Cyberpunk 2077 cannot be an empty sandbox

+
Cyberpunk 2077 cannot be an empty sandbox

There are many rpgs and sandbox games out there that are only focused on quests. These games have beautiful worlds but they have nothing in it despite its beauty.
Don't get me wrong, quests and story are important just as the graphics of the game's world. But these empty sandbox games have no activities in the open world exploration, and this is where it gets boring to the player.

Is this fun to you? To explore a world only to find some chest at the end of the cavern and then discover that this chest will never be reopened again? Oh you completed that mission? It's over, you'll never do something like that again. And after finishing the main story and the side missions, theres nothing left to do in the world of these games. But the world is entertaining to explore because of its beauty, right? Yes but for a limited amount of time. This lack of activities in the world exploration makes us players not want to explore the game.

Wouldn't it be entertaining to have multiple mini games or activities that could implement the open world exploration in a way that we as players cold immerse in that world?

Wouldn't it be nice to have a never ending system of activities that could let us players do them multiple times? Take the taxi cab in GTA V for instance, you could be a taxi driver forever, and so you could deliver different passengers around the whole city and it would never feel as it was scripted, even though we knew it was, thats because it got variety. It cold get repetitive, but at least it wouldn't be a only in a lifetime experience as most missions are.

Another good example is GTA San Andreas where it was possible for the player to dominate territories for his gang, then after a time the rival gangs would try to take the player's territory back and this all happened during the open world exploration. This kind of activity gives life to the world and Cyberpunk 2077 should be inspired by it.

Most developers these days sell their games based on graphics alone, that's why there are so many dead open worlds out there. Developers instead should be asking themselves: how can we make the players spend a big amount of time exploring our game's world?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lisbeth_Salander;n8463920 said:
Wouldn't it be entertaining to have multiple mini games or activities that could implement the open world exploration in a way that we as players cold immerse in that world?
Absolutely not.
I buy a game because I want to play that game not a bunch of mini-games.
If I want to play mini-games I'll buy a $1 collection of games on Steam.

 
Suhiira;n8463990 said:
I buy a game because I want to play that game not a bunch of mini-games.
If I want to play mini-games I'll buy a $1 collection of games on Steam.

>I don't like X, therefore X is bad.
That's an opinion. Not an argument.


Stop nitpicking my words. I am talking about activities just like GTA V and San Andreas.
These activities are bad? It makes sense why Gwent made a huge fucking success then.
new.jpg
 
Last edited:
Real question is would you want few-er in number, but more relevant/developed side activities or something in style of GTA/Saints Row/Yakuza, large amount of trivial ones?

My take on this...Cyberpunk already has roles which are more "grounded" ( than in most rpgs), real life/social occupations and base activities should be centered around them.

You start as newcomer in NC, improve skills and based on this you can better realize your role, by joining a faction/group.
Each would have it's own set of side activities, more designed around specific roleplaying ( cops would more often use authority for instance)...deal with crime as cop, night life of rockerboys, protect your family as nomad, investigate as media, etc.

Since they lack the same narrative pull as with handcrafted quests, they need to be mechanically "sound"...I loved side activities from Splinter Cell Blacklist for very specific reasons:

- High level of challenge...test player to the limits here. Without it: boredom.
- Worthwhile rewards...unique/expensive implants or equipment.
- Strong focus, short duration...to compensate for lack of character "investment"
- "Open design"...from levels to dynamic of AI interaction, giving more randomization factor to this kind of repetitive experience

Basically, they need to compensate for their simplicity, with a fun/addictive/challenging "factor". Skyrim's or Fallout's were dull, because they lacked all of this.

Outside of this, it's important that random activities through the city feel organic and spontaneous...GTA/SR activities can be fun, but they would feel out of place here.

They've got enough on their plate with core mechanics, so I'd go with focus on quality with more meaningful context through roles and their place in the world.

If they try to please everyone, they'll likely end up with a very shallow game.
 
Last edited:
Lisbeth_Salander;n8464110 said:
>I don't like X, therefore X is bad.
That's an opinion. Not an argument.


Stop nitpicking my words. I am talking about activities just like GTA V and San Andreas.
These activities are bad? It makes sense why Gwent made a huge fucking success then.

Tone. Attitude. Chill, please.

Attack (courteously) someone else's "opinion" or "argument", not your definition of it. That just goes south fast.
 
Make these whole and you win.




No, seriously. These two games cover p.much everything for an open-world sandbox gameplay needed to not suck. Barring animation excellence, but in 2017 there shouldn't be any problems with that and it's not gameplay-related.
 
Last edited:
Lisbeth_Salander;n8464110 said:
That's an opinion. Not an argument.
Everyone's opinion is equally (in)valid, mine ... and yours.


Zagor-Te-Nay;n8464310 said:
My take on this...Cyberpunk already has roles which are more "grounded" ( than in most rpgs), real life/social occupations and base activities should be centered around them.

Since they lack the same narrative pull as with handcrafted quests, they need to be mechanically "sound"...<clip>

Outside of this, it's important that random activities through the city feel organic and spontaneous...GTA/SR activities can be fun, but they would feel out of place here.
Gwent worked (and worked well) in W3 because it was a non essential (unlike Skyrim/Fallouts lock picking minigame) activity that made sense in the context of the game. You start out with a social activity at a tavern, and if you choose to pursue it you eventually wind up with a high stakes game. It doesn't intrude on the primary game, it supplements it.

I was fine with the multitude of minigames in Saints Row 4 because the entire game was an over-the-top ludicrous parody you couldn't take even as seriously as Mario rescuing Princess Daisy.

But in CP2077?

Only if a minigame somehow "fit" within the games context like Gwent did, AND was non essential, or directly related to and "sensible" within the play of the game. CP2077 will have hacking ... but the hacking minigame in Fallout is bad ... and Shadowrun was even worse.
 
Last edited:
Suhiira;n8464800 said:
Everyone's opinion is equally (in)valid, mine ... and yours.

See? This is what I mean. Non-constructive verbal gunfights which lead to bad feelings. Stoppit!
 
I hope it's not barren. That would be a disappointment, I want the city to be filled with citizens, and buildings that you can go into.
 
The world will also have to feel vibrant, place the players would want to inhabit.
Think that was one of biggest disappointments with Fallout IV and why it didn't have as much boom as their last game.
Skyrim had several major, visually distinctive cities, different climates and plenty of one note funny meme npc's, Commonwealth was barren, lifeless and simply ugly.
Think it's a good choice they went with Our world will not be dark and hopeless approach. Opressive, one note ambiance would get dull, fast...life fast, with style and every day like it's your last, it may as well be. :p
There could also be npc activities that other npcs would initiate, that based on your role, you could take a different place in. Techno party in the open...cop prevents riot, fixer selling illegal contraband, rockerboy takes the spotlight and rallies the crowd, etc.
 
Suhiira;n8464800 said:
Only if a minigame somehow "fit" within the games context like Gwent did, AND was non essential, or directly related to and "sensible" within the play of the game. CP2077 will have hacking ... but the hacking minigame in Fallout is bad ... and Shadowrun was even worse.

The two examples I made, one was the gang's system in San Andreas and the other was the taxi cab in GTA V. Both were non essential. If you had actually read my original post or played both games I mentioned, you would have known that.

Suhiira;n8464800 said:
Everyone's opinion is equally (in)valid, mine ... and yours.
I made actual coherent arguments unlike your first post in this thread.

Suhiira;n8464800 said:
Only if a minigame somehow "fit" within the games context like Gwent did, AND was non essential, or directly related to and "sensible" within the play of the game. CP2077 will have hacking ... but the hacking minigame in Fallout is bad ... and Shadowrun was even worse.

Where is that person who said that Cyberpunk 2077 should absolutely have no activities, I wonder? They should fit into the game just like Zagor-Te-Nay said. Yakuza is another great example.

Michał Kiciński said that the next step for CDPR with Cyberpunk is economical growth, not to mention the fact that he said in an interview that CDPR will be more like Rockstar regarding gaming development, in other words that CDPR will focus in developing 1 game at a time. But I wonder if they'd get some characteristics from Rockstar games, activities by instance.

Before you guys freak out, I'm not saying CDPR should focus only on casual gamers to gain money. I'm saying they should focus on both casual and hardcore gamers (this is possible by the way). I'm also not saying Cyberpunk should be a copy of GTA, but it should be inspired by SOME of its characteristics while still being a true rpg.

If CDPR really wants economical growth they should be inspired by Rockstar because GTA V sold over 70 million copies.
 
Last edited:
Whether some people like it not, this game has to be attractive to TES/GTA audience...they're investing a lot into this, and that's one crazy gamble for a new IP from a developer that only just recently made a name for themselves.
And for all their flaws, the reason for popularity of both, is their world simulation experience...they pull you into their world like no other and make you it's resident( Witcher was great, but you were only "passing through").
Now, I don't believe in simplistic stereotyping ( popular equals "dumbed down"), espec concerning rpgs, so I think it's entirely possible to design 2077 as game with roleplaying/gameplay complexity at it's roots, but making them more accessible to wider audience.
UI design should be very organized, allow very clear, easy to follow information, and effects of stats/skills/etc should be logical and transparent. Also get rid of all the +x% fluff...in loot, rpg progression, weapons/armor variety, customization...focus on quality instead of pointless bloat.
Extensive difficulty customization ( better than easy/normal/hard...let player customize parameters) and added "hardcore" mode, would go a long way as well.
 
Zagor-Te-Nay;n8468300 said:
Now, I don't believe in simplistic stereotyping ( popular equals "dumbed down"), espec concerning rpgs, so I think it's entirely possible to design 2077 as game with roleplaying/gameplay complexity at it's roots, but making them more accessible to wider audience.

Michał Kiciński (CDPR Co-Founder) said just this:

"I am convinced that Cyberpunk 2077 may be a much greater commercial success than The Witcher 3. The Futuristic world of Cyberpunk is closer to what we know from everyday life. It is also increasingly popular as evidenced of the phenomenon’s presence in a number of films, books, comics and games. You have to remember that fantasy, is a niche topic.

I think it’s absolutely realistic. “The Witcher” was a fantastic material for a game, but it also constraint us. For startes, we’re working with a story set in a fantasy world. Secondary, we’re promoting a brand, that was mainly known in Central-Eastern Europe, and not in the west.

I’m confident, that Cyberpunk 2077 can be a much bigger commercial success than “The Witcher 3”.

I believe, that in case of Cyberpunk, CD Projekt can fight not only for prestigious awards and accolades, but also for a huge commercial success. It’s hard to achieve both of those in our industry, but it’s perfectly doable, as shown by Rockstar and, in the past, Blizzard."
 
Last edited:
Zagor-Te-Nay;n8468300 said:
Whether some people like it not, this game has to be attractive to TES/GTA audience...they're investing a lot into this, and that's one crazy gamble for a new IP from a developer that only just recently made a name for themselves.

Ah, this argument. "Do it like the others, if you want to win."

Is that how Witcher 2 did so well? And Witcher 3? I don't think so. Interestingly, one of Witcher 3's biggest flaws was a classic open-world blandness - the POIs of pointlessness.

You may have been "passing through" in Witcher. For me and everyone else I know who played the games -everyone- they were much more immersive than either TES "Have you thought of joining the College of Winterhold" or Rockstar's Killing Spree City games of little to no actual consequences.

In the Witcher series, the choices I made, big to small, mattered. I was very much in a responsive world, being a denizen of that world. Not just being Me with a Gun or Magics.

And it was Witcher 2 that made a name for them. Witcher 3 took them into the top level of gaming companies in terms of sales, fame and awards, but they got so much coverage because Witcher 2 did so well.

No, I think CDPR will try to make the game attractive by following the design principles laid down in Witchers 1-3: Good writing, great plot, interesting characters, fun gameplay, exciting combat, freedom of choice and consequences thereof, excellent graphics and sound.

If the GTA/TES crowd likes that, great. If not, well, CDPR isn't trying to become Rockstar or Bethesda. They are already CDPR.





 
Sardukhar;n8468450 said:
You may have been "passing through" in Witcher. For me and everyone else I know who played the games -everyone- they were much more immersive than either TES "Have you thought of joining the College of Winterhold" or Rockstar's Killing Spree City games of little to no actual consequences.
In the Witcher series, the choices I made, big to small, mattered. I was very much in a responsive world, being a denizen of that world. Not just being Me with a Gun or Magics.

I wasn't referring to quality of world design, but how it's narrative structure and gameplay was related to it. If they're going for sandbox experience, they cannot design them without taking it into account.

Sardukhar;n8468450 said:
No, I think CDPR will try to make the game attractive by following the design principles laid down in Witchers 1-3: Good writing, great plot, interesting characters, fun gameplay, exciting combat, freedom of choice and consequences thereof, excellent graphics and sound.
If the GTA/TES crowd likes that, great. If not, well, CDPR isn't trying to become Rockstar or Bethesda. They are already CDPR.

But, they're designing this based on some design principles of those games...they're not doing Witcher 2077( And they openly stated, Witcher 3 took a lot of cues from RDR).
And Bethesda/Rockstar have practically decades of experience on working of that kind of type of game, while this is their first attempt...on so many things, besides "just" sandbox: classic rpg mechanics, skills, stealth, multiplayer, traffic, etc, etc...it's a long list.
Innovate, but don't ignore mistakes and lessons from your peers...it's not so simple as "we'll do things our way" ( for example success of Dark Souls series spawned a new subgenre recently, but not many realize how much it was inspired by cult classic Severance...games do not exist in a vacuum)
Especially considering massive scope of the game...Witcher III was build over the experience of years of what they learned from it's predecessors, this is whole new territory.

 
Zagor-Te-Nay;n8468630 said:
But, they're designing this based on some design principles of those games

Are they?

Zagor-Te-Nay;n8468630 said:
they're not doing Witcher 2077

I certainly hope they aren't doing a TES 2077 or GTA 2077 either.

--------------------

There's no requirement to copy design from neither Bethesda nor Rockstar (or even themselves -- with Witcher in mind). The realization of CP2020 (+57 years) in a computer environment is what they need to do. And there are many ways of doing so that has little to nothing to do with TES or GTA (outside visual similiarities).
 
Last edited:
I think people are overblowing the argument.. The Op in the and suggested something akin my No Movie Set Open World aka thread...

If people want see side activities... Why not?... if it complement the setting the game is based on.. Why not?....A lot and a lot of people have the word Sandbox when they really are not... In fact those title are just wide huge open areas mostly with 2-3 activities...

Ever played the recent updates of kenshi?...
Well kenshi is based mostly on survival but has a progression similiar to and old school rpg... an Huge open world but also don't restrain you how you play it...

You can be a thief... you could run a carovan and trade around the settlements... be a bandit, a murderer a researcher a farmer almost evrything you wish... Is your character and you have the freedoom to enjoy what a radiant open world has to offer...

Now you take GTAV huge fancy super map BUT..... Tennis..Yoga...Racing...And some exploring abilities... The progression of the game is pretty Linear... missions can't be ended in different manner you can for heist chose how to do preparations or make the plan... But even there what you do is watch custscene shot...drive away... You are not actually climbing down from an helo inside a rope smashing the glass with your boots to penetrate in the building... is just interactive cutscenes and this is not a Sandbox or an Open world....

I think a Cab like content for cyberpunk 2077 has sense....also... more feature....

And please don't tell me the GWENT were complementing witcher 3 when was an activity totally out of context and character... And almost forced on you on many dialogue... Dice poker from witcher 1 or 2 was contextual..
 
Sardukhar;n8468450 said:
If the GTA/TES crowd likes that, great. If not, well, CDPR isn't trying to become Rockstar or Bethesda. They are already CDPR.
Or let's at least hope to hell they're not.

Adding something to a game just because another game that sold well has it doesn't strike me as good game development, in fact quite the opposite. A good part of what makes CDPR games what they are is NOT following trends but CDPR doing it's own thing. Many claim RPGs are dead, yet here we see a set of games (W1, 2, & 3) that feature more RPG elements then other recently released popular games have, and it's done quite well ... in large part because they're not the same as those recent offerings.

Will CP2077 get everything right?
Of course not.
Will it appeal to everyone?
Of course not.

But, it will (we trust) appeal to fans of CDPRs other games. Adding elements (like minigames ... or anything else) just because some fraction of the potential audience likes them is not smart game development.
 
Last edited:
Mebrilia;n8468670 said:
And please don't tell me the GWENT were complementing witcher 3 when was an activity totally out of context and character... And almost forced on you on many dialogue... Dice poker from witcher 1 or 2 was contextual..

Yes I was. I loved the dice game, but it was too dependent of luck to win. Gwent also needs luck to win, but it needs less luck and it is less linear than the dice game. That's why it's succeding.
CDPR shouldn't have removed the Dice game. We should have had both the Dice game and Gwent in Witcher 3.
 
I missed the dice game.

It was suitably primitive. All you needed was dice and a board. Fancy collectible cards? Didn't seem very road-worthy to me.
 
Top Bottom