CP2077 Development Confusion

[Draymar23]

CP2077 Development Confusion

As a big fan of Cyberpunk 2020 and CDPR I was understandably hyped for Cyberpunk 2077. In 2016 I was so glad when I heard news of the game entering full development. I then became concerned when I read an article that said that the REDengine 4 needs to be built. Luckily CDPR cleared that up. Over a year later news articles are coming out saying that the engine has only just been built. Not just that but CDPR has just gone into full development. I thought it was already built. Does that mean that no models, textures or assets have been designed? I thought they would be nearing completion by now or at least halfway. It seem that they are only just starting. Unless (and I hope this is the case) that the art/design team has already created the assets and are now importing. Is this possible? If not what the hell is happening?

I'm stumped

 

[Snowflakez]

As a big fan of Cyberpunk 2020 and CDPR I was understandably hyped for Cyberpunk 2077. In 2016 I was so glad when I heard news of the game entering full development. I then became concerned when I read an article that said that the REDengine 4 needs to be built. Luckily CDPR cleared that up. Over a year later news articles are coming out saying that the engine has only just been built. Not just that but CDPR has just gone into full development. I thought it was already built. Does that mean that no models, textures or assets have been designed? I thought they would be nearing completion by now or at least halfway. It seem that they are only just starting. Unless (and I hope this is the case) that the art/design team has already created the assets and are now importing. Is this possible? If not what the hell is happening?

I'm stumped

Just to clarify, the engine will probably never be "complete", at least not in the sense that you're thinking of. What they said is that they have all the major features they want in, in. They have been building the game the entire time, they aren't just now starting or anything like that. Work on the engine happens simultaneously with the rest of game development, including (but not limited to) programming mechanics, creating art assets and animations, concept art, all that other good stuff.

Artists don't just drop what they're doing because the engine isn't feature complete, neither do other non-engine programmers.

In other words, the engine doesn't need to be fully finished just to even begin development on a game.

My current guess, given the info we have so far and CDPR's track record, would be gameplay in early 2018 (Q1 or Q2), followed by a release date announcement in Q3 or Q4 2018, and an actual release in Q1 or Q2 2019. This would fit with their desire to follow the "Bethesda" model and release the game within 6 months after the announcement.

This would also give them time to release DLC for 2077 and still have time to finish up work on another AAA title before 2021 (which is probably already in pre-production with another team), as it says on their company website. The website's release window for both CP2077 and this other AAA RPG are both still golden, as of the most recent info we've been given (last month, I think).

 

[Draymar23]

In other words, the engine doesn't need to be fully finished just to even begin development on a game.

My current guess, given the info we have so far and CDPR's track record, would be gameplay in early 2018 (Q1 or Q2), followed by a release date announcement in Q3 or Q4 2018, and an actual release in Q1 or Q2 2019. This would fit with their desire to follow the "Bethesda" model and release the game within 6 months after the announcement.

This would also give them time to release DLC for 2077 and still have time to finish up work on another AAA title before 2021 (which is probably already in pre-production with another team), as it says on their company website. The website's release window for both CP2077 and this other AAA RPG are both still golden, as of the most recent info we've been given (last month, I think).

That makes sense actually. Now that that is cleared I really do think that 2018 is when when we will hear more. I feel that E3 will be the big reveal with a release date announcement. That would mean that it would be released by Q4 Christmas 2018 (If we are going by the Bethesda 6 month strategy). My guess is that Q1 and Q2 2019 are for potential delays and bug fixing. But anything could happen in my mind. It may be more or less than 6 months. We will see how it goes. But I digress.

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Snowflakez]

That makes sense actually. Now that that is cleared I really do think that 2018 is when when we will hear more. I feel that E3 will be the big reveal with a release date announcement. That would mean that it would be released by Q4 Christmas 2018 (If we are going by the Bethesda 6 month strategy). My guess is that Q1 and Q2 2019 are for potential delays and bug fixing. But anything could happen in my mind. It may be more or less than 6 months. We will see how it goes. But I digress.

Thanks for clearing that up

No problem. I understand your frustration, I've been waiting for this game for ages now. But I truly believe we're finally in the home stretch. They're nearing their company goals, major development milestones are finally behind them, and Gwent is taking off, which will further finance development on their main titles.

Good things are coming!

 

[Draymar23]

No problem. I understand your frustration, I've been waiting for this game for ages now. But I truly believe we're finally in the home stretch. They're nearing their company goals, major development milestones are finally behind them, and Gwent is taking off, which will further finance development on their main titles.

Good things are coming!

Absolutely. I think its safe to say that everybody (including myself) on the forums is frustrated but excited about hearing more on Cyberpunk. CDPR are pretty much the only developers I can fully trust. This is gonna be amazing.

Can't wait!!

 

[BjornTheBandit]

Absolutely. I think its safe to say that everybody (including myself) on the forums is frustrated but excited about hearing more on Cyberpunk. CDPR are pretty much the only developers I can fully trust. This is gonna be amazing.

Can't wait!!

The first rule is to trust NOBODY

 

[Draymar23]

The first rule is to trust NOBODY

Nah... Its not in CDPRs nature to f*** over consumers. I trust in a company until they make a major stuff up. The first time they screw up, I become cautious and stay cautious. But CDPR haven't failed us yet. It also takes a lot to lose complete trust in a company. EA used to be the best, until they kept consistently screwing their consumers. Now look at them. In the end I always keep in mind that good guys can turn bad, but all in all CDPR deserve that level of trust. I won't trust nobody Night City though that's for sure haha

 

[Snowflakez]

Nah... Its not in CDPRs nature to f*** over consumers. I trust in a company until they make a major stuff up. The first time they screw up, I become cautious and stay cautious. But CDPR haven't failed us yet. It also takes a lot to lose complete trust in a company. EA used to be the best, until they kept consistently screwing their consumers. Now look at them. In the end I always keep in mind that good guys can turn bad, but all in all CDPR deserve that level of trust. I won't trust nobody Night City though that's for sure haha

That's basically my philosophy, and it extends towards pre-orders and purchasing deluxe editions of the game. When the "good guys" consistently do it right, I reward them with my pre-order money and extra revenue from me tossing them another $10 for a Gold edition or something. The first time they screw up is the last time I do that, though.

 

[Suhiira]

As much as I want to pre-order CP2077 I'm not going to until I find out if the combat system is pure FPS or not.
Yeah, that's a make-it-or-break-it point for me.

 

[Mefris]

As much as I want to pre-order CP2077 I'm not going to until I find out if the combat system is pure FPS or not.
Yeah, that's a make-it-or-break-it point for me.

But which would you prefer?For it to be pure FPS or not?As for myself,I'll hold off on the pre-order until we have concret information on the classes (or lack thereof).I'll be really disappointed if there isn't a proper class system in the game.

 

[Lisbeth_Salander]

As much as I want to pre-order CP2077 I'm not going to until I find out if the combat system is pure FPS or not.
Yeah, that's a make-it-or-break-it point for me.

It's unlikely for CP2077 to be a 1rst person shooter without 3rd person, but is it likely for it to be just another casual shooter game? Well, Witcher 3 had a methodic combat system, so CP2077 might follow the rule to become a inspireless casual shooter, but remember that Kyle Howley is working in this game, and he made a very nice job with Quantum Break, a game that is a pure shooter, but with lots of innovations.

The great thing Howley and many others at CDPR is that CP2077 willl have a lot of creative freedom. If CDPR get to the point of doing what they want as a team without restrictions, then the chances of us having a brainless shooter is small.

 

[Suhiira]

But which would you prefer?For it to be pure FPS or not?As for myself,I'll hold off on the pre-order until we have concret information on the classes (or lack thereof).I'll be really disappointed if there isn't a proper class system in the game.

Not.
I want an RPG where character, not player, skills matter.

If I play as a Corp who's all business savvy and backstabs I shouldn't be able to hit the broad side of a barn regardless of how skilled or fast with a controller/mouse I as a player am.

 

[sv3672]

As a big fan of Cyberpunk 2020 and CDPR I was understandably hyped for Cyberpunk 2077. In 2016 I was so glad when I heard news of the game entering full development. I then became concerned when I read an article that said that the REDengine 4 needs to be built. Luckily CDPR cleared that up. Over a year later news articles are coming out saying that the engine has only just been built. Not just that but CDPR has just gone into full development. I thought it was already built. Does that mean that no models, textures or assets have been designed? I thought they would be nearing completion by now or at least halfway. It seem that they are only just starting. Unless (and I hope this is the case) that the art/design team has already created the assets and are now importing. Is this possible? If not what the hell is happening?

There is no definitive information, the game may be released as soon as late 2018 (that seems to be the earliest that is not unrealistic, with an E3 announcement), or not before 2020. As Snowflakez already explained, the engine and content can be developed in parallel, and even a partly functional engine is usable for testing in the early stages.

However, at this time I do not know if any voice acting has already been done for CP2077, nor did the game appear on SteamDB yet. For comparison, the total amount of time it took to record all the dialogue in all languages for TW3 was rather long (I do not remember the exact number, but it could have been up to 2 years), and all English voice acting for main quests had to be finished by the alpha version in early 2014. Also, the game was on Steam as (unreleased) app 292030 as early as March 2014. From those, it would look more like 2019-2020, the latter with no voice acting yet. Then again, nothing is really proven because voice actors could be under NDA, and the game GOG exclusive on PC for all we know, or hidden from SteamDB to prevent possible leaks (like it already happened with the release date of Blood and Wine).

Nah... Its not in CDPRs nature to f*** over consumers.

It depends on one's definition of f***ing over consumers, would a "Witcher with guns" game that is otherwise very well made and does not come with things like loot boxes, DRM or unreasonably priced DLC qualify as such? I would expect a game that is liked by most people, but there will obviously be some disappointment, too.

 

[Snowflakez]

It depends on one's definition of f***ing over consumers, would a "Witcher with guns" game that is otherwise very well made and does not come with things like loot boxes, DRM or unreasonably priced DLC qualify as such? I would expect a game that is liked by most people, but there will obviously be some disappointment, too.

I don't think Witcher with guns would be considered fucking over consumers, but it would mean them going back on things they've already promised - core aspects of the game, not extra "take it or leave it" features.

We are supposed to be able to customize our characters and select from a wide variety of classes from the PnP (some of which may or may not translate as well and may be scrapped, such as Rockerboy), whereas in TW3 you were locked to one character - Geralt - for story and continuity reasons.

I would be very disappointed if it was just the Witcher with guns, but I'd probably still play it. I just might not buy it on release. We won't know until we see gameplay.

As a side note, do you know when TW3 appeared on SteamDB, or how far before release it did? Was SteamDB even around at the time? I can't remember.

 

[Snowflakez]

Snip? Did a bunch of posts just disappear? I was in the middle of typing a reply when suddenly it all disappeared. Here it is, anyway.

Not.
I want an RPG where character, not player, skills matter.

If I play as a Corp who's all business savvy and backstabs I shouldn't be able to hit the broad side of a barn regardless of how skilled or fast with a controller/mouse I as a player am.

Why would you think we'd get that, given what we've seen from CDPR with the Witcher 3? Witcher 3's combat was fun, but it was neither RPG-focused or really all that innovative in any way.

Also, when I suggested player skills playing a role in damage and the like, you didn't like that idea either. The thing is, in a video game format, there needs to be some leeway. This is not a turn-based RPG. CP2020's skill system, especially in relation to guns, wouldn't work very well in video game form.

So, what's the alternative?

One possibility is to implement things like weapon jamming and weapon sway at low "weapon handling" skill levels. That would add a lot of interesting elements to the combat, and make it so lethality could still play a huge role for both the player and NPCs. Then, there doesn't need to be any increasing damage or anything of that sort, because there's already a weapon progression system in place (As far as getting better at using guns goes). As you said, you then may not be able to hit anything worth crap if you built your character with piloting, persuasion or stealth in mind.

Here's the problem, though - how can CDPR possibly account for every player build in, say, the main story? There are almost 100% going to be combat and stealth encounters in the main story, for all classes (If people are expecting 5 different class storylines, I think they will be very, very disappointed). In a real PnP situation, or even in the real world, certain "classes" would probably not get into certain situations all that often, but because it's probably going to be a centralized main story, that's going to end up happening sooner or later (probably).

The only way I can see this not being ridiculously unfair for players (I say unfair because certain people will be punished just by virtue of picking a different class, not unfair in the sense that Cyberpunk is hard - because it's supposed to be) is by keeping everyone on a level playing field, which compromises what I suggested above.

It's tough. Any thoughts?

 

[sv3672]

As a side note, do you know when TW3 appeared on SteamDB, or how far before release it did? Was SteamDB even around at the time? I can't remember.

This page on the Wayback Machine is from June 2014, the history shows changes dating back to March 28 2014. and says that the app was published in the database on June 7 (a few days before E3 2014). Not sure if the latter means the game was not publicly visible before then. The full history can be viewed by logging in to SteamDB. The Witcher Trilogy Pack appeared on May 14 2014.

Searching for "cyberpunk" reveals nothing useful, although the practice of not naming any depots, packages or apps after the actual game until it is ready to be announced is recommended to developers even by the SteamDB FAQ.

 

[Snowflakez]

This page on the Wayback Machine is from June 2014, the history shows changes dating back to March 28 2014. and says that the app was published in the database on June 7 (a few days before E3 2014). Not sure if the latter means the game was not publicly visible before then. The full history can be viewed by logging in to SteamDB. The Witcher Trilogy Pack appeared on May 14 2014.

Searching for "cyberpunk" reveals nothing useful, although the practice of not naming any depots, packages or apps after the actual game until it is ready to be announced is recommended to developers even by the SteamDB FAQ.

Interesting, so if we were going to see a hint of the game on SteamDB, it'd probably be around E3 2018 (assuming it was going to be at E3 at all).

 

[Suhiira]

Why would you think we'd get that, given what we've seen from CDPR with the Witcher 3? Witcher 3's combat was fun, but it was neither RPG-focused or really all that innovative in any way.

Also, when I suggested player skills playing a role in damage and the like, you didn't like that idea either. The thing is, in a video game format, there needs to be some leeway. This is not a turn-based RPG. CP2020's skill system, especially in relation to guns, wouldn't work very well in video game form.

So, what's the alternative?

Actually turn-based combat works just fine in a video game format.
Ever hear of X-Com?

The problem (I think) is that many gamers were born and raised on Mario and FPS shooters thus lack any significant background with anything but action games. So they can't imagine any other way to do things. Then there's the whole "modern RPG" thing, action games with a couple superficial RPG elements that many think are "real RPGs".

I "merely" want CP2077 to be a "real RPG" not a shooter with a few RPG mechanics.

Yes ... this is a VERY unpopular stance with many, and we've gone round and round on the subject since day one here in these forums.
That's why I keep pushing for the dual mode system I've proposed. At the start of a new game you can select either "RPG" (character driven) or "Shooter" (player driven) style combat. That way everyone is happy.

The part I totally and completely fail to understand is why the action/shooter fans insist that CP2077 as anything but action/shooter game means it automatically sux to play and is doomed to failure.

####################

Then there's the whole "How to implement weapons" thing.
Which is really the subject under currently under discussion.

Why insist on what's become the standard in action/shooter games? A system where more and more powerful weapons became available thru loot, crafting, or whatever become available as the game progresses. While there are certainly instances where game mechanics must take precedence over "reality" for the sake of gameplay this isn't one of them.

The only way I can see this not being ridiculously unfair for players (I say unfair because certain people will be punished just by virtue of picking a different class, not unfair in the sense that Cyberpunk is hard - because it's supposed to be) is by keeping everyone on a level playing field, which compromises what I suggested above.

It's tough. Any thoughts?

The ONLY way such a system is "unfair" to players is if you look at it from a PvP perspective.
It doesn't matter in the slightest in a PvE game if your character is hopeless/useless in combat as long as there's some other way to accomplish your goals. There's no need for, or reason for, a "level playing field" ... unless you're looking at PvP.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news ... but CP2077 is not going the be a PvP game.

There may ... may ... be some option for multi-player PvP ... but that's not the going to be the focus of the game. Thus PvP considerations should take a distant back seat to RPG ones.

 

[Snowflakez]

There may ... may ... be some option for multi-player PvP ... but that's not the going to be the focus of the game. Thus PvP considerations should take a distant back seat to RPG ones.

You aren't the bearer of bad news. I couldn't give a crap about PvP, and don't even want multiplayer in the game at all. And yes, I know turn-based combat works in video game format, I meant I didn't think it would work in the context of CP2077. I also am not pushing the standard that has become the norm in action/shooter games, quite the opposite.

I can never tell if you are directing your frustrations at me (I'm neither an action/shooter fan nor a multiplayer fan) or at the gaming populace in general. I'm going to assume the latter, because I largely agree with you here, which is why I suggested what I suggested (Weapon handling and the like).

But I think you're missing the point of what I said about it being unfair. It has nothing to do with PvP. Let me explain. It's my fault for failing to articulate my thoughts properly.

• Joe Combat (TM) starts playing CP2077.
• Joe Combat likes combat. He builds his character with an emphasis on gun handling.
• Joe Combat comes across a scripted combat encounter (I.E. unavoidable) in the story.
• Note: This is not a tabletop RPG. In a tabletop RPG, you can improvise and do whatever you can possibly think of in a combat encounter, so it's much more accessible to non-combat oriented players.
• No problem for Joe Combat (TM) because he built his character for it. It may not be easy, but he can pull it off.
• Sarah Hacker (TM) starts playing CP2077.
• Sara Hacker doesn't like combat. She builds her character with an emphasis on hacking.
• Sara Hacker comes across the same scripted combat encounter. Well, shit. In a tabletop scenario, maybe she can run, maybe she can knock stuff over behind her, maybe she can burst through a nearby window to escape, heck maybe she can avoid the situation entirely because that's how her character rolls (though any good DM will put you out of your comfort zone every now and then).
• Sara Hacker cannot do any of those things in a video game - probably.
• Sara Hacker dies. And then she dies again. And again.

This is my concern when I say "unfair to certain characters". It is strictly because of the context of a video game, not that I'm trying to "casualize" the game or make it "PvP oriented". Now, one could argue that such challenges are at the very core of Cyberpunk - and I would agree. After all, why shouldn't a combat-oriented player do well during a combat encounter? Why shouldn't you struggle as a non-combat oriented player in a combat situation?

My problem is that it's not a tailored story. It's not "This is a hacker story with combat encounters", it's not a "combat story so you can tailored challenges (as you would in a PnP)", it's a "one size fits all" story with all kinds of encounters, many of which have absolutely nothing to do with your character.

Of course, this is pure speculation on my part - the only "Evidence" I have for thinking it'll be one story is that it would be incredibly time consuming to make, what, 8? different stories.

Hopefully that made sense.

 

[Suhiira]

I can never tell if you are directing your frustrations at me (I'm neither an action/shooter fan nor a multiplayer fan) or at the gaming populace in general. I'm going to assume the latter, because I largely agree with you here, which is why I suggested what I suggested (Weapon handling and the like).

Actually the "frustration" isn't directed at anyone in particular. But rather the way many people refuse to think outside their narrow, and self-imposed, comfort zone.
I'm "frustrated" with humanity

But I think you're missing the point of what I said about it being unfair. It has nothing to do with PvP. Let me explain. It's my fault for failing to articulate my thoughts properly.

• Joe Combat (TM) starts playing CP2077.
• Joe Combat likes combat. He builds his character with an emphasis on gun handling.
• Joe Combat comes across a scripted combat encounter (I.E. unavoidable) in the story.
• Note: This is not a tabletop RPG. In a tabletop RPG, you can improvise and do whatever you can possibly think of in a combat encounter, so it's much more accessible to non-combat oriented players.
• No problem for Joe Combat (TM) because he built his character for it. It may not be easy, but he can pull it off.
• Sarah Hacker (TM) starts playing CP2077.
• Sara Hacker doesn't like combat. She builds her character with an emphasis on hacking.
• Sara Hacker comes across the same scripted combat encounter. Well, shit. In a tabletop scenario, maybe she can run, maybe she can knock stuff over behind her, maybe she can burst through a nearby window to escape, heck maybe she can avoid the situation entirely because that's how her character rolls (though any good DM will put you out of your comfort zone every now and then).
• Sara Hacker cannot do any of those things in a video game - probably.
• Sara Hacker dies. And then she dies again. And again.

This is my concern when I say "unfair to certain characters". It is strictly because of the context of a video game, not that I'm trying to "casualize" the game or make it "PvP oriented". Now, one could argue that such challenges are at the very core of Cyberpunk - and I would agree. After all, why shouldn't a combat-oriented player do well during a combat encounter? Why shouldn't you struggle as a non-combat oriented player in a combat situation?

What you've described has nothing to do with being "unfair" to players.

It's called bad game design pure and simple.

If you, as an RPG game designer, fail to take into account non combat methods of achieving results in your game you're ... ummm ... Bethesda.

Fallout 1 and 2 were designed with non combat solutions, 3 less so, 4 almost not at all.

Of course, this is pure speculation on my part - the only "Evidence" I have for thinking it'll be one story is that it would be incredibly time consuming to make, what, 8? different stories.

No need for 8 different stories, you only need 8 (probably less) ways to accomplish each mission.

Hopefully that made sense.

Yep, hopefully my reply did as well.