"Cyberpunk 2077 VS Starfield"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- Asmongold Clips / Asmongold Reacts To: Cyberpunk 2077 VS Starfield by CohhCarnage
Check out Cohh on Twitch: / cohhcarnage
and UA-cam: / @cohhcarnage
On this Asmongold Clips UA-cam Channel you'll never quit finding all the funny Asmongold Moments with Mcconnell and the best Asmongold Highlights from the most popular games, like: Baldur's Gate 3, Helldivers 2, Starfield, Blizzard Diablo 4, The War Within & Hardcore Classic WoW, the record breaking MMORPG FFXIV, Path of Exile 2, sneak peeks from Gameplay of the upcoming Riot MMO and playthroughs of many other popular games like Monster Hunter, Final Fantasy 16, Elden Ring and more. Also Asmongold Reacts to a lot of content, such as World Record Speed Run of games, Drama and videos of some of the most interesting creators like penguinz0, Internet Historian, Emiru, Dunkey and more. Asmon is also known for his "The True Story of Asmongold", "Asmongold $2 Pizza" and "Asmongold $2 Steak", "Asmongold Room and House Tour" videos, the legendary Transmog Competitions and Mount Off competitions, Ban Appeals, Media Share streams, Reddit Recap Reactions and much more.
► Asmongold TV: / @asmontv
► Twitch: / zackrawrr
Editor: Daily Dose of Asmongold
Contacts:
/ dasmongold
dailydoseofasmongoldyt@gmail.com
Don't forget, the more you want Asmon to play a game, the less likely he is to play it.
Classic case of demand avoidance.
Except FFXIV, he's deffo gonna go back to that 100% for sure
Monster hunter/ baldur's gate enjoyers
@@motorolasamurai1635sure...
Play it yourself you virgins
The Phantom Liberty's Dogtown is so crazy, anywhere you walk you are in awe. The scenery, the complexity, the vibe is on a movie level, this is by far the best game so far.
Starfield looks like a Fallout 4 mod, with instanced space simulation like 15 years ago. There is no vibe and no life to it, the design is dull and outdated, the story sucks. It's like comparing gold with stones.
Playing Starfield for a bit, then coming back to 2077 for a third playthrough made me realize how FUCKING AMAZING Cyberpunk looks and plays.
Yeah only took 3 years after launch
@@slashergasher1388idk i playd it at launch and did everything on the game and still think it was a better experience than starfield imo, the world felt more alive and the gameplay more fun, story is fine but a bit underwhelming that still hasn't changed for me
CP2077 on launch day is disaster .... There is nothing close to "world felt alive", i just play 2.0 and its look better but the world still feel empty, no 3rd view, physics is the same, box-moving clunky animations .... nothing change except for graphic, a game for those who love the look & dont care about the rest
@@scenes3177it's first person for better immersion, go play gta if u want trash story with no immersion
@@Emulator833 You should think again about what you saying, before 1.6 you got more gameplay than this between combinations, more builds, after 2.0 not anymore. Wake up sheeps, stop swallow everything you got feed down your throat
Starfield is great because it made me appreciate Cyberpunk even more.
I loved the game since release and the bugs only hinderd my actual gameplay maybe 3 times ahahaha but i really loved the game
Bruh Starfield came out in a better state than Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk only got good when the 2.0 update came and phantom liberty released
@@rogueraccoon1840It was better before that, just not as majorly as 2.0 did.
@@rogueraccoon1840 No it didn't. It took me 25 hours to be completely done and utterly bored with Starfield. I had like 100 hours in Cyberpunk before the DLC dropped and I've played over 35 hours already in just the last week. It is a WAY more engaging and fun game to play and always has been. Starfield is just dull and bland with a lot of systems that have no depth to any of them.
Cyberpunk was a buggy hell, when it was released, but the foundation was solid, as seen by its redemption arc, now that it is patched.
On the other hand, when I played Starfield, it felt like a chore. Old game engine, faux open-world, empty locales. It's just oblivion in space but in 2023.
Cyberpunk has almost no loading screens. Its really a technical achievement for a open world this big.
I never noticed that but now that you mention it, I can’t even think of one
What would there be loading screens for? You can barely enter any buildings. When you go to your apartment, you sit on an elevator longer than any loading screen in Starfield.
@@Low_Tier_Jamal There is club, store and what you think it takes 5 sec to go up an mega building? Starfield as loading screen every 3 min don't make me fk laugh lmao. You need a loading screen to get down a ladder in your ship. What kind of retarded game is that?
@@Low_Tier_Jamalrather the whole game be the elevator then play snorefield the game would have been mediocre 10 years ago let alone today total garbage
@@Ar17778keep coping lmao. That dude just stated facts and you hate it. Barely any of the buildings are enterable and elevator rides are just loading screens. Starfield on launch was way smoother than the garbage that was cyberpunk on launch and you know it
Going from starfield to the new cyberpunk 2.0 and PL dlc was such a breath of fresh air for me. In starfield I felt like I was constantly clogged down by loading screens. You had to go through loading screens to go into a shop, into buildings, etc. etc. With cyberpunk everything is so seamless and there is very little loading screens outside of fast travelling. So much more immersive than starfield.
They simply hide some of the loading behind stuff like elevators. Not uncommen but very well implemented in CP77
@@stoneagealienz874 yeah i just don't understand why starfield couldn't do the same thing. the game was hyped so much to be innovative and groundbreaking but it does nothing new and in-fact I enjoyed it less than other bethesda games.
For real. Half the loading screens dont make any fucking sense. You go to neon and you have to go through like 4 loading screens to get to top of the map...then you can just jump off to the 1st level...like what?!?!?!
@@stoneagealienz874 Those aren't loading screens, Cyberpunk has 0 loading screens. Let There Be Flight, flight car mod. You can use that to go to the top of buildings and get to the same locations, stuff all is there. No loading screens
I'm happy I got to try out Cyberpunk 2077 beta when it first released but it is nice to finally get my hands on the definitive edition now that it has been fully released.
They didn't fix the fundamental flaws with the game, and they pulled the shit again from launch with reviewers not being allowed to show their own gameplay footage of phantom liberty (since that would deflate this little marketing hype about the game being "transformed"). Recommended not to give them any more money.
I mean half the content was cut and isnt coming back
@iyziejane ur a bit slow, they don't allow people to show footage because of spoilers. If u took the time to check out reviews you would see the difference, most people are giving it 9/10s.
You did not miss much, and won’t miss much if you skip it now too.
@@Nyakomatadoubt you’ve ever played the game
I believe starfield gets so much hate because the fanbase were constantly screaming that this was gonna be not only game of the year but game of a generation. They really thought that starfield was gonna be better than baldurs gate 3, zelda, elden ring, god of war and be a genre defining game. Truth is that people are already starting to forget about starfield and talk about other games like cyberpunk and lies of pi and this is still the same month this "game of a generation" was released.
If a game is marketed with a lot of features, from now on I don't trust it
No, the fanbase knew Starfield was gonna be basically Fallout in space. A solid game, but a Bethesda game, so lots of issues, but no different than their past titles. It's everyone else who had weird expectations comparing it to other games that are just kind of a different genre.
Doesn't mean it's ok for Bethesda to being lazy and not improve on their weak points and rely way too heavily on modders, but if you buy a bird, don't expect it to do shark stuff.
@@HotdogPotato101 Exactly, people were expected Star Citizen or something lol
I have never seen hate that produces so much laughter.
it gets so much hate, because its a game that's mediocre, We deserve better than oblivion level npc interactions and shit like that these days when even smaller studios with way lower budgets can manage it.
CohhCarnage is literally in Cyberpunk 2077 as a quest giver npc.
'Course he's gonna simp for all the games he worms his way into. CP2077 is better, but it's still average when you look past the "ooh! aah!" of the huge city; the inhabitants are shit, the activities are repetitive.
I'm glad that he didn't LITERALLY crap on Stanfield like Asmon expected.
I am COB now
his GOTY was launch version of cyberpunk, he legit believed it was the best, still does. he's delusional.
and you can't compare the games, at all, one is a GTA wannabe, the other is fallout 4 in space.
@@videogames9972You can still compare the graphics.
I do think Neon in Starfield is wonderfully crafted. However, with that being said, Cyberpunk does it on a larger scale and, frankly, does it better. It shouldn't be a direct comparison as both games are entirely unique. Cyberpunk is expected to be better because, well... that's the game!
Dude cyberpunk is garbage 😂 I don't play starfield but it is SO funny reading comments from you weirdos who have never played a good game in your life looking for excuses to talk about cyberpunk
@@forwardmoving8252 Nothing going on in your life? Imagine after 2 years, we are still rent free in your head.
@@forwardmoving8252I'm curious what games are you playing..
@@cocobosHe is one of those clowns who never tried the game but just read a bunch of bad reviews 3 years ago and decided they were his opinion.
@@ChesterZirawin Yea, probably new to gaming too.
I love Cyberpunk and am currently really enjoying Starfield, but Starfield's release has made me appreciate Cyberpunk on a whole other level. Cyberpunk is sexy, and I don't just mean physically, I mean the entire world and universe is just so enticing.
That’s on good storytelling. The story of Cyberpunk is really simple but effective, it tells you what a world you are in and how people in this world feels about it. Plus the Edgerunner story is a fantastic addition.
I mean I agree but 2 years later after release isn't a great comeback
@@vashsun4908if the story of cyberpunk is simple, what is Starfeild lol
@@bud_kleric2771 I never mentioned any sort of comeback, I was actually comparing the games in their launch state. Starfield's release has made me appreciate Cyberpunk more, because even at launch on my XBONE it was 100% more of a great experience in my opinion.
Well no shit? One gets to use the universe of Cyberpunk 2020 lol the other went the art direction of NASA-Punk. Ofc 2077’s world is sexier.
2.0 is out now and it's like a different game. They changed up the quests a little too.
If you're going into it new, play on very hard, since it actually is hard now (heals are on a timer now etc).
If you're an old player, I recommend starting fresh since it's a different experience.
Do you still get gigs just by going to the area or do you speak to fixer first?
@@zebwiz1900still by going to the area
Yea it's not like a different game imo. It's closer to what they promised and where it sbouldve been, but it still lacks any real open world interactivity, and the few it does provide is bare bones, the perk system is better, but there's still no way to truly delve into the cyberpunk aesthetic from a character creation standpoint, the RPG mechanics are still barebones, etc. They basically improved upon the already very minimal foundation, but the foundation didn't become a new foundation. I still think playing the game like a Far Cry game or something, where you don't try to explore it as an open world game or an rpg, but instead a linear campaign in a beautiful setting is the right way to go. It still has that "wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle" element to it imo.
Already played it once - cba to play it again.
sadly citizen AI is still crap .. they should ask rockstar games for some advice lol
Well yeah they aren't even the same game, because in starfield you don't play the game, you watch loading screens.
The Ascent does "cyberpunk city" the best IMO. But considering the setting of Cyberpunk 2077 is a not so distant future, maybe what we see in game is actually appropriate (it doesn't look that much different to current day's mega cities).
The Ascent's world building was STELLAR. Absolutely gorgeous. Literally gorgeous physically, and metaphorically gorgeous plot wise.
Yep, sucks that it fell very short, gameplay wise. The game looks gorgeous for the most part.
@@TheElefanteBranco To be fair, the shooter gameplay mechanic is a bit too simple for it to be a longer game. I wish that the devs would create a different genre (something like an RPG) in that universe, or just put it in the very same tower where The Ascent takes place.
@@TheElefanteBranco I know right? I felt that the RPG / progression aspects were just really boring and didn't keep me invested long enough to see where the story goes, but the visuals are amazing. I'd be fine with the simple gameplay if building my character was really interesting but it just felt kind of shallow for some reason.
The Ascent's maps were amazing. I had fun playing through it, but it seemed like a waste to make such a detailed city and then use it for a twin-stick shooter. I would KILL for a BG3 style RPG with those assets.
Playing Cyberpunk 2.0 vs playing one day one a few years back is such a huge difference. Glad to see they really turned such a big L into a W
As someone who finished and enjoyed Cyberpunk, I can say that while the futuristic city is beautiful, there wasnt much to explore. You dont actually get to enter most places, and the ones you do are either stores or buildings with enemies. Its like a beautiful vase that is nice to look at but empty inside.
sounds like you're talking about Starfield as well in one sentence
@@JKane_88 Starfield is loading screens of beauty and imagination.
@@OD91MJ I'll take a loading screen if it means I get to interact with something, as opposed to Cyberpunk where you can't.
V dying at the end ruined the entire game for me. Why would we have all these abilities and character progression just to have no end game. So stupid
Action Adventure game in a closed off small city portion or a finite space RPG with multiple genres packed into cities and other settlements. Like you cant compare these games tbh. Cyberpunks comparison is GTA V and Soon GTA 6
Cyberpunk is a good example of. " games can be fixed".i mean look at no mans sky. distaster of a launch but now it is one of the most beloved space exploring games out there
no mans sky is a great example and cyberpunk might be one in a year or three
A comparison of Starfield at launch vs Cyberpunk at launch would be more interesting.
Starfield is for sure much much more polished than cyberpunk was. I've encountered no game breaking bugs in starfield in my 40 hours of gameplay. Not to mention that the Bethesda modding community is soo much larger.
Ong, its so stupid comparing the two right now seeing as how it took Cyberpunk 3 years to finally deliver on its promises.
cpdr didnt have 8 studios working on the game to fix the bugs doe......imagine if microsoft/ phil spencer didnt make that decission...... you know the game was in bad state when forza Qa teams where working on a bethesda game to somewhat make it playable. so thats a lot testers lamo.@@iulic9833 anyways, its still broken in terms pc performance.
You could compare Starfield to Skyrim and it'd still look just as bad.
EDIT: If not substantially worse considering Skyrim is better in almost every single way.
@@dantemeriere5890 Skyrim was great, but it was by far the worst Elder Scrolls game. It was a glorified melee FPS. At least Starfield added back some RPG aspects. Not perfect, but definitely better than Skyrim. And if you're speaking in visuals in Skyrim looking better than Starfield then you 100% have amnesia or have only ever played the Special Edition of Skyrim (which still looks substantially worse than Starfield). You can not want to acknowledge the many ways Starfield is better, but that doesn't make you correct.
Well knowing Bethesda, Starfield is never gonna make the same come back that Cyberpunk 2077 did
''Mods just entered the chat''
Never say never
@xale1836 we will have star wars at home soon but with big tiddies
Well, before 2020 we knew CDPR and we could say that they would never launch a game completely unfinished. And Also, Bethesda had a similar comeback with Fallout 76, which have a consistent player base that loves the game. I'm just happy that CDPR took the time to properly release CP and I'm also happy that Starfield launched in a good enough state and will improve a lot over time.
The comeback only exists in marketing, since Cyberpunk is still an empty non-interactable world. So you're right that CDPR is much better at marketing than BGS.
Cyberpunk and Starfield are going for completely different aesthetics.
Except for the fact that Cyberpunk uses RT Overdrive AKA path tracing AKA full ray tracing + DLSS 3.5 + Ray Reconstruction + frame generation, which makes it technologically the most advanced videogame to date. No other IP uses full on path tracing and RR at this time. This shitty UA-cam compression plus people watching it on their crappy 1080p / 1440p LCD monitors crush the detail so much that it's really frustrating to really convey how fucking incredible it looks on a large 4K OLED screen with HDR. It's that fucking good.
@sYnc_e literally none of that has to do with the aesthetic.
@@StinkyBuster It does. Because Starfield uses none of that. Which means it can't look better than Cyberpunk when you look it from technologically standpoint. Lighting, shadows, reflections, image quality, performance, post processing, asset streaming (i.e. no loading).. everything on another level. Starfield is one generation behind. One example - Starfield uses dynamic cubemaps for reflections. Cyberpunk uses path traced reflections. It's objectively better. What can be subjective is that one may like space stuff more than futuristic dystopian city. In that aspect yes, that is subjective.
@sYnc_e you keep talking about "better" and I'm just not talking about that.
bad is not an artistic choice or an aesthetic
Starfield Special Anniversary 3rd Release Upgrade Edition will look better, just wait and see.
But in all seriousness, Starfield isn't the best graphics, but I still like what they did across the board. Going to mars has a kinda Total Recall feel, Akila gives off some Fallout vibes, New Atlantis is a nice luxurious setting, and Neon although not the best cyberpunk depiction, is still a good one. They covered a lot of bases in a single game instead of having one continuous theme across the board, so you can feel like you're experiencing different worlds. Can't wait to see how modders expand even more.
Modders are gonna have a field day.
On top of the roughly 1000 planets, just think they could add space stations.
@@ValbrandrLeonhardt Not just that, but they can expand the universe too. My brains already cluttered with ideas of stuff I want to add to the game.
how come none of the npcs seem to work right or well for that matter
@Joe-no7gs Been a few minor issues with writing imo, beyond that I've been content. I will call out the morality of Constellation followers tho, they'll lose their shit if you kill someone random, but they have no issue killing when it serves their purpose.
Beyond that, optimization for the game is kinda crap, but on my PC everything runs nice so I can't complain.
@@jackcaffrey8493 How do you mean? I've not noticed any issues with NPC's for the most part. Get a few quirky bugs here and there, but nothing that really ruins the game for me.
It's ironic how cyberpunk is used as a exemple of a good game now that starfield is out. Don't get me wrong, i liked cyberpunk, it was unfinished at the launch? It was, but anyway only saying how ironic it is
Starfield makes me want to play No Man's Sky. No Man's Sky makes me want to play Eve Dangerous. Eve Dangerous makes me want to play Starfield.
Kinda true they all seem to have some aspects the other is missing, put them all together and youd have like the dream space game
Even at launch 2077 was still better than Starfield could ever be.
I just notice 0:16 is this blasphemous easter egg? it's cool tho.
Cyberpunk 2077, 2.0 update is a massive game changer.
Does v get to live?? Thats the only game changer that even matters
@@Nasty_Riffs Stupid ass question. Its an in story dlc not an game changer dlc lmao.
@@Nasty_Riffs No happy endings in Night City. You gotta know this.
@@Nasty_RiffsThere will be a new ending in the upcoming DLC, so there is a hope
The environment in Cyberpunk 2077 is insane. Night City is pretty damn big but there are buildings, signs, you name it, everywhere. It never feels like CDPR made Cyberpunk massive just for the sake of being massive. No place is empty, except for the Badlands but that's a design choice 'cause it's supposed to be a desert
Anyone saying Starfield's Neon is better than Night City is lying or hasn't finished Cyberpunk 2077. There's no contest. I daresay Night City is objectively better than all the Starfield cities and procedural terrain COMBINED.
bette in what way? there's almost nothing to interact with physically in night city whereas in Starfield you can interact with almost everything. Yeah starfield has a lot of loading screens to enter buildings and such. but you can enter them.
@@antonego9581interact with what though? Bunch of basic shops? And basic building interiors
@@antonego9581 tf you talking about? Nothing to interact? You can parkour in Night City buildings for vantage points and sneak around in vents, even hack the cameras, computers, and look around for loot and upgrades to your hacking software. Lol you can even hack ATM machines.
@@antonego9581you can drive a car, ride a bike, drive a tank, car chase with police, banger radio etc.
I dunno about that. Night City has so few interiors, and the few you can actually enter are completely empty unless you're doing the quest they're designed for. Plus the city itself is super lifeless, so little interactivity with its people. You can drive cars though, that's a plus.
2077 is so much better though. I know it had problems on launch for a lot of people... but I had such a blast playing that game.
I played at launch on PC with a ghetto laptop and I only had a single crash now don't get me wrong I had my share of bugs. The worst were quest triggers not happening, then during the drunk shooting contest my controls would lock up, and the single crash when I phased through builds like I was Kitty Pryde. Even with the lack luster story I enjoyed it enough to do 3 runs currently on my 4th so I have a clean save for the dlc. They have drastically improved the game since launch and in those multiple runs I found alternate quest endings there aren't that many but it was nice.
I rebuilt my computer completely right before cyberpunk came out.
Think I crashed once, if I remember right. Enjoyed the game immensely, even before the 1.6 update. Gave it a 8 out of 10, at launch.
I agree with Asmon in Starfield being a 6. But I think that’s also because look at the game we’ve gotten recently. Triple A has been churning out pretty substantial garbage for the most part.
Yeah we occasionally get things like Elden Ring and such, but overall it been pretty dismal. Starfield does ok because it’s the exact same formula and quality Bethesda was known for, and it looks even better because the last game they did was 76. Out Starfield back in 2012 and it would fit right in. But in 2023, it’s lagging behind in my opinion. Especially if the time, personnel, and money they invested into it are true.
Cyberpunk is better hands down. Better combat, better builds, better graphics, better immersion, better music, better story telling.
@RicoRaynn I think the updates saved Cyberpunk even if a lot is just set dressing in my opinion the Edgerunner stuff was kind of stupid.
Maybe after some time or some dlc it will make Starfield better like No Man Sky but for me 70 bucks is a lot to ask for mid game when I can turn on Baldur's Gate 3 for 60 and have a infinity better experience?
@SkeleTonHammer where I do agree there was a lot to be desired and needed to be fixed in the story/gameplay department I've not seen mobile gangs, car battles (to be fair I've seen 1), and the police doing anything.
Cyberware and quick hacks were always busted as with some talents could make an unstoppable character even before the update. I've been playing and the new weapons are nice but the changes to how clothing and how armor mods work is frustrating. Stacking armadillo mods don't seem as effective but it could be how difficult it is to find high enough quality of armor with enough slots to stack now?
@@RicoRaynnEh, 8/10 for Cyberpunk at launch is hard to justify. It had way more bugs than Starfield at launch, gamebreaking ones at that. Apart from the entire world not working because of buggy vehicles, buggy events, buggy NPCs, etc., trying to go around and progress through the storyline was a guaranteed way to hit a hard lock bug that bricked your save. This is ignoring the fact that Cyberpunk struggled to run on even RTX 3090s, 32GB RAM, 10th Gen CPUs, etc. I mean, you're talking about a game that crashed frequently on PS5s and Xbox Series X, what is this NMS? Meanwhile, in Starfield, my only true performance complaint so far has been the terrible asset streaming and memory optimization. Almost every bug I've encountered was related to poor asset streaming such as audio bugs, freeze frames, etc. And while they were immersion breaking, not once have I even been softlocked in Starfield thus far (mostly because I don't try to glitch it out unlike others who are trying to Skyrim their way through Starfield). Not to mention, Cyberpunk had much worse memory optimization issues considering I'm running Starfield on 16 GB DDR4 RAM and Cyberpunk 2077 struggled with PS5 which had 16 GB DDR6 RAM. There's a reason I didn't even attempt to play Cyberpunk 2077 on release despite having a decent mid range PC (2070 Super, 16GB RAM, i5-10600k) since I hopped on, did a tenth of the prologue, and quit immediately. If we ignore the memory issues, Starfield is not even remotely as CPU/GPU-intensive as Cyberpunk was on launch even at higher graphics (low on Cyberpunk, high on Starfield).
It isn't really until Patch 1.4 or 1.5 that Cyberpunk could even really be considered playable. Going through old forum posts, I'm actually sad to see the people saying Cyberpunk's "playable" on PS4, mid range PCs, etc. because they got more than 30 FPS and _only_ crash every two hours with 1280x720 on all low settings.
Anyhow, when we get to comparing Cyberpunk and Starfield at launch, I'd say Cyberpunk is a 4/10 and Starfield a 6/10. Cyberpunk had more to offer in terms of story and gameplay, but literally can't because of how unplayable it was. Not to mention, while Cyberpunk had more potential, the core gameplay was so broken and all the systems just didn't work so what's the point? A cop car spawning on my head is a million times more immersion breaking than Barrett's face lagging 5 seconds behind his voice for a tenth of every conversation. And look, I like Cyberpunk 2077. I played the game to full completion in 60 hours, downloading every which mod to enhance the experience. But Cyberpunk on launch is not even the same game as Cyberpunk now. It was truly indefensible while Starfield is just a normal Bethesda game that's pretty good, nothing amazing, and an all-round decent AAA title.
The shipbuilding is indeed pretty cool. Sadly it's also pretty much the only thing it has going for it and you can definitely see that shipbuilding is what Bethesda spent the majority of their time on (even though it's just the same mechanics as from the settlement building in Fallout 4 but with prefab modules surrounded by greeblie bits).
That said, I'm stoked to go back to Night City once the expansion comes out. I know 2.0 has already released but I'm waiting until everything is in (plus I'm also still playing Baldur's Gate 3 right now). No time for playing Shipfield. Maybe once Bethesda has released all the DLCs and have a Complete Edition on sale during a Steam Summer Sale I'll buy it.
obviously any individual city in Starfield isn't gonna be the same scale as Night City...seeing as how the ENTIRE GAME is just set in one city. absolutely asinine comparison. And the cities in both games feel just equally lifeless and static. However, starfield has tons and tons of other content whereas Cyperpunk is just the one city. At some point endless blocks of the same glowing buildings becomes boring too. Now, with the 2.0 update I'm sure cyberpunk is much better than launch, but still. These games arent remotely comparable.
I think cyberpunk really benefits from its scale, by that I mean that the whole game is one city and it’s outskirts so they were able to just nail down every detail of the city.
Asmon is really farming the fake starfield outrage. Even though Cohh said he's LOVING starfield.
Played Cyberpunk last night for the first time in a long time after hearing about DLSS 3.5, Ray reconstruction, etc. He isn't kidding it looks and plays so much better than the last time I played it. Considering getting Phantom Liberty now after reading the reviews and playing this new 2.0 overhaul.
@@deenman23 def agree, if you played the witcher 3 and it's expansions, you know what you'll get. 15-35h playtime, depending on playstyle and doing sidequest's (15h if you only do the main story, but play more stealthy); several possibilities of progressing through the story depending on your decisions, even in sidequests; and another great story, with more of Keanu and especially Idris Elba.
They said its a blood and wine type of expansion. Cannot be more hype than that
To be fair, Cyberpunk 2077 happens in one single city, Starfield does not. So the comparison is a stupid one, since they are completely different. That was Cohh's point, but for some dumb reason people are trying to paint it as if he's shitting on Starfield, when he's actualy shitting on starfield fanboys that are saying stupid shit.
Starfield fanboys are living in a bubble if They think their game is the pinnacle of video games
Besides loading new areas almost every build you can enter in cp2077 you can enter and the ones that have a loading screen are usually hidden behind elevators, which will have tvs in playing news commenting on stuff that happens in the world.
The only thing that kind of sucks is now that Cyberpunk has reached this point, we have to wait x amount of years for Cyberpunk 2 basically. This is the only DLC they said they were going to make. Good news is they are opening an entire studio in Boston to solely work on the next Cyberpunk and nothing else.
fr? didn't know they opened an entire studio for a Cyberpunk 2. But damn, if they just copy the way gta/rockstar handles npc's/interactions in the world/city, like having more buildings available to enter and the whole routines and stuff, to make their world more lively, it could be my favourite game of all time. But let's see how their work will play out. Cyberpunk 2077 with the 1.6/2.0 update rly made me appreciate the game even more. I'm a fan of the setting, but the aesthetics, atmosphere, graphics, gameplay and performance in this whole package just blend together extraordinarily well, that if they had gta levels of transporting the feeling of an automanous world existing outside of the player, it'd be on the same level as BG3. Gave Starfield a try, but the fallout graphics(+lighting mod), oblivian character animations and faces, skyrim hair in combination with the utterly unplayable performance just stopped me after 11h. Like, I play Cyberpunk on my 4k samsung m7, medium-ultra settings, fsr 2.1 on quality, 90 fov and get stable 60+ fps in every situation. Medium-high settings on 1440p, 67% fsr upscaling, 80 fov, and I'm not able to have 60 fps in atlantis, while looking at plant assets, that look like copied from skyrim. If it at least had the graphic fidelity, so you could say it looks better in one way or another, so it's "next-gen" like Todd always repeated over and over again, to somewhat have the excuse for the performance... But no, just the creation engine again, but this time dialed up 200% and used for a setting, that it just can't handle in a reasonable way. I mean if I had 40fps in atlantis bc all the buildings and interiors are preloaded and I can just walk straight into everyone of them, I'd say fine, but when even the fucking train connecting different parts of the city is a loading screen, then what kind of shitcode do you throw at my pc to it not being able to use it's hardware, hardly even pulling the max out of it.
dont forget the first months of cyberpunk :D, compare the 2 after 2 years
The world of Cyberpunk 2077 is much more thought out and aesthetically pleasing than all of Starfield locations combined in my opinion.
yeah but thats about it. It looks nice but other then looking around night city really has nothing to offer
Still, in both games the interactive aspect of the world is non existent.
@@bugsnax4145 Starfield is trash tier garbage compared to Cyberpunk IN every aspect.
@@bugsnax4145 u either haven't played the game for more then 2 hours or speakin out of ur a**
@@bugsnax4145 wdym it has a whole game to offer. You can't mine shit, but that's about it in terms of differences.
Dont think its fair, Starfield just released , Cyberpunk had 3 years to fix the absolute awful state it was at release. And its not much of an unbiased opinion, Coh is literally IN cyberpunk 2077
The new Cyberpunk 2.0 update is pretty dang good - feels good to zip around with a sword, blocking bullets n' all that.
I was just playing it. They actually added pretty good car damage physics in.
@onestepclosertoheaven7347 That reminds me: I did see a completely destroyed car frame, with no wheels, driving around like it was just a regular part of traffic. That was pretty funny~ Game still got jank, but at least none of it has been infuriating like it once was.
@@onestepclosertoheaven7347yeah the driving is much better I noticed instantly and you can actually blow up cars as a net runner lmao fuckin insane fun not to mention the katana swinging off a bike like a weed wacker zipping down the highway at 130 mph 😂
I saw some guy trying to claim that Starfield at launch was better than Cyberpunk 2077 at launch.
I played Cyberpunk 2077 at launch for 60 hours in one week.
I played Starfield at launch for two hours and ten minutes and then refunded it for Steam credit.
Are we going to overlook the state OG 2077 came out in? So many promises that weren't delivered...
And you will be sad about it till end of your days, instead of having fun with great game as it is?
@@firion666 Nice double standards you have there
No. Are you going to overlook that Starfield doesn't have much gameplay or that Bethesda never actually fixes their games?
It was bad on console and on lower end PCs, there's no denying that. I played it and, besides a few minor visual glitches, it was good.
Nobody forgot. We're talking about what it currently is. Everyone and their mother knows it was a broken mess at launch.
even at launch with how bad the game ran, cyberpunk still looked 1million times better than starfield and had more heartfelt quest lines throughout and a even better story
I mean even a starfield hating individual such as asmond can admit it’s better then the average shlock we’ve been inundated with as of late
0:15 Avoid death: done. Avoid baldness: impossible.
My biggest gripe with Cyberpunk was that CDPR were actively scamming by selling it on last gen consoles. A bad game is a bad game but paying your money and getting something that doesn't even function is worse.
I think at the time they believed it *could* work since they've been developing it with old consoles in mind before 2018 but quickly realized upon release that a ps4 or Xbox one couldn't run Japantown or smth.
The game runs perfectly on my Xbox one x. I’m pretty mad I’m not getting the expansion or 2.0
I didn’t had a gaming PC when I bought Cyberpunk 2077 so I bought it for PS4 which is what i had at that time . I feel scammed I really enjoyed the game but knowing we wont have 2.0 patch and the last expansion makes it feel like I should have waited and bought it now that i do have a gaming PC
@@xblowsmokex There's numerous reports of it not working for people on last gen. You must've been one of the lucky ones.
Blame Console Industry for holding games back. They were PC first developer before this
Neon is the Duplo block version of Night City.
Ship building in Starfield would be great if you could actually fly around :D
You do fly around and dogfight other ships. Flying 1 hour in deep space to reach another planet is definitely not fun.
@@kishaloyb.7937 speak for yourself, gamer.
@@kishaloyb.7937 dogfight in starfield are dogshit lmao. The ship feel heavy and slow and it look like the ship don't move but the camera do. You does not fly around like that and only in a small arena in front of an planet which we could have done since 2005 on star wars battlefield on ps2 lmao. If you don't like spaceship just say it but ain't everybody want to spend his time running in the field all day and jumping everywhere. We already do that in almost every game who do it better than in starfield.
@@sicariodu9546 lol so basically you want x-wings/fighter jets in Starfield? Then why not just go and play a Star Wars game at this point and stop bitching about Starfield. Every game has it's own take on a familiar mechanics which has been implemented by other games. If you don't like it, then don't play it and instead play another game lmao.
@@fussia2568 go play Elite Dangerous then, if you want to waste hours of your life travelling between planets.
starfield might be above average for asmon but thats only because his sample size for games is in the single digits
Good point. If it doesn't have a two-handed sword wielding tank, there's not much interest.
Kinda a weird thing to be into, but Cyberpunk Devs literally made THOUSANDS of custom ads for the world of Cyberpunk based on stuff from Cyberpunk 2020 that have different formats depending on where and on what they're displayed on. It's actually nuts how much love and care went into the scultping of the world for Cyberpunk, shame it had gotten so much (kinda deserved) hate at launch for all the missing stuff.
easily one of my favorite games to just walk around and explore in, the city feels so lived in (especially from my early 2.0 play last night) and the story, even all the side stuff, is all SO GOOD
@DeadManWalking-ym1oo it was a fully finished product that was completely payable from day one. I had a few bugs here and there, nothing game breaking that wasn't solved with a save revert. I wasn't really online for most of the time hype was going on and was going to be a player just based on the old TTRPG and loving the genre. Wasn't disappointed by the story and feel/ world of the game and the game has only gotten better, though in hindsight I do see why people were upset, hence my note in my OC lol.
I didn't forgive Bethesda after the garbage that was F4 and am a recent purchaser of NMS; love that game. I get your sentiment, but you're barking up the wrong tree lol.
@@PBRatLord bro even the devs would probably off the record agree that the game wasnt finished when they originally launched it.
@@justateddybear951 "probably" is your opinion. Idk what you're trying to argue, "bro", I said the game had issues at launch, but to say it wasn't a fully completed story experience from day 1 is disingenuous at best. You could play the game, start to finish, all 40-odd hours of content from start to finish, and even with the occasional bug or glitch, the gamebreaking ones were few and far between; I *personally* encountered none on a pretty modern machine that I literally only game on and keep well-cleaned and up-to-date.
@@justateddybear951 Plus,, I even said I'm biased cause I'm a boomer who loves Cyberpunk 2020.
@@PBRatLord Dog this is the same company that made The Witcher 3. THAT'S a game that was finished on release. The story is only part of the game. They legit delayed it multiple times because the devs weren't ever given enough time to complete what they wanted to. and eventually just had to put out what they had. I mean sure you could call it finished if you want but it clearly wasn't seeing as they're still adding/fixing things that they clearly would've done given more time.
"It's not even the same game"
*Genius*
Cyberpunk just got a fresh coat of paint to cover up the whole lots of new bugs, breaking already good game balancing, and still half the game you were promised(remember they guaranteed three expansions?). The game currently runs nearly as bad as it was at launch, and it will be swept under the rug with its Edgerunners clout.The double standards isn't astonishing.
What are you smoking? Runs great on my PC, Series X, and Series S. Game is balanced enough that I still need to play on very hard. You talking out of your ass like the rest of the jokers saying stupid shit like this?
People saying cyberpunk launch was better then starfield launch are out of they’re minds.
Cyberpunk 2077 was so broken at release. Physiks were missing / gameplay / graphics.
Like No Mans Sky, both games were not good at first. I like No Man Sky a lot by now and right now I'm having fun in Starfield and hoping for the best. It makes me want to finally try Cyberpunk or play No Man Sky or Star Citizien again.
depends. I played 2077 on release on pc and had no problems
@@arso4893 Same.
@@arso4893 okay ;) ps4 so Not good for me ist used the offer to Chance to PC Version but neuer tried it again.
Bugs were never the main problem of Cyberjunk. It´s just a half baked game. And people still buy the freakin dlc that should´ve been free.
I don´t have any hopes for future AAA gaming
I love both. Problems with Starfield 1 local map 2 storage boxes don't share. Problems with cyberpunk 1 Save files are not separated by character.
People often forget that Cyberpunk took two years to even be at this state, at launch was a broken mess for most people and even for people that did not have bugs the game was lacking in almost any aspect that they promissed to deliver, people should stop rewriting the past.
This! I mean, Idk about Starfield, but Cyberpunk unfortunately was a pretty big disappointment for what they promised. 😅
Neon in Starfield was pretty much a street with load screens
I love both games. Imagine that.
You can like two games and compare them at the same time, y'know.
Stop lying to yourself. Starfield’s dog
A level headed take on the Internet? Blasphemy!
I don’t 🌠
"Ship building is good" meanwhile Me, playing Space Engineers, "Man, you don't know what good ship building is"
Starfield is a more massive game than CB2077. CB2077 has the depth but not the width. You can look between the nooks and see that so much is missing and empty. Starfield is MEANT to feel empty. Its space but its filled with so much more do to and accomplish than CB2077. CB2077 is a 40hr game. Starfield is a 1000+ hour game. Comparable but people need to stop looking at starfield and acting like CB2077 is a better game. Its like looking at an airplane and wondering why a car drives better on the highway than an airplane does. They are just vastly different vehicles of video games. Cb2077 is the car, Starfield is the massive airplane that can go more places and do more than a car can do.
Yup, 1000 empty "realistic" planets and hours maybe as good as 40hr of deep, investing gameplay. I'd rather not waste my life.
i mean, for some its 1000h game, for some its a 20h game. Depends how much you want to do the same things over and over
Now they only have to find someone who wants to play 1000+ hours of Starfield.
People forgot easily that when Cyberpunk released it was the same as how Starfield is now.
Simply don't buy games on Day1, No Man Sky's docet.
The city in cyberpunk is nice till you realize that 99% of these buildings can't be entered and going inside a place is usually for a quest or a rare find
From a thematic point it's pretty good but form a gameplay point it's just a cosmetic
True
I mean yeah obviously. The amount of buildings is insane
@Faron837 obviously what, mf? You could probably enter more buildings in rdr2 than in cyberpunk 😂😂 maybe they should focus on actual gameplay rather than spending all of their time and money building a pretty background
@@Faron837 that just makes it worse because it dilutes the pool of accessible buildings
Cyber punk polished up after years ago. Starfield real development happened 1 year ago and was way less bug ridden than cyberpunk. They just have to polish it more like cyberpunk.
And starfield story and content is immense. And the side quest stories are not copy pastas. They are mostly good or decent.
Hes more generous than me. I rate starfield a 5/10.
I had it as a 7/10, but 100 hours in I give it an 8/10.
-1.5 of that is for the poor AI.
@roostre5254 No, it was good immediately, and over time it got better.
If you don't enjoy it, don't play it.
@@roostre5254so tired of that’s argument coming from people who haven’t played lmao. It’s good right away it simply gets better the more you play.
@@ElderSnowballyeah it’s good…for a ps3 era game in, Shame it’s 2023
The problem of Cyberpunk isn't how the game looks, it's the story that sucks balls. Starfield at least doesn't even try to hook you up on its story while Cyberpunk does and fails miserably.
Cyberpunk 2077 looks absolutely breathtaking with the new visuals and update. Can't see a game matching it for some time. Maybe Alan Wake 2 will give it a run for it's money.
I'm sorry they released Cyberpunk 2077 on PS4 and had game breaking bugs that held up my game for like 3 days. I have only had minor bugs in Starfield. I have thought about reloading my ps4 version of it and seeing if they fixed that bug yet.
This isn't a fair comparison. A more fair comparison would be to compare the launch state of both games.
Outcome wouldn't change. Comparing Current-Gen, the only gen that both games are on.
2077 still looked incredible at launch
Rather ps4 cyberpunk then oblivion in space
It's not even that there are less loading screens... There are NO loading screens aside from fast traveling, but that's impossible to avoid.
PS5 Spidermans fast travel doesn't have a loading screen.
Cyberpunk looks generations ahead of Starfield. I’ve honestly seen PS3 games that had better graphics and physics than Starfield.
Bro everyone forgot the launch of Cybepunk 2077 and No Man Sky.
Now compare Starfield with the release version of CP2077💀
Theres like 2 loading screens in Cyberpunk 😂 you can enter every building properly and elevators arnt even desguised loading screens they avtually go point A ti B unlike fallout 4 😂
Starfield made me appreciate skyrim's npc day and night schedule.
Cyberpunk has been more than playable since 1.6
It’s always been an insanely good looking game.
Took only 2 years. Great game. 😂😂
@@silvioantonio6952Doesnt matter how long it takes. If its good its good.
@@Svoorhout85 can you say the same about about skyrim? starfield i dont know, its the least buggy bethesda game, but it feels empty, bc the game is using the more realistic aproach to space. (In our entire solar system, only we have life, i guess they want us to feel this lonlyness) I understand why a lot of people would prefer Cyberpunk 2077. Since the gameplay, and the theme, are completly different.
Anway, back of tangent, every game should been released like Baldurs Gate 3, take the time to polish, make it run in older pcs, does not need 180gb of disc space, specially if it is a single player game.
@@silvioantonio6952 weird example. BG3 isnt optimised at all for older hardware (esp. act3) and it does need close to 180gp disc space as a single player game lol.
@@angulinhiduje6093 first, it is optimized, i can play on my old notebook. Second, it have insane amount of CGI, multiple endings, voice acting for days. Unlike cod warzone, for no reason have 180gb that probably 100gb is only for skins.
Asmongold's editors making sure that they get all kinds of malding balding asmongold in there.
Funniest part is, even a 2.0, Night City is still damn lifeless comparing to Starfield. The ''I heard you can enter a room in this game without getting a loading screen'' still doens't happen... since you can't actually enter rooms in this game lol
Game is only fun when it's a New Fresh start , if you have already finished it you can't do much. Well technically main character is about to die soon and he is Mercenary expecting him to deliver pizza to all houses?
I wouldn't call the city lifeless it's quite vibrant however i would call it empty as there is a lack of side activities and this is coming from someone who likes the game also they are right about the loading screens you don't get them other than loading up a save or respawning
@@deenman23 the npcs DID NOT feel real or behave realistically at launch, don't know about now. There was (and probably still) nothing to do in the city, which is why i got bored and stopped playing.
@@riceplatter8102They haven't really improved any of that either. 2.0 is a combat update. Cyberpunk is a pretty tech demo, and not much else.
@@riceplatter8102how could you get bored of non interactable world when there is a story with a lot of stuff in it? You never played the game did you
It’s just pretty dumb to mention that comparison without acknowledging we are seeing a version of cyberpunk 3 years after release, which would’ve probably never happened if it weren’t for the severe backlash the release got. And even then… 3 years post release? PlayStation network had to enable refunds ffs lmao
Starfield art direction is good, there are exceptional micro details, but Night City design is simply outstanding.
Cyberpunk doesn't have realistic looking procedural planets tho.
Starfield has great ship building the problem is there isn't much stuff to do with said ship.
Try having a bounty. If you wanna land on a civilized planet, you gotta shoot down all the patrols lol. Did that on Neon last night.
that's why you need to role play. Either role play as a bounty hunter or a pirate and use that ship as much as possible. Starfield doesn't hold your hands. It's a sandbox where you create your own objectives and have fun.
what a massive cope, if I wanted to play with my imagination I don't need a $70 game to do it @@kishaloyb.7937
you can do everything with the ship? fly, fight, dock...what else do you do with a space ship?
You'll get more ship encounters by traveling to orbit instead of fast traveling directly to the surface
Comparing to Neon to Night City is wild
Neon is one block compared to whole City
Also other than Neon Core, it’s just empty
Cyberpunk does immersion very well imo. When the game came out, I played a lot just moving around the map on my bike, god with the music I was so happy. Wasn't perfect obviously as we know but I can't wait for the new DLC/Expension to replay this.
... You've never played an immersive game in your life if you think that. Cyberpunk is garbage. Most of the city is cosmetic nothingness and they took years to add basic things to the game that should have been present at launch.
@@forwardmoving8252 Cope harder, Bethesdroid
@@forwardmoving8252did cp77 hurt you? How many comments you've dropped already trying to shit on the goddamn game? Get a life
@@forwardmoving8252 What’s immersive about Starfield? Is it the fast travel between planets? Is it the loading screens? The bad voice acting and dialogue? The same copy pasted bases? or the tiny section of the planets you’re actually allowed to explore? What about farming the same resources? What about the blank facial reactions or the same outdated water mechanics since morrowind?
Better yet, is it shooting around police and other NPCs while they stare vacantly at you and do nothing? Cyberpunk might not be perfect but it’s 100x more immersive than Starfield will ever be, way to expose your for being the one to have ‘never played an immersive game in his life’.
For the record, at least Cyberpunk npcs react when you aim a weapon at them by running away screaming, grovelling on their knees or attacking you, they pull out umbrellas in the rain, have more interesting interactions and animations with the world around them.
Being a fanboy isn’t a good look kid, if you’re gonna circle jerk at least use something good as an example. Starfield is about as immersive as oblivion was back when it launched twenty years ago. Considering it’s still using the same engine, that’s pretty sad.
@@rileyboy10 I never said starfield was immersive lmao. It's funny how cyberpunk fanboys need a worse game to point to 🤣 cope
Cyberpunk 2077 is golden now. On XSX. Playing on Ray Tracing quality mode is so much better now. Absolutely no need for performance mode now on XSX.
For how long it took them to make Starfield, I'm incredibly disappointed with the seemingly little innovation. It just feels like another space game that could have come out 10 years ago =(
The space game that came out roughly ten years ago is Mass Effect 3.
Cyberpunk suffered from being ambitions and rushed, Starfield suffers from being dragged out and not ambitious enough.
i agree with this for cyberpunk at at launch but now with it being polished its my favourite game ever
Ok now show cyberpunk at launch
The city hasn’t changed since launch
graphics are almost the exact same as launch graphics if you were playing on ps5/pc back then
Only problem with launch cyberpunk was insane bugs, which are like almost all fixed now. Game is insanely good rn
oh oh, gay starfield fan detected!!!
This game was always good
someone in chat : "editor about to make a clip".
So true 😂
Funny how people forgot how Cyberpunk was at launch, it took 3 years for CDPR to fix that game I'm happy it's were it should be right now but i can't compare it to Starfield at least i was able to put in over 80 hours into Starfield with minimal bugs Cyberpunk was unplayable for me at the time.
@p.cameron1588 lol got me there no multiplayer yet and I remember we were supposed to have different and unique starting stories like a corpo story instead you end up being a street kid no matter what you picked at the beginning.
Neon has a better noir flair due to the shaders, but it doesn't look better then Cyberpunk 2077. Cyberpunk did go the more lively road with their aesthetic. It's also more realistic imo, because even if the cyberpunk genre is influenced by film noir and brutalist achitecture, it doesn't exist only in night time and even tho corporations don't give a damn about the people, they still do cater to them and with that in mind a corp. City doesn't need to look unwelcoming.
Night city to me is like a beautiful, extravagant, but dead environment. There’s nothing that keeps you on your toes when exploring. To be fair, starfield is the same, besides the occasional space encounter. Random events are heavily underrated
Nothing to keep you in your toes? lol Play 2.0 man. And even before there was a lot to do, just was missing dynamic events and now so many stuff has been added to make the game more alive.
Dude make side gigs. They're so good to creating a living city atmosphere
@@astrojeet I’ll have to give it another try once I build my pc
I disagree, Night city doesn't feel dead at all. Especially after the 2.0 update, you'll see npc's having conversations, taking photos, having a smoke, playing cards, etc.
There's always gang wars that you can encounter and ncpd police chases. The game's world feels alive and semi-realistic and is so much better than the mess we got at launch.
@@Badookum 2.0 definitely makes it feel more immersive
Can't wait till 2026 when Starfield is the same piece of shit and the apologists no longer have the argument of "It took them 3 years to fix Cyberpunk"
No,but I unironically love Night City. It can get repetitive,however,just the ambiance,the sound cues,the way you feel driving down Japantown on your brand new Arch Nazaré,listening to Chet Baker *IS* godlike. I`m actually putting off completing the main quest so I can play it when Phantom Liberty releases.
One doesn't typically drive "in" a motorcycle, lol
Like CohhCarnage commitment to the greenscreen. Full-on weatherman production with pointing at stuff that makes sense from our POV.
Remember 2077 release? Atleast starfield isn't buggy AF like that lmao. Keanu Reeves literally T-Posing while sprinting
Now is now, and now, as a consumer and gamer, you have choice between today CP and today Starfield. Remember how No Man's Sky was broken on release? It's just crazy people doesn't consider this when they prefer to play NMS or CP2077 than Starfield.
@firion666 It's a three year old game, most people who are interested already tried it. I personally bounced off the game three times already while wanting it to be good.
@@Low_Tier_Jamal "most people who are interested already tried it" Oh yeah, cause it's not like a DLC is coming in a couple of days, which will drive in new players who haven't tried it before lmao.
The zoom in when he said "Bald" this editor I can't.
After playing the most recent updated with all the DLSS and Pathtracing cranked up to the max.
You can't convince me that there is a better looking world than CP2077's.
It looks amazing, the people look realistic and damn near everything reacts or is interactable in some way.
Gameplay was a 7 at launch but easy 8-9 now.
Started well, graphics do look nice, went completely astray when you start hallucinating about "everything reacts and is interactable". Most street interactions are an NPC throwing you a canned line, clicking a vending machine, or looking at one of the 500 locked doors around the city.
@@Tripnotik25 Yeah, don't know where he got that. They literally didn't change that part of the game lol
CDPR is so good at marketing people are now thirsting over them delivering 50% of what they promised on launch.
@@felipecouto1102 get with the times old man, the game is different. maybe if you stop living in the past where we all know cp2077 dropped the ball, maybe you would have a positive perspective on life. cp2077 with the recent phantom liberty overhaul (yes overhaul every system got revamped) is an easy 9/10 maybe a 10/10 game.
@@Tripnotik25 Better than NPC not reacting at all like in Starfield.
@@doubled99218Jesus, aggressive much? Dude just said the NPCs interaction haven't changed and that's true. CP is a fucking good game now, no one here said otherwise.
Kudos for cdpr team to not ditch the game completely but keep working on it relentlessly.
Cyberpunk is a great game, but I think the comparison Cohh makes here is kinda facile. For one, that exact spot he is standing in is probably the best and most impressive Cyberpunk 2077 looks - that first vertical vista when you leave your block. There's nothing wrong with that, but if you're just going to animatedly point at that vista as evidence of something, I think it behooves me to point out that Starfield can look plenty impressive in lots of places.
Secondly, CP2077 is game that has had years of updates to make it better, after the quality at launch was so legendarily awful that the game actually got REMOVED from the PlayStation store for a while. Something that was pretty much without precedent for such a big game. The game often ran in single digit framerates on some of the platforms they released it on. Tons of features they talked a big game about pre-release were straight up missing, and some of them still are even now.
I actually do think CP2077 in 2023 is definitely the more polished overall game, but the two games are also offering very different experiences beyond the broad basics of "both have guns you use to shoot guys and take place in the future". I certainly don't think CP2077 is in some other league comparatively, and as a disclaimer I've probably put 200 hours in both games on PC.
Starfield has some problems, but the hate boner Asmon's community has for the game continues to baffle me.
It get traffic and clicks. Especially with the Oblivion music in the background, lots of creators make similar videos.
But is that the case? Night city maintains a higher level quality than Starfield's cities no matter where you go. Even in back alleys and random corners of the cities. Starfield's locations look okay, but they are not as aesthetically pleasing or immersive.
"hate boner Asmon's community has for the game continues to baffle me." - Its not a hate boner, because everytime someone says Starfield is a 7/10 game SF fans immediately shoot it down as hate because to them its a 10/10 genre defining masterpiece. SF has mediocre story, awful dialog, shallow exploration and pointless spaceships. Its saving grace is content spread.
At the very least, CP2077 has way better character writing, script, story, visuals. Oh, and you can actually drive in CP, even if its janky.
I don't see any hate. Being honest is not hate, remind yourself of that. Actually playing the game, and rating it a 6/10 is a fairly generous take. I have done that multiple times to other games.