heavy thumbs up.
man i just love him for this words. indeed i do.
heavy thumbs up.
man i just love him for this words. indeed i do.
Please tell me when did they ever say there won't be multiplayer.
You must have heard this from these trashy YouTube channels that just read Reddit, make wild spins on what they think they read which is already someone's elses opinion, instead of actually judging what's being stated officially.
Post automatically merged:
You can always fix it. I doubt it'd take more than 1 developer 1 week of work. This is not serious issue.
So just fix the numbers then? League of Legends makes updates every 2 weeks to balance out the damage, and they got like 150 characters in game and somehow they manage to make every character playable at least on some tier of gameplay.
Make developer fix this? Not have mines in multiplayer? Even with mines not making sound sometimes, I'm sure you can still run the multiplayer.
Pretty sure this issue is in like 1-2 instances you've witnessed? It's a large-large open world and some walls might not have been properly configured for vision? Multiplayer could have far smaller areas with NPC's and easier to test specific walls to be behind.
Doesn't seem that huge issue to me.
Is this talking about some basegen version issues where NPC's just take ages to load the assets to actually move the characters?
Wasn't this fixed for the most part? Maybe some areas if you just rush into there in huge open world, that the assets around you are being loaded and it's preventing loading up enemy AI from memory?
Again, this could be fixed because this is going to be ISOLATED instance just like in the RESCUE mission, where you have everything loaded up in a small box after you take up the elevator.
And with multiplayer, the consoles aren't doing the calculation of what assets to load to AI, it's done by the server, so the consoles will just read the internet packages to interpret what's happening.
Again, you can just not have AI in first multiplayer iteration.
What you described here has barely effected my experience and I've played the game since launch.
This is like saying that you can't have expansion because Panam drove a motorcycle and got stuck in air and some rare instances still do (just hypothetical here). These are 2 completely separate topics.
May I remind we've not had patch for soon to be 4 months, and it'll probably be another 2 months before we see patch 1.5. So to claim that there's no way they can do multiplayer because a specific mod like Sandevistan might be bugged is crazy.
BTW did you know in GTA 5 enemies can see you through walls when aggroed?
Last edited:
Nah I completely get your point.
There's issues to be solved, especially in open world setting, and that some areas aren't properly adjusted, like some cars still might drive through some rail. Some perks might not be working properly and maybe there's something that stops working when something else is triggered in talents and so on. Consoles suffer in loading assets in big open world.
But if you take away the open world aspect of the game, have few people tackling remaining of the talents of cybernetic implants not working properly, there should be enough space to create separate instances of smaller missions or battle arenas.
See how well the game run on PS4 base gen on launch WHEN the game was on isolated instance?
So I don't think there's really that big struggle when it comes to actual performance on these multiplayer instances.
However I do agree that game is unlikely ready for full scale open world multiplayer where you got thousands of people playing on same servers driving around completing missions.
They even stated themselves that they're going to do incremental multiplayer addition, first adding something small and then further improving on that.
Which is utterly baffling considering how easy it is to make money in GTA:O. This whole notion of buying a game because you want to play it and then paying extra so you don't have to play it is just... why?
[...]
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, swapping real money for digital game money is absolutely madness to me too.
But heck, people do it and that's how R* made just shy of $1 billion in 2020
They sure like to get some more EAsy pEAsy lemon squEAzy money even AFTER we buy their games don't they
?
Last edited:
Yeah, swapping real money for digital game money is absolutely madness to me too.
But heck, people do it and that's how R* made just shy of $1 billion in 2020
It's not even that. It's the inherent logic (or lack thereof) that I never understood.
You buy a game because you want to be entertained and then you pay more to have less entertainment. If you say "well I wanna skip the boring parts" then why are you buying a game you find boring?
Blowing people up is fun for like 5 minutes.
Mass Effect 3 (optional microtransactions available to speed up leveling gear and getting consumables) Gears of War, Gears 5 (various methods) Deep Rock Galactic (No microtransactions, fans may buy separate cosmetic DLC kits).
For single player game, well implemented MP can actually generate decent sales of main game + expansions of part of multiplayer content is behind that DLC. ME3 is good example of that. I felt ME3 campaign was very uneven, it had contradicting mechanics and conflicts in which way developers wanted players to experience that game but multiplayer coop was so fun that it was silly and in the end I think there were lot's copies sold for MP alone, many for players who probably never finished story content of single player.
So CDPR has options here, I could think of season pass for MP content allowing access for new cosmetics and maps but really, they could also just go with cosmetic packs I guess. It all really depends if MP content is fun enough to appeal to players. I can see coop scenarios working with CP 2077 for PvP I can't say anything since I haven't had reactions for ages to play those.
They have options, time will tell what they will do.
No I get what you mean, and I see no point in it either.
I play War Thunder and I know some people pump money into it to skip the grind or unlock new vehicles, however, they often turn out to be some of the worst players in the game too. While grinding in a game might be tedious, it does give you time to practice and "git gud" at it too. So Skipping parts just makes you a weaker player overall imo.
But back to CDPR; seeing that R* makes so much money off GTA Online and Shark Cards, its no wonder that CDPR would want to make something similar to make that sort of revenue. No doubt investors would be drooling at the prospect to make that sort of return on an investment too.
Only time will tell, we'll just have to see what they do with it in the end.
That ship has sailed and I think there is no point in going after it. Releasing Multiplayer standalone would make sense 3-6 months after release when you have large active player base "hungry" for it. In CDPR's case, even if they already developed it, it would've been a financial disaster ( with how quickly playerbase, interest in the game, along with their reputation has plummeted). Multiplayer games have a brief window of opportunity where they either take off and become very/lucrative or result into failure. It's incredibly hard/rare to turn it around later on ( in this case ( for CDPR their target MP audience is mostly GTA fans: and they are not exactly "happy" with the game)
I really have no idea where they are going with this. CDPR can add god knows how many multiplayer modes to the game and it won't make any real difference in reception of the game/their reputation.
What will is adding more quality content and massive improvements/additions to rpg and open world systems and mechanics.
It's that simple.
I totally get what you are saying.
The way I see it that there are 2 ways it could go (or could have gone).
1) A stand alone MP version of the game - the would generate more sales from those who buy it. But this has already been scrubbed I believe.
2) A tacked on MP element to the main game - the issue being, how to make money off it? Are people going to really buy a whole game just for the MP element? Sure GTA Online has captured that audience, but that's mainly because GTA V has a fairly good launch, the game worked, and people were overall happy with it. So when the online element got added, people tried it out, and turns out it was so good (to many), some people buy the game just for the online mode.
The issue with tacking an MP element onto CP77 is; there is a lot of negative stigma around the game and CDPR, so how to rangle new players? Because when you look at it, if CDPR wants to tap into the MP market, they are asking people to buy a game that was meant to be a single player game, it has had a bad launch but, "trust us, the MP side of the game is good, please play it. "
So, how do you bring those players into the MP side of the game? Offer new content. Would that content also be available in SP mode too? If not, that's a bit pants imo, GTA Online does this too.
And would they make it hard to earn eddies, so that people want to then buy in game money, just like GTA Online and RDR2 Online?
Either way, I'm not sure who they think they are going to make MP successful. Many players who play CP77 play it because it is a SP game, and just looking at the forums, many do not care about MP. Can CDPR offer something to bring new players in, specifically to make MP worth it? I just don't know :/
It's not just shark cards, GTA 5 is still selling silly amounts of copies in 2021. Their last earning call stated that the game sold 5 MILLION copies in the previous 3 months. That's ridiculous and completely unprecedented for such an old game.
Money printer go BRRRRRR even if shark cards didn't exist.
Money printer go BRRRRRR even if shark cards didn't exist.
I think this is another example of CDPR's management wanting same profit and same success of larger, more experienced companies while overestimating their capabilities and underestimating work and effort required. You simply can't skip a few ( dozen) steps to get there.
With Rockstar this has proven to be a very lucrative combination.
You create a single player experience that gets a lot of players invested into characters and the world. Then, after a few months ( and after they're done with playing through game's content), you release standalone MP where they continue playing in the same world with more freeform and gameplay oriented content, and you're at huge advantage ( next to other online games) as you already start with strong, very invested playerbase.
Bethesda, also makes second most popular open worlds that excell at sense of discovery at adventure (I wouldn't be surprised if they end up doing something similar with Starfield or TESVI).
Problem with CDPR is: their design of open worlds is nowhere near as complex and engaging in terms of systems, interactivity, activities, integration of content into the game, etc.
AI systems are simplistic and very flawed ( police is only one example of it), emergent gameplay and interactivity is lacking, plenty of QoL features are missing, and general approach to design/content is extremely outdated ( 2000's Ubisoft checklist).
So if they want that GTA online success at some point ( probably with a sequel), they need to build a strong Single player open world "framework" first, before they seek to expand it with multiplayer. ( and from what I see at their job listings, they are not hiring people in critical positions they need the most: rpg designers, open world content creators, AI designers, etc)
The game still being sold is a solid bit of revenue for R* and T2, but making over $700 million off Shark Cards according the the below article, is immensely impressive especially since they are effectively selling nothing. People are trading in real money for digital money that has no real world value!!
But they also made over $800 million in the first hours when the game launched which is nuts!
How Much Money Did Rockstar Make From GTA V? 2023
The kind of online games available today have better resolution, clarity, and controls. The makers of the games have been innovating and coming up with
www.dissidences.net
Post automatically merged:
Agreed, and you've sort of hit the nail on the head when it comes to the technical elements of the game imo.
Comparing CP77 to RDR2 for example .. to me RDR2 is far more technically advanced in the AI and physics department.
It's very interesting to read this conversation.
You are discussing monetization in other games and criticise it for being pointless. At the same time you are excited about monetization in Cybrepunk, even though you don't consider buying anything yourself. In your minds it's "gta crowd" who would, for some reason, come in and start making revenue for CDPR... you don't seem to understand why those largely popular games with microtransactions are so largely popular. And why people want to (or rather-- feel like they have to) pay additional real life money to get fictional, purely cosmetic items. Sometimes even consumables that once used-- are gone forever. And you don't understand why, because you yourself don't do it. Simple as.
Cyberpunk online, if it ever comes to be, wont make any money, because its main player base is largely composed of single player gamers who don't like the idea of paying after they already payed. Do you know who I'm talking about when I say "their main player base"? I mean myself, but also you guys, here. We simply don't spend money that way. We want the full experience for the full price and we expect that experience to be of high quality from day one.
I doubt there is many people in these forums willing to pay $70 for standard edition of the game, then additionally $20 to $40 for season pass, and then additional $20 to a $120 for cosmetics. We are simply not that kind of gamers. CDPR wont make a huge money out of us. And we would not pay for something that is obviously full of predatory monetization. If CDPR wants to make huge money out of Cyberpunk multi/online/call it as you wish, they will have to appeal to "gta crowd". And that will automatically make this game unplayable for us. Because GTA crowd might be into games like this. But we are definitely not into games like GTA online. We would complain and move on. Play "our" single player, and leave GTA Crowd to play "inferior" Online.
CDPR already tried to do "the right thing" with optional monetization in Gwent and Witcher Go. Did it make them all the money in the world? No. And its full of optional stuff to buy. Why are you guys not buying it? Because you are not that kind of gamers. And why "That kind of gamers" are not buying them? Because its not the kind of game they would play.
Being supportive is a beautiful thing. Until someone asks you to support them financially. I have a friend who always pirates games. His argument is "I will play it now and decide if its worth the money". Guess how often the game is "worth his money" at release price. But he will play it on release. And maybe, if its mind-blowingly good, he will buy it at 75%off on steam or get for free later down the line from humble bundle and such.
He sees nothing wrong with it. Because in his mind he values his money. At the same time he will complain that "good games with huge potential" always sell less than "cash-grab" games. Well, those underperforming games are targeted to people who "value their money".
You are discussing monetization in other games and criticise it for being pointless. At the same time you are excited about monetization in Cybrepunk, even though you don't consider buying anything yourself. In your minds it's "gta crowd" who would, for some reason, come in and start making revenue for CDPR... you don't seem to understand why those largely popular games with microtransactions are so largely popular. And why people want to (or rather-- feel like they have to) pay additional real life money to get fictional, purely cosmetic items. Sometimes even consumables that once used-- are gone forever. And you don't understand why, because you yourself don't do it. Simple as.
Cyberpunk online, if it ever comes to be, wont make any money, because its main player base is largely composed of single player gamers who don't like the idea of paying after they already payed. Do you know who I'm talking about when I say "their main player base"? I mean myself, but also you guys, here. We simply don't spend money that way. We want the full experience for the full price and we expect that experience to be of high quality from day one.
I doubt there is many people in these forums willing to pay $70 for standard edition of the game, then additionally $20 to $40 for season pass, and then additional $20 to a $120 for cosmetics. We are simply not that kind of gamers. CDPR wont make a huge money out of us. And we would not pay for something that is obviously full of predatory monetization. If CDPR wants to make huge money out of Cyberpunk multi/online/call it as you wish, they will have to appeal to "gta crowd". And that will automatically make this game unplayable for us. Because GTA crowd might be into games like this. But we are definitely not into games like GTA online. We would complain and move on. Play "our" single player, and leave GTA Crowd to play "inferior" Online.
CDPR already tried to do "the right thing" with optional monetization in Gwent and Witcher Go. Did it make them all the money in the world? No. And its full of optional stuff to buy. Why are you guys not buying it? Because you are not that kind of gamers. And why "That kind of gamers" are not buying them? Because its not the kind of game they would play.
Being supportive is a beautiful thing. Until someone asks you to support them financially. I have a friend who always pirates games. His argument is "I will play it now and decide if its worth the money". Guess how often the game is "worth his money" at release price. But he will play it on release. And maybe, if its mind-blowingly good, he will buy it at 75%off on steam or get for free later down the line from humble bundle and such.
He sees nothing wrong with it. Because in his mind he values his money. At the same time he will complain that "good games with huge potential" always sell less than "cash-grab" games. Well, those underperforming games are targeted to people who "value their money".