I thought I'd continue my post about Vampyr here so we can get some use out of Scorp's thread
Alright, so I finished Vampyr, and boy I really liked that game. It's honestly not objectively great. I think even the most generous reviewer would struggle to justify an 8/10. Playing on PS4, some of the technical aspects were bad enough to have an effect on my role-playing itself. The city is gorgeous, but every street looks identical, and the loooong load times between areas and baffling lack of any kind of fast-travel system makes it a chore to get around. I often just gave up on any sidequest that involved a trek across the city because I couldn't put up with the schlep. I tried not to kill anyone, but at a certain point I was too underleveled and couldn't stand the minute-long load times after death so I started eating people just to save my patience. I had three hard crashes during my playthrough, and nearly had a heart attack thinking I was about to have a fourth when the post-final-boss cutscene started hitching. Combat is honestly just bad. Just... bad. Mushy dodges, bad hitboxes, unsatisfying weapons; imagine Bloodborne made by French walking-simulator developers, because that's what it is.
But if you're the kind of RPG fan who isn't afraid of a little of that Eurojank, and has a PC to play this on, then I'd still strongly recommend it. There's just so much to love here, so many cool RPG mechanics to dig into, and so many dialogue trees to exhaust. I mentioned I abandoned my no-kill playthrough, and I think I enjoyed the game much better for it because it opened up a whole new world of possibilities for me. Vampyr's 'good' run is actually quite difficult to achieve because of how tightly interwoven all its mechanics are. There's far more to it than just picking up all the nice guy options, and more importantly, the other paths and levels of morality are really interesting to explore in their own right. To lay things out a bit more clearly:
Being a good guy in Vampyr: You just don't eat the guys, right? Ah, but seeing as how that sweet human blood is your main source of XP in this game, you're choosing to play a much more difficult game for which you'll be perpetually underleveled. The plight of the RPG nice guy, amirite? But, furthermore, you'll actually be locking yourself out of certain options amongst NPCs. A few of London's citizens are monsters in their own right, and there are actually positive outcomes to be had by judiciously gnoshing one or two of'em. Certain dialogue options only unlock after a related NPC is killed, and some of the other folks will live better lives out from under the thumb of the bad crowd.
Being a little bit bad, but mostly good: OK, but don't think you're off the hook just because that guy you ate was a serial killer. You also have the overall health of each of the game's four districts to consider. This is a mechanic made a little bit annoying by the game's lack of fast-travel, but basically every citizen in the game can get sick and your job as town doctor is to make your rounds and give them medicine to keep them healthy. Every time you spend that sweet XP you get from chowing down on a bad guy you have to sleep through a day and wake up the next night, but the game's world state will change overnight. People who were sick will get sicker, and people whose significant others you might have chomped will absolutely tank the district's overall morale level. You might have done London a favour by offing that killer, but consider his elderly mother who lived for her son. Can you keep a district healthy with her bringing down the happiness level? Can you justify killer her, too?
Being a big evil vampire in Vampyr: Ah, and here begins the slippery slope. So you've started killing willy nilly; don't think the game's just going to let you get away with it. In biting these people you're enjoying huge chunks of XP, but when you sleep to spend that XP you'll wake up to a drastically declining world, and if you're having too negative an effect on the district you can simply lose it for good. First a citizen or two will simply disappear without your involvement, but if you're really ruthless you can lose an entire district overnight, failing all their sidequests at once, and when you exit your hideout you'll be accosted by all manner of horrible beastie. Hope the game doesn't send you back through that area later in the story... (it will).
If you haven't already guessed, I got a pretty bad ending thanks to getting a little too fang-happy, and this game follows the Witcher 3 method of deciding your comeuppance long before you actually reach the end of a given quest (or, indeed, the entire game) so there's no last minute Quick Load repenting to be done. I actually really like the ending I got, though. Much like its other clear inspiration, them there Souls games, Vampyr has an autosave function running constantly to force you to live with your decisions, and I really respect that. There was one time early in where I feel I wasn't given enough information before I made a choice, and I ended up choosing an option that I hadn't really wanted (these pesky Mass Effect dialogue wheels not telling you exactly what you're going to say before you say it), but apart from that I feel like the game judged me fairly for how I played it and I'm happy to wallow in the muck I ended up in. I'm definitely going to try and get that elusive perfect playthrough on a replay, though.
I really hope Dontnod is able to make a sequel one day, or at least use what they've learnt from this game in another RPG. I wouldn't say they're one of my favourite developers, but between Life is Strange and Vampyr (and I might even add Remember Me if you caught me in a good mood) they're really building an excellent resume.