E3 2019 & post-E3 2019 - Media News & Previews

[Snowflakez]

A lot of journalists keep saying that last year's demo didn't feel like an actual product, but this does. I don't understand that. They never specify what they mean.

Do they mean the visuals? If so, I think the game actually looks better now than it did last year -- the weird washed-out colors, occasional blurry textures, and rubber-y surfaces appear to be gone. Either way, it takes place in a completely different part of the city with far few people milling about and far few massive neon skyscrapers to gaze up at.

If they mean the gameplay, we actually didn't see much of that in last year's demo, either, so again, no idea what they're referring to. Compared to what we saw last year, what we're hearing about now seems like a straight upgrade in almost every sense; even for some of the hardcore RPG fans here (compared to last year's "no visible RPG impact on anything whatsoever," we now have much more of that).

 

[Garrison72]

A lot of journalists keep saying that last year's demo didn't feel like an actual product, but this does. I don't understand that. They never specify what they mean.

Do they mean the visuals? If so, I think the game actually looks better now than it did last year -- the weird washed-out colors, occasional blurry textures, and rubber-y surfaces appear to be gone. Either way, it takes place in a completely different part of the city with far few people milling about and far few massive neon skyscrapers to gaze up at.

If they mean the gameplay, we actually didn't see much of that in last year's demo, either, so again, no idea what they're referring to. Compared to what we saw last year, what we're hearing about now seems like a straight upgrade in almost every sense; even for some of the hardcore RPG fans here (compared to last year's "no visible RPG impact on anything whatsoever," we now have much more of that).

The last demo hinted at many things but didn't explain. It was a shallow dip into the game. This year it sounds like the systems under the hood were finally explained. Visually, I might disagree with you. Last year's demo had a level of fidelity I don't see right now, but I have to see more to really judge.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

A lot of journalists keep saying that last year's demo didn't feel like an actual product, but this does. I don't understand that. They never specify what they mean.

Do they mean the visuals? If so, I think the game actually looks better now than it did last year -- the weird washed-out colors, occasional blurry textures, and rubber-y surfaces appear to be gone. Either way, it takes place in a completely different part of the city with far few people milling about and far few massive neon skyscrapers to gaze up at.

If they mean the gameplay, we actually didn't see much of that in last year's demo, either, so again, no idea what they're referring to. Compared to what we saw last year, what we're hearing about now seems like a straight upgrade in almost every sense; even for some of the hardcore RPG fans here (compared to last year's "no visible RPG impact on anything whatsoever," we now have much more of that).

They meant that old demo was really "choreographed", very scripted, while this one looked like a real "in development game" with crashes, bugs, glitches, stupid AI with enemies running in front of tables, stuff like that. That's what I've heard.

 

[gregski]

What do you mean still being questioned, and why is that unfortunate?

If I wasn't clear - combat is again said to be lacking, which is unfortunate considering how important it will be in CP2077. Not too much time left to polish things.

A lot of journalists keep saying that last year's demo didn't feel like an actual product, but this does. I don't understand that. They never specify what they mean.

I think a lot of it comes from the fact that people were just shocked and astounded by the first proper look at a misterious game that was in development for 6 years and noone every saw it. Plus, all the hype and expectations that were created after TW3.

This year, there was no such shock value as people already saw the game. Previous demo was rather scripted, without any details on how the game actually works. This year CDPR focus more on the game's core systems & mechanics, with the novelty factor obviously missing.

 

[Snowflakez]

If I wasn't clear - combat is again said to be lacking, which is unfortunate considering how important it will be in CP2077. Not too much time left to polish things.



I think a lot of it comes from the fact that people were just shocked and astounded by the first proper look at a misterious game that was in development for 6 years and noone every saw it. Plus, all the hype and expectations that were created after TW3.

This year, there was no such shock value as people already saw the game. Previous demo was rather scripted, without any details on how the game actually works. This year CDPR focus more on the game's core systems & mechanics, with the novelty factor obviously missing.

I'm amazed that they haven't managed to "fix" the combat in a year of development. If they still don't have it polished up by release, that'll be two years without it being better. That would be unfortunate.

Guess we'll see! Maybe they'll touch it up for the next public demo, or maybe that's too little time...

 

[xxTotexx]

If I wasn't clear - combat is again said to be lacking, which is unfortunate considering how important it will be in CP2077. Not too much time left to polish things.

Combat isn't really that important to me. I think they're more focused on the story and characters which is a big relief. I enjoyed the combat system in TW3 so I'm sure it's not that bad. I feel like the majority of people huffing and puffing about combat are more into action games than RPGs.

 

[CyberBrett]

I might be the only one but i had no real problem with the combat in the first demo.

 

[xxTotexx]

I might be the only one but i had no real problem with the combat in the first demo.

Same!

 

[Sardukhar]

I might be the only one but i had no real problem with the combat in the first demo.

You aren't the only one. My only issue with the combat was too-spongey enemies for 9mm hits and little to no armour or cyberware, especially with head hits. But that's remedied with diff settings.

Other wise I found the gunfights pretty fun-looking.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

You aren't the only one. My only issue with the combat was too-spongey enemies for 9mm hits and little to no armour or cyberware, especially with head hits. But that's remedied with diff settings.

Other wise I found the gunfights pretty fun-looking.

I agree with you (and bullet sponges are one of the things I hate the most in videogames as a whole, I consider them one of the laziest game design), the problem is that journalists say that this time shooting looked worse than the old one. The old one had a very good looking shooting, not perfect, but I'd be very happy with that.

 

[Snowflakez]

You aren't the only one. My only issue with the combat was too-spongey enemies for 9mm hits and little to no armour or cyberware, especially with head hits. But that's remedied with diff settings.

Other wise I found the gunfights pretty fun-looking.

I thought the pistol animations were a bit janky, but that's probably due to it being early footage. Some of the transitions were too abrupt.

Out of curiosity, how exactly do you think difficulty levels will fix that? Do you mean turning it down? That would certainly make enemies easier to kill, but then the player will become godlike. If you mean turning it up, AFAIK, devs have given us no indication of any "realism" mode where both the player and enemies die faster, so I'm expecting hard difficulties to be just as it was in TW3: tougher enemies with bigger health pools, with no in-game justification for it.

EDIT: Said "bullet sponges" when I meant difficulty levels. Oopsie.

 

[Sardukhar]

so I'm expecting hard difficulties to be just as it was in TW3: tougher enemies with bigger health pools, with no in-game justification for it.

Lower diff - easier enemies to kill.

"godlike" isn't really too much of an issue for me. As FNFF says, "win every encounter (you only get to lose once)".

Game too easy? Just don't die. Ever. hey, now it's like 2020!

Devs haven't said anything about diff modes at all, so we'll have to see about a realism mode.

 

[Snowflakez]

Lower diff - easier enemies to kill.

"godlike" isn't really too much of an issue for me. As FNFF says, "win every encounter (you only get to lose once)".

Game too easy? Just don't die. Ever. hey, now it's like 2020!

Devs haven't said anything about diff modes at all, so we'll have to see about a realism mode.

Gotcha. Appreciate the clarification.

I think it's far from an ideal solution, personally. I like the risk. I like being able to die (very curious how this "immortality" chip will function). Guess we'll have to see.

Worst case scenario, it shouldn't be too difficult to create or find a mod (even without excellent support) that "unlevels" enemies, or at least balances the game in such a way that there's always a risk posed to both sides. Should just be a bunch of number edits, really.

I'll be looking forward to future interviews where perhaps this idea (a 'realism' mode) can be passed along or asked about.

 

[Sardukhar]

Worst case scenario, it shouldn't be too difficult to create or find a mod (even without excellent support) that "unlevels" enemies, or at least balances the game in such a way that there's always a risk posed to both sides. Should just be a bunch of number edits, really.

I think this is super duper extra likely to happen. Near-certainty, in fact.

As an in-between, if it's too easy, just save every 6 hours. Then you can risk death and not lose your whole save. Which I admit is kind of tedious. Plus CRPGs are a leeeeetle gitchy and unlike an actual GM, can't adjust very well on the fly.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I'm amazed that they haven't managed to "fix" the combat in a year of development. If they still don't have it polished up by release, that'll be two years without it being better.

It will never be polished or fixed, if they aim at the dead center of the spectrum between FPS and RPG mechanics, and don’t clearly lean towards one or another.

Depending of course on what one might understand with those words. Certain amount of clumsiness, for example, is a given with RPG mechanics (is it then unpolished and unfixed, one might ask).

 

[Snowflakez]

It will never be polished or fixed, if they aim at the dead center of the spectrum between FPS and RPG mechanics, and don’t clearly lean towards one or another.

Depending of course on what one might understand with those words. Certain amount of clumsiness, for example, is a given with RPG mechanics (is it then unpolished and unfixed, one might ask).

Yeah, I should have clarified.

When I say fix combat, I mean make the weapons have proper impact in terms of animations (I know this is not something you are too bothered by) and sound.

I'm going purely based on heresay, of course. I have not seen the new version of combat for myself, and thus cannot say with any real certainty that it hasn't been improved. It's just an assumption based on pretty widespread reports from both "lul GAME JURNALIZTZ" and actual gamers, who happen to also be youtubers.

 

[MauricioMM]

At this point I'd rather wait for the next gameplay video not only because I can't tell how much I'd enjoy the game's different mechanics from other people's observations and opinions but also because I want to see other things journos and youtubers didn't, or couldn't, sufficiently describe yet, like the atmosphere, art direction, graphic fidelity and UI.

I guess I'm more eager at the moment to see the current artistic/design/visual aspects of the game than other things. What little combat I saw in the 2018 demo looked fine for me, nothing extraordinary but competent and fun enough, at least way more than any other FPRPG I've ever seen, and skill/background checks are confirmed so I'm alright with those things, especially if they manage to improve them sometime before I start playing the game.

My curiosity about techie and net mechanics still remains but I don't want to spoil myself too much about them. I'd love to have more than a sneak peek at the other districts, though. And a "sneak listen" at the music as well.

Even so, at the risk of raising my expectations too much, so far it sounds like the Fallout: New Vegas and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided I wanted F:NV and DX:MD to be

 

[Gwydden]

I'm amazed that they haven't managed to "fix" the combat in a year of development. If they still don't have it polished up by release, that'll be two years without it being better. That would be unfortunate.

Guess we'll see! Maybe they'll touch it up for the next public demo, or maybe that's too little time...

I feel vindicated. I have always fully expected the game's combat to impress no one despite CDPR's efforts. You'd be hard pressed to find any story-driven RPG with good combat, and CDPR has never been an exception. TW series were, even at their best, mediocre hack-and-slash games.

Which is fine by me. Combat isn't really the point of combat in most RPGs. It's about 1. how you prepare for it and getting to see your character build in action, 2. what you get out of it, be that XP, loot, or story bits, and 3. providing context and pacing for the narrative. I think the expectation that Cyberpunk 2077 has to be a good shooter and/or H&S is just one more instance of the hype taking over, and people thinking the game has to excel at everything (which is odd to me, since, while a good overall package, TW3 excelled at very little).

By the same token, I predict that those hoping for particularly good driving mechanics or a sandbox environment will likewise be disappointed. In my experience, the less systems a game has, the more in-depth they are. But RPGs are, at least in theory, supposed to be founded on player choice and therefore have to provide a variety of systems to mess around with, systems that together are shallower than they'd be in a game built entirely around them.

 

[Snowflakez]

I feel vindicated. I have always fully expected the game's combat to impress no one despite CDPR's efforts. You'd be hard pressed to find any story-driven RPG with good combat, and CDPR has never been an exception. TW series were, even at their best, mediocre hack-and-slash games.

Which is fine by me. Combat isn't really the point of combat in most RPGs. It's about 1. how you prepare for it and getting to see your character build in action, 2. what you get out of it, be that XP, loot, or story bits, and 3. providing context and pacing for the narrative. I think the expectation that Cyberpunk 2077 has to be a good shooter and/or H&S is just one more instance of the hype taking over, and people thinking the game has to excel at everything (which is odd to me, since, while a good overall package, TW3 excelled at very little).

By the same token, I predict that those hoping for particularly good driving mechanics or a sandbox environment will likewise be disappointed. In my experience, the less systems a game has, the more in-depth they are. But RPGs are, at least in theory, supposed to be founded on player choice and therefore have to provide a variety of systems to mess around with, systems that together are shallower than they'd be in a game built entirely around them.

Regarding what I'm talking about, the game being an RPG is unfortunately not an excuse. Game development doesn't quite work like that. People whose sole job it is to make the combat animations, for example, are in no way responsible for the RPG mechanics. You can make a sword attack feel like a sword attack, whether it oneshots an enemy or not. Same deal for guns.

What I want is weighty animations (for both the player and enemies) that make the combat feel like it has impact. If CDPR fails at that, it's not because the game's an RPG.

That said, I have no reason to think they will. TW3's animations were all very smooth, in my opinion. Some people criticized them for being frustrating to control, but I never had too many issues with that. Hit reactions weren't perfect, but I never looked at a combat scenario and said to myself "man, that was an awfully-choreographed encounter."

 

[doktor_fleck]

We will see soon how the combat looks like, but I'm not very worried about that. For me the first demo looked good, but with too much HUD clutter. I assume that the combat looks even better now. Even more, I'm kind of hyped a little bit, after hearing about new mechanics, which I haven't seen in other games - using enemies as shields and ripping out turrets to use their guns.