', the game is super easy.
@bdleo300 hard mode is more challenging then normal. Challenging doesn't mean impossible. They really should have called it easy, normal and hard.
cap cp is just as easy as sarfield both games just need you to get to about level 15-20
@@HexxuSzcap. Enemies scale with you and even a max armor, hp tank build dies in seconds if caught out. Unless your a netrunner, than yeah its still easy
@@karlkoskie2891 to be fair I have not played 2.0 but I highly doubt even with berserk you can not just curb stomp it.
starfield felt like going through the motions. i didnt finish it, but put in probably 60+ hours. then i tried cyberpunk for the first time and it completely blew me away. like how elden ring blew me away. its so amazing and i absolutely loved having johnny silverhand along for the ride.
After the 2.0 update and the Phantom Liberty expansion, I played Cyberpunk for the same time. I couldn't stop playing. I am already on my second playthrough and i'm still having a blast with different builds. I feel like the game finally became what it was suposed to be and it can only get better from now.
damn, it’s almost as if cyberpunk is a seamless game that actually contains content and NPCs that behave normally
Fuuny I was saying last night how I played cyberpunk DLC after binging starfield. Even with my reset stats and kind of ruined character I had more fun in that session than I ever did playing starfield. Sword on motorcycle made me uninstall starfield .
In cyberpunk, you don't just watch a cutscene, you participate... And the characters movements, mannerisms, facial expressions and body language,etc...are the most immersive of any game.
Played Cyberpunk at 1.0. loved it. Completed 3 olay throughs, and now on mu fourh after 2.0.
Just talking to people was a whole experience, in cyberpunk they have animation, they do thing while talking, fixing something, pacing, smoking, rolling/spining on a chair, etc. in starfield they just stand there with google eyes. So un immersive
I wanted to love starfield but I just can’t get into it even after about 50 hours I feel like I have to force myself to play it. On the other hand I picked cyberpunk back up a few weeks ago and I can’t wait to get home to play it everyday. Even listening to a cyberpunk Audio book at work lol
Ten years ago Starfield would have impressed me so much, but now it’s a pretty generic rpg experience with a huge map. But I feel like that’s all it has to offer. Skyrim was a much better experience. I think the issue was that they hyped it up so much. Cyberpunk 2077 had a rocky launch, but I still had fun playing it. I didn’t experience much bugs and the story and side-quests really wowed me. Now it’s even so much better. Cyberpunk 2077 is the best game of the twenties.
i had the same experience, played starfield for 20 hours, the new upgrade parts of my pc arived so i had to format my computer, downloaded cyberpunk after one year and never looked back
I have been playing 2.0/phantom liberty for four months straight. I’m finishing up my third playthrough now, and all I can think about is what my next build and backstory will be.
Jackie doing the shimmy towards you is my favorite part of cyberpunk. Shows the brotherhood between him and V. Cyberpunk has so much character depth that is real. Loved starfield but it lacks in that department.
My first 10 Locations where AI generated copy paste Dungeons with the exact same layout...
This happened to me as well. Talk about a letdown.
@@blazr1976 absolutely felt like 10 times the oblivion temples... I just don't (wasn't to) get it?
I have about 10 hours total in Starfield, which is more than I actually have in Baldur’s Gate III before I uninstalled it. I have about 80 hours in Cyberpunk and I plan on putting a lot more hours into it. They really did a complete turnaround on this game from the initial disaster of a release.
I was enjoying BG3 and 33 hours into that game when I bought Cyberpunk at the 2.0 PL release and I've not played anything since, I have 200 hours in CP already and starting to think about a new start since I've finished pretty much everything. CP is one of the best games I've played and I've been gaming since the C64/ZX81 era lol. I would rate it above my experience with heavily modded Skyrim which I also thought was amazing by CP has blown that experience out of the water. I'm lucky though, I didn't experience the problems of CP when it was in a bad state and I'm so glad they finally game people what was promised, it's really nice to see so many people commenting on Reddit etc about how much they love it now.
@@JagdgeschwaderX absolutely agree with this. I actually just picked up the Ultimate Edition of Cyberpunk 2077 for the Series X since I also have it on Steam (it plays incredible on the deck btw). I’m glad that I passed on it at launch because it was just horrendous (even worse than Lords of the Fallen at release). Ever since they patched the game, they showed what an incredible and immersive world and story. CP2077 is everything that Starfield wished it could be. I’m going to try and give BGIII another shot, probably on console, and see if I like it more.
@@stakesishigh516 BG3 is fun if you like Divinity Original Sin and games like that, the acting is great as well but I can see why it's not for everyone. As soon as I started playing Cyberpunk I had no desire to go back to BG3, Cyberpunk is 100% fun and takes a lot less effort to play in my opinion, I find D&D type games to require a lot more commitment and I have to really be in the mood to play them, I loved the first Divinity but never got round to playing much of the second for that exactly reason, I always feel like I have to spend loads of time researching everything. I will go back to complete BG3 at some point but I started a second play through as the female V to see the different acting and as Corpo as I did Street kid on my previous one. On my first playthrough of CP I made loads of mistakes or didn't really understand what I was doing or the mechanics like crafting etc so I plan to try to play through in a more structured way and not dive into the main stories too quickly. I was thinking about doing all the NCPD missions first, the start on the gigs until I'm leveled up enough to really enjoy the Cyberpsychos and other story line missions. I feel sorry for the people who are disappointed with Starfield, I was skeptical about it myself because I didn't really enjoy Fallout 4 and felt that had been hyped up a bit on the back of New Vegas and Skyrim, I was playing it and feeling like I was missing something because I wasn't really having any fun. These days I always wait for a game to be released and to see the reviews and almost never buy early access as it's become too common for developers to over promise and them let everyone down. My one wish for CP would be that they add another DLC or two and maybe respawnable missions like the NCPD ones, it's horrible when you get closer to the end and the map is bare.
I pirated Starfield and after 13 hours i deleted it knowing well i will never play it vanilla.
I still feel I'm owed a refund of my time.
I hope you get downy back for your time
lol😂
Having the house for oneself for a couple days, and play video games, it's gotta be one of the greatest feelings. You know that feeling you still have a few more hours, and cannot decide what to play and then the time goes by and you end up not playing nothing and kinda feeling stupid?
Cyberpunk has been awesome for a few years. First through an amazing modding community, and then through CD Projects Reds updates. They deserve absolute praise for a) allowing their work to be modded completely, and b) getting things right as a matter of principle. Great Studio, great games.
I felt the same way, especially after playing Phantom Liberty. I dont even hate starfield, its just so uninteresting and safe.
My experience went something like this “man this game sure feels like a Bethesda game just without the mods” then I proceeded to stop playing to wait for mods instead, then accidentally sunk 80 hrs on phantom liberty alone.
After hearing you talk about the build you used in cyberpunk I gotta suggest you do Body, Technical, Reflex with the berserk OS and gorilla arms. Some of the most adrenaline filled gameplay out there as you just run in head first taking everything and throwing people across the room
Something to note about the opening montage in Cyberpunk (the one at the start of this video, which plays after you've done your opening background mission) - it's in-engine. Take a moment to consider the technical implications of that. All those rapid cuts, all those environments and character assets, all being loaded and transitioning that fast.
Not only would Bethesda never have such slick style... their engine is entirely incapable of it.
I am happy to see cyberpunk's redemption arc. It’s an amazing game. Starfield is a good gane but it looks like it came out 15 years ago by comparison. If Bethesda are using the same engine for elder scrolls 6 then it will crash and burn on launch.
I have too much time in Cyberpunk. I love to try out different specks and gameplay. Also the city is a masterpiece. There are still a few bugs but nothing like state it was in 2020. Perhaps Starfield will do the same.
I think Starfield is shit outta luck. Their issue is their game engine and oldheads that need to retire.
Same for me, choom. Had almost the exact experience with the two games. Well said.
It’s the being able to switch play styles on the fly in Cyberpunk that keeps you emotionally engaged too
I just want to let you know that you hooked me at the beginning of your video, me being an Xbox fan the fact that you made it very clear that you don't give a s*** about the war between the two consoles you like what you like, that's what has me engaged to watch the rest of this video just want to let you know🤌🏾🤌🏾 and equally I'm at a frustrating point with Starfield and have been watching a lot of gameplay and hearing a lot of good things about cyberpunk I can't wait to try it out💯
You will get hooked on CP
Cyberpunk Ultimate Edition was worth the 3 year wait after the disastrous and heartbreaking launch back in 2020. That release was finally the moment I stopped being over hyped for videogames and learned to be patient when it came to launches. Now that Cyberpunk is finally finished and at its full potential, it feels like a game ahead of its time.
They made Cyberpunk 2077 amazing after the disastrous launch. After playing through Phantom Liberty, I am not comfortable saying that CP is the best game CDPR made. Love it.
It's like starfield existed to make us miss playing cyberpunk
100% AGREED
Starfield, actually, was deliberately designed the way it was to pad out time out of the player.
-Procedurally generated planets with no vehicle to drive around
-Fast travel is almost necessary to complete quests
-Loading screens and even more loading screens
Cyberpunk has none of these problems. Granted, it took 3 years to actually deliver on everything promised. So, maybe Starfield needs 3 years too.
Another 3 years wouldn't do anything. Bethesda would, at best, just make more features to chop out of the main game and put into DLC.
Not to mention their engine just sucks. It literally can't handle anything a space exploration game needs to be good.
Do you wanna know why there aren't any land vehicles? It's because the engine can't function if the players are moving too fast. It's the same reason Horses in Skyrim are so damn slow. Speaking of, Skyrim Horses, we all know how fucked they are. So yeah, Bethesda wasn't going to even attempt to figure out freaking land rovers and cars and shit. That's also why they used Vertibirds in Fallout 4 and no cars, even though cars should be possible to have.
Wanna know why fast travel and loading screens are everywhere? Because the engine requires everything to be built from CELLS. Cells can only be so big. If you fuck with the cells, the game starts to break in a lot of ways. That's why cities in Skyrim along with every cave and dungeon and building were all behind loading screens. Large seamless worlds aren't possible, so having a planet you can fly off of and go into space then punch it to ANOTHER planet in the same system? Yeah, never gonna happen. Everything needs to be behind a loading screen or at least an animation so their engine doesn't get screwy.
Bethesda just doesn't know how to make better games and they're not even going to try and learn. Skyrim came out 13 years ago, has had MANY MANY updates and literally been SOLD dozens of times more, and unmodded it's pretty much the EXACT same game with a majority of the bugs still in there and NO new features added since LAUNCH. They've added small GIMMICKS (nearly all of which you need to buy), but not FEATURES, nothing that properly changes how you play the game. A game like this they've decided to repackage and resell this many times, I'd expect it to do at LEAST one thing Cyberpunk 2.0 did, let alone Phantom Liberty. To date the content Bethesda puts out for Skyrim for real money, is consistently far below what modders do for FREE.
Starfield's biggest resurgence in public attention since it released, is videos coming out explaining why it's so bad.
@@haku8135 Quite the essay, but accurate. It's simply a flawed design philosophy of Bethesda. They are not willing to get out of their comfort zone, and they are relying on outside sources to keep their old sources relevant (Fallout tv show, community mods that are controlled and profited by Creation Club, various editions, reliance on same engine, etc.)
At this poiny, many companies that attempt Triple-A are slowly killing themselves to stay relevant because they refuse to take risks, even though their budget can more than afford to. Indie games have proven to give more with having less, even Baldur's Gate 3.
50-60hrs in only two days!? record gaming man, that’s nearly impossible! jokes aside, thought that line was hilarious lmao loved the vid and completely agree. been having the time of my life playing Cyberpunk, feel like my younger self!
Starfield made me quit Starfield
You can tell cyberpunk was always meant to drop with dogtown and phatom liberty , but overall the games been an awesome experience since 1.5
I've been stuck on Cyberpunk even when the game sucked and now I just can't put it down.
The game never sucked... Just had technical issues
I only played about 20 hours of starfield I got bored with it fast. I decided to try it with Xbox game pass which I’m really glad I did and didn’t pay the $70 for it. But as soon as cyberpunk 2.0 came out I stopped playing it. I already loved cyberpunk before but I love it even more now. It’s definitely my favorite game.
Doktor Skipper made an excellent video on how Cyberpunk 2077 Phantom Liberty does better bethesda magic then Starfield.
I straight skipped Starfield. Reasons: AMD CPU, Nvidia GPU, Baldurs Gate 3 and Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty. Those 2 (especially BG3, as I have playthroughs in CP2077 already) will 'feed' me until the spring. Maybe then I will take a look at Starfield.
Funny how the game everyone hated at one point is now the benchmark of gaming!!! Well done CDPR I know you could do it!!!!!!
Yeah, I'm glad things turned around big time.
Cyberpunk got me back into first person games lol, the world, lore, characters, immersion, graphics, little details, i could go on and on. Cyberpunk is like an NFL team that started its season 0-6, and ended up going to the superbowl and winning when it was all said and done.
LMAO it took years
I stopped playing Starfield and started playing The Outer World's.
is it good?
I modded it as soon as possible. I endured making a Discord account just so I could get Mod Organizer 2 beta and went nuts modding
Cyberpunk fully path traced on pc with ray reconstruction is a truly next gen experience, I’m also using the HD reworked 2.0 mod to tidy up some of the lower quality assets in the game, this is PS6 level graphics available now if you have the hardware.
They finally fixed ray tracing on console, on Xbox Series X since release, frames noticeably drop below 30 FPS when you turn on ray tracing. Almost 3 years later and it's fixed, and it looks phenomenal and runs so smooth.
I'm still on a RTX2080 Super and it is even amazingly good looking with that.
I feel ya man , I played 3 hours and just knew it wasn’t for me . And I am now loving cyberpunk I never got more than 10 into cyber cause I wanted to wait for it to be fixed and I am so happy I did .
I started playing a couple weeks ago, and I’ve barely been playing anything else, truly amazing game.
Great video. I’m happy RUclips is finally showing me new, smaller channels. Keep ‘em coming.
Had the same experience. Started playing Starfield and really tried to enjoy it, and then Cyberpunk 2.0 and Phantom Liberty released and now I can't go back. The writing in Cyberpunk is S tier, while Starfield is B tier at best. The gameplay feels 100 times smoother, the world feels livelier and the graphics just can't compare. Everything's better in Cyberpunk 2077.
First, totally different games, no idea why people constantly compare them. Second, both are mediocre... like saying: Starfield is so much better than Gollum, so yeah Starfield is amazing 😀
@@bdleo300 I'm curious what you would consider a good game if even a game like Cyberpunk 2077 is mediocre for you.
I was playing fallout 4 and I hit a plateau that made me try a little bit of cyberpunk and I played like 5 minutes of it and got to the free roam part of the map and I had to put it down because it was already blowing fall out 4 out of the water and I know if I continued I probably wouldn't have finished fallout 4. Which the game still sits now gathering dust.
@@Immopimmo A lot of people still consider CP2077 to be mediocre. To be fair, I haven't tried the 2.0 update yet, so maybe that pushes it over the line from "mediocre" to "pretty good." But overall I agree that SF and CP are both pretty mediocre games.
Pretty much every game in the "AAA" space is mediocre. The best games these days are coming from AA's and indies. Sometimes smaller experiences, or they don't have the big budget graphics, but overall just better and more interesting games.
Baldur's Gate 3 is doing for Larian what TW3 did for CDPR - where the game blows up enough to turn the developer from AA to AAA. Hopefully Larian doesn't fumble the bag like CDPR did.
@neofromthewarnerbrothersic145 With the 2.0 update and Phantom Liberty, I'd say Cyberpunk is a pretty great game and far from mediocre. I'd rank it up there with BG3 when it comes to writing, voice acting and overall design, and the gameplay feels really good.
Starfield also just feels like a huge missed opportunity; if they literally just rewound the clock a few decades to their big ass war between the UC and Freestar with mechs and bio warfare and a cult picking at the scraps it could have been much more interesting than the bullshit we actually got.
I can't believe Todd Howard hasn't been canned by now. He just churns out dogshht.
It's not garbage but it's a decent game
@@manuelfernandez2644Lies
SIXTEEN TIMES THE DETAIL!
Only good thing he gave us was Skyrim
the problem is the dogshit sells
I’m 5 days of playing time into Starfield, gave it more than enough time to become interesting but it only gets worse. Nothing gets better or exciting after the bland main story or bland main side missions.
Everything you said was factual, not even subjective opinions, just straight up facts.
Cyberpunk is freaking amazing! The story, the action and gameplay. Glad I got it!
I was a cyberpunk lover since the game came out. Yes it was a mess, but I still had a good time with the gameplay and story. After I got it for PC I had an even better time. The 1.6 update felt perfect and then the 2.0 update along with phantom liberty just made things even better. Cyberpunk is one of my all time favorite games.
Cyberpunk is undoubtedly the greatest single player 1st person shooter of all time bro
@@1andOnlyKBdoom
I have to force myself to play Starfield.
Overall, I think 2077 did things better since the launch (been playing since day one, never regretted it) is how they handle the lore. For those not in the know, the tabletop games are canon to 2077, and there are a ton of references to it in the game (Biggest example being Johnny himself), and instead of this being a game where either they would need to dial things back to explain everything to you, or being a game that requires you to play the tabletop games to understand it, they go their own way. Stuff happened, some people know more than others, some people may be lying, some people may be telling the truth. There's a ton of exposition with the Morro Rock Radio station, but it's presented as mostly conspiracy theories, which is great because it reflects on how players of the tabletop could have handled certain situations, and it makes a reference to that on a lot of points in the game, my favorite being how you handle Royce. You could get Militech involved, if you do, you can side with Stout or you can side with Gilchrist, or you could go solo. If you go solo you can pay Royce with your own money and have the gang laugh at you, or you could just say "Fuck it" kill Royce and fight your way out of the factory.
From an RP point of view, the lifepaths also reflect your potential position with this game, prior playing it, my knowledge of the lore was limited, so, I played a Nomad, an outsider who has no idea what goes on in Night City and has only heard a few things, learning things as one goes. Eventually in future playthroughs and after absorbing the lore, I played a Corpo, insidious guy looking for a way to the top, but also knowing how to push people's buttons and manipulate them to get what I want (As seen in many instances, such as the Konpeki Plaza check in, getting the Spellbook from R3no, or hell, even sweettalking a street vendor so they would let me purchase Samurai bootleg tapes), whereas Nomad has a different focus, my favorite being that you can get to talk Jackie into tuning his bike and you'll see it reflected in the future.
For the most part, I only have two issues with the game, one that we didn't get to spend more time with Jackie or bring him along for more gigs (Would of been great to have him tag along for gigs before meeting Dexter, for example), and two, the lack of third person outside vehicles. Mainly because in the tabletop games, it's a reference burned into your brain: You won't get far in Night City if you're on your own, you need a crew. And in the universe of Cyberpunk, looks are everything, so if I get a badass biker jacket, you can be sure I wanna show it off at any chance I get. But of course, those gripes are personal, I still love every single minute in the game, I'm still discovering new things three years after the launch, and I can 100% say this is my favorite game of all time.
There is a lot of cut content in the game, don't get me wrong, there is evidence of places that had to be cut off, or omitted (Arasaka Waterfront being probably the biggest one, with a lot of spaces that ultimately had to be abandoned), and a lot of speculation within the community runs rampant, early game shots from the character creator implies that the Relic would have been vastly different (There's an option to pick "Childhood Hero", and the options are Johnny Silverhand, Morgan Blackhand, and Saburo Arasaka), and even some of the trailers point to what seemed to be a very different line of production (Keanu being signed was a relatively late decision in the game, I love him in the game, but sometimes I wonder what would things be if he had never be signed, what would have been the big part of the story overall). And well, it all boils down to a big "What if"
On the other side, however, for a game that for a long time was referred as "Skyrim in Space", Bethesda seems to have missed its mark. Horribly. A game that came three years before, with a troublesome launch, with a lot of divisive opinions within its own community still manages to top and surpass it even though Starfield is supposed to be newer and better. I can only hope the devs take this as a learning experience.
The thing about the Starfield story that I didn't like was that nothing unique happened to me as the player. Right off the bat, I hear about someone else having visions when interacting with the artefact. In CP2077, you are the most unique individual in the entire game. There is no one more interesting than V which makes it more enticing to play. In starfield, anyone could've collected all the artefacts and gotten the powers. Theres nothing else interesting about my character. I also don't like that my player doesn't speak. V having a voice actor really immersed you into the game and you really got to develop a relationship with V, making the game even more immersive and fun.
So weird seeing people praising Cyberpunk like it wasn’t roasted over hellfire on release. If we’re gonna even remotely compare these games, let’s take first month Cyberpunk, exploding cars and all, and make it fair.
Comparing a game that has just released vs a game that was so bad at its release it was unplayable is a bit of a hard comparison.
I started missing playing Rrd2 after a couple hours in Starfield . I'll try cyberpunk. Thanks