CD made 3 great games prior to Cyberpunk and since when does one review dictate the quality of any given game?

First I would like to know why this review left before the date agreed with the developer. Second, why should I take into account a review of a game that has not received its final patch? Gamespot is playing a dirty game in this case.

Well, it seems that you already had your mind made up that the game would suck no matter what.
reminds me of all the reviewers that already had Days gone painted as a failure at E3 because it was another zombie game with a white male protagonist.

And since you are so eager to have a Gamespot review reflecting your perception of the game I guess that we can discard your review of Tlou2 since the same Gamespot reviewer gave it an 8 versus your perfect score.
I guess you must agree also about Gamespot's review of Spiderman Miles Morales score of 7/10 versus your 9.5 review

And before replying to ppl about patches you should at least read the review
" I played a pre-release build that was updated during the review period, and there's a day-one patch planned as well, "
So nope she didn't play the patched version of the game.

Completely disagree. Many of the reviews are calling it GOTG in scope and ambition. Pretty much all the points taken off are due to performance issues and glitches Personally I couldn't care less about glitches, it is an independent issue and as long as it's plays decently well i'm satisfied.

@ 5by9

its a 20h game that can double up into the 40's range you will only get 100's of hours if you just play it again

Dude, i just looked through your comment history and cant believe you have spent the past 4 hours going from thread to thread bashing Cyberpunk and hailing reviewers as if you've personally played the game and they sung from your heart book.

91 metascore with 44 reviews

Here we go with this BS again.

By Kallie Plagge:

“The incorporation of different cultures and backgrounds is wildly inconsistent, from good to inaccurate to downright offensive“

Make another 700 posts how you don't like the game lol.

did this game insult your family or something lmao

One side will hate the review and cite 91/100 on meta while other will defend the review

Here are some facts

Cd project red haven't allowed sites to review the console version

CDPR have allowed the early reviews to show any of their personally captured gameplay due to the fact many would show bugs and glitches along with good aspects of the game

There is a day zero patched which was released mid way through the review process when other big companies would let the reviewers play with day zero/one patch to review to give fair and honest opinion

The main story is extremely short and with side quests it's 40+ hours max(I rather take a short great game but it is what it is)

Pandemic has hit all game developers hard so working from home and polishing the game along with play testers isn't easy. I think many games that will launch start 2021 will suffers some bugs/glitches unless games are delayed

Is it a bad game absolutely not is it GOTG type game I also don't think so. I am waiting till summer 2021 so I can get a ps5 and hopefully by than they will have a true next generation patch to make it awesome. This game needs gamers feedback so CDPR can improve so I think it's safe to assume it will be a much better game by middle of summer 2021

Reviews are an opinion of one person when that person gives our favorite game a good score we defend them and when they don't we hate on them. Ask yourself this do you want the person reviewing to give you all the pros and cons or just pros and gloss over any bugs and or glitches

They are a small developer,they have slowly increased the scale and production values of their games with every single release. Lack of purpose in the world is a bit concerning but overall you are going to get bugs in a game this size and scale.

Even with GameSpot's review score it is sitting on a 91 at metacritic. In my view that still puts it in line for game of the year.

you are going to have to look elsewhere if you dont' want an agenda driven review, (stay away from polygon, kotaku and this specific gamespot review)

"I found just one message on one of the many computers I logged into that commented on how low-brow Night City culture is. The result is that there's a fetishization of trans people at every turn, in a game with only one very minor trans character (that I found, at least) and no way to play as an authentically trans character yourself."

Have you played this yet?

You don't even realize that the person who wrote this review is full on SJW. I bet you didn't even read the review.

Witcher 1 and 2 being equally great of course....only casual gamers were wholly unaware the entire time.

Casual gamers love love witcher 3. But the rest of us know just how awesome the 1st and second were. Specifically the 1st.

On the hand, I've never been interested in The Witcher series, but this looks amazing to me. I just don't care for medieval themed fantasy games outside of Dragon Age II and Inquisition.

Shit I didn't realise these guys did the only reviews in the world of gaming. Guess the game is shit.

I am so tired of this philosophy that it is OK to declare what is offensive to people, even when the speaker is NOT THOSE PEOPLE. Where does she get off saying what's offensive to them? Does she think they aren't grown-up or intelligent enough to speak for themselves? Does she speak from their perspective? People like this author don't realize that they are low-key exactly that which they claim to abhor. So toxic.

Dammit, and here I though the score was lower because it was not being looked at through the overhype lens. Guess I'll have to find my down to earth reviews elsewhere.

*reviewer writes something i don't agree with about diversity* "SJW!". You lot are the biggest snowflakes.

That one paragraph makes me question the reason why she rated it 7. Was the score due to an agenda she wanted pushed but didn't happen?

Dude, I freaking knew SJWs would be knocking points off for things that trigger them.

Takes guts to post that acronym, I remember when doing so not that long ago would get a comment marked inappropriate at the very least, maybe the mods are lightening up a bit. FYI I agree with you.

This invalidates the entire review.

I think you misspelled BS.

I hope that's sarcasm. How is bringing that up a problem? I'll never understand people with that mentality.

Edit: Though I see that isn't the case. I cannot fathom how discussion about things is a bad thing. It's a part of the game. To some people it is important. To others, it isn't. If that's not something that has a baring on your playthrough, then ignore that section.

People talk about it like anyone who brings it up is looking to feel superior to someone else, or to earn some kind of points from an unseen panel of hipster judges. It's something they noticed during their playthrough, so they are noting it. You probably wouldn't, so you wouldn't. It's weird that people treat every piece of content has to 100% be applicable to them, even if 99% of the rest of that content - in this case the review - is still relevant. And then focus solely on the 1% that isn't applicable to them, but don't recognize the irony in being potentially offended that someone is potentially offended.

The fact that's the only thing you picked out of the whole review to talk about tells me that as much as they care about "social justice", you care more about "anti-social justice". So what makes you any different from her? She expresses her opinion. You express yours. Except people with your opinion tend to simply be "shut up, I don't want to hear your opinion, I'm tired of it", rather than having any real discussion of substance to the topic at hand, or the reason for not wanting to hear about it. "It annoys me because I find it inconvenient" isn't a particularly great justification.

This alone should make the review invalid.
Political ideologies holds no place in video game reviews...at least not in a credible way.

Due to the popularity of gamespot and how metacritic values certain sites more than others. This low review will have probably affected the score way more than it should have otherwise....and so it would probably be standing with a higher score right now.

I am not that excited to the game, I have a lot of concerns for developers choices like fps, calling this an RPG, although it is pure shooter with points and leveling system 'fallout', etc...

But this very precise SJW point of view is very aweful and disgusting. Actually it is very distributing to know that such people exist in the gaming community, or in any. Hope these kind of people focus on hollywood and just do their things their and just use Hollywood to dumb them their with all their nonsense.

Criticize the damn game, you people are fake and non of view criticsized MW2 for that Russia mission, if it other than Russian you would be now crying loud. Such hypocrisy it very pathetic.

Most of the big game review sites are full of fake SJW journalists now and they don't like that CD Project Red isn't pandering to them. Most of the more level headed reviewers on youtube who have played it say it's amazing but full of bugs which will hopefully be fixed with the day one patch.

Honestly I think it's healthy to have some reviewers that are less into a game. If they find something about it they don't like then that may be relevant for others. It's ok to have reviews that stand out from the pack. diversity in opinions means people can better get a sense for what the game is and whether or not it is for them.

Yea I barely ever agree with gamespot reviews. I guess I don't share the same game tastes as most of the reviewers.

The game is full of bugs and shouldn't even be getting 10's and 9's. Just wait until you hear how it is on consoles. There is a reason they haven't sent those out to anyone yet.

Yeah, so far I'm seeing perfect scores and a 9 from ign. Pcmag gave it a 5/10 so these 2 have the lowest scores.

In Opencritic there's a lot of unscored reviews that are not so favorable.