I didn’t mean aesthetically so much as how vibrant the city feels (and again, I’ve only read about and watched the game). But traffic and pedestrians are far mo

I didn’t mean aesthetically so much as how vibrant the city feels (and again, I’ve only read about and watched the game). But traffic and pedestrians are far more brainless than even Vice City, the city itself is far less interactive or dynamic, and there’s way less opportunity for exciting emergent gameplay. > I found myself often just ignoring the actual gameplay and parkouring around the beautiful city. That’s kind of what I mean - and everyone I’ve watched play Cyberpunk has done the same thing, ignore the quests and abuse the quirky movement system to explore places they aren’t “allowed” by the developers to visit, and admire the pretty views. It does look fun and relaxing - I often dick around like that in open world games. But pretty views and nice models are only part of a good open world. In GTA the act of messing around in the city is real emergent gameplay explicitly supported by the game’s mechanics, and not just an improvised Mirror’s Edge. In GTA you can have an exciting chase across the city, and your actions have real (if transient) consequences for the surrounding cars and pedestrians. GTA’s cities do feel like real cities. The city in Cyberpunk seems like more of a set piece - impressively detailed and engineered, but without a lot of action.