Multiplayer confirmed

+
so your guess is that the multiplayer mode of cyberpunk 2077 is going to get paid expansions eventually?

No. I said "If i had to guess (and this is a pure guess)". I have no idea what Cyberpunk 2077 multiplayer will be, so i also don't know what the possible monetisation options would be. Is it serverless coop-mode with friends a la Divinity Original Sin 2? Team-based missions ? MMORG ? Simulating the tabletop experience with scenarios and GM ? Just a braindead shooter ? Why would they need to have R&D for that ? So something different maybe ? - We just don't know. But given their general outlook and stance, i expect them to try and be as consumer friendly as possible (but they obviously are no charity -> i don't expect everything for free).
 
Last edited:
Comparing apples to peanuts there, where you could effectively compare CP2077 much better to GTA V from what we've seen. I bet it will be similar to GTA O. Fixers scattered through the city, missions that can be run by a group co op, PvP in the open world or in missions if those occur in the regular instance of the world.

What do you think CP2077 multiplayer would even look like if not that? LOL
I don't know what makes you think that multiplayer is going to be anything like that. Because it's open world and GTAV is open world, therefore it's going to be like GTA Online? What I think will happen is that multiplayer will be released separately from the main game for free (like Enemy Territory was released separately from Return To Castle Wolfenstein, despite being initially planned as a multiplayer mode for that game), so it's going to be more of a F2P game like Gwent. It won't be GTA Online, because their online dedicated development team is just way too small (including the people they are currently hiring, it will be around 40 men) to handle this kind of undertaking, if they want to release multi in reasonable window after base Cyberpunk 2077. The most we can count on is some kind of social hub between missions/battles/whatever they are planning.
 
I don't know what makes you think that multiplayer is going to be anything like that. Because it's open world and GTAV is open world, therefore it's going to be like GTA Online? What I think will happen is that multiplayer will be released separately from the main game for free (like Enemy Territory was released separately from Return To Castle Wolfenstein, despite being initially planned as a multiplayer mode for that game), so it's going to be more of a F2P game like Gwent. It won't be GTA Online, because their online dedicated development team is just way too small (including the people they are currently hiring, it will be around 40 men) to handle this kind of undertaking, if they want to release multi in reasonable window after base Cyberpunk 2077. The most we can count on is some kind of social hub between missions/battles/whatever they are planning.
Because it's a shooter with contracts, missions, minigames, and driving. What??.... How on earth do you not liken the two games and possibility that the multiplayer will be similar? You really think it will be wildly different from the main game itself? I just don't see your thought process there. The Wroclaw office is already 40 people, not including who they're hiring for. And that's not to say people aren't going to get moved to mulitplayer dev after the main game launches. We'll see as it gets closer but I'd put all my money on it being similar to GTA O since the main game is
 
Because it's a shooter with contracts, missions, minigames, and driving. What??.... How on earth do you not liken the two games and possibility that the multiplayer will be similar?
The game is much closer to open world Deus Ex then GTAV. In fact the only similarities between GTAV and this game I can see is the fact that both take place in California, in the city and involve driving (though it is much smaller focus in Cyberpunk), as well as organized crime (and all those elements were already part of 2020, many years before GTA existed). If it would take form similar to GTA Online, it would be closer to MMORPG, so a much more complex project then GTAO.

You really think it will be wildly different from the main game itself? I just don't see your thought process there.
Multiplayer comes in many shapes and forms. While mechanically it probably will be similar to the main game, it won't be nearly as open, probably limited to smaller hubs, which already would make it different then GTAO.

The Wroclaw office is already 40 people, not including who they're hiring for. And that's not to say people aren't going to get moved to mulitplayer dev after the main game launches.
Not according to my calculations. Source on that?

Besides of that, even with those extra people, it doesn't change the fact that it would be too much of undertaking for a team of that size. I mean they had over 100 people working on standalone Gwent for three years and the game similar size of GTAO would require far more people then that.
 
The game is much closer to open world Deus Ex then GTAV. In fact the only similarities between GTAV and this game I can see is the fact that both take place in California, in the city and involve driving (though it is much smaller focus in Cyberpunk), as well as organized crime (and all those elements were already part of 2020, many years before GTA existed). If it would take form similar to GTA Online, it would be closer to MMORPG, so a much more complex project then GTAO.

Not sure why you downplay driving and cars for Cyberpunk. Every piece of footage we've seen has had vehicles. Almost every screenshot or poster they've put out has a vehicle. It's a big part of the game.


Multiplayer comes in many shapes and forms. While mechanically it probably will be similar to the main game, it won't be nearly as open, probably limited to smaller hubs, which already would make it different then GTAO.

It could absolutely be smaller hubs or something similar. I never once said it would be a GTAO clone. It's going to be different for sure. But it would make the most sense for it to be that TYPE of multiplayer.


Not according to my calculations. Source on that?

Besides of that, even with those extra people, it doesn't change the fact that it would be too much of undertaking for a team of that size. I mean they had over 100 people working on standalone Gwent for three years and the game similar size of GTAO would require far more people then that.

First search for Cyberpunk 2077 Multiplayer Office lol

https://www.digitaltrends.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-multiplayer-mode-follow-up-aaa-in-development/

"A team of about 40 in Wroclaw, Poland, is working on the multiplayer mode in Cyberpunk 2077. "

No idea about went, haven't played it. We don't know how long they've already been working on multiplayer or when it will come out. It's certainly a 'give some - take some' from things GTA does that CP doesn't. Multiplayer CP will get neutered in some areas for sure. It absolutely wouldn't have near the complexity that the main game does
 
Not sure why you downplay driving and cars for Cyberpunk. Every piece of footage we've seen has had vehicles. Almost every screenshot or poster they've put out has a vehicle. It's a big part of the game.
Because devs noted that the city is designed in such a way to encourage mostly on-foot exploration. Cars are used only to travel to the places further away. While the demos included short sequences of driving, 95% of them still took place in isolated areas, which you can only access on your own two feet.

First search for Cyberpunk 2077 Multiplayer Office lol

https://www.digitaltrends.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-multiplayer-mode-follow-up-aaa-in-development/

"A team of about 40 in Wroclaw, Poland, is working on the multiplayer mode in Cyberpunk 2077. "
"About 40 people", if I recall correcly, referred to 35-36 people, so still below 40, but with the people they are hiring currently indeed it would be slightly above 40, so I stand corrected. Of course, I still think it's way too small.
 
Tbh I hope part or all multiplayer is like harder missions that require multiple mercenaries to complete. And building a team with friends balanced with most roles covered making them easier slightly.. I wouldn't mind an open world lobby area to just goof off but on mission should be private instanced
 
It would be MUCH MUCH smarter and more profitable to add multiple apartments to MP versus SP. If they made a strategic decision to take out certain features (I don't think this personally, I think they literally can't get it done with the time they have left) like this for MP, it was a brilliant financial move even though of course I don't like it for the SP game. People might be shocked at how lucrative ESO is for example with just housing/furniture, etc. The bottom line is that if I was a minority shareholder in this company, I would be very happy with everything I have heard in the past six months. The stuff most people are complaining about are not huge money hits with enough people to matter, and their FPP and heavy shooting will draw new fans for sure. I don't think it's an accident their very first big reveal was strategically crafted to resemble GTA and they then strategically had a secret RPG message afterwards to tweak that audience too to appeal to multiple types of gamers. The ultimate kicker down the road is if they actually have a TPP option for MP so you can buy cosmetics to adorn your character that you can now see all the time! (in jest in part, but this really would be smart)

Action/adventure blended with some RPG (like a standard Venn diagram in crossing multiple genres) is a financial winner too, you won't lose most RPG people from W3 reputation alone, and you will attract new non-RPG players to both SP and especially MP. They are going to make plenty in the SP game, and they are probably going to create a nice revenue tail with legs for their MP game. Very impressive from a fiscally strategic standpoint if this is their aim. In all seriousness, I don't see this road for MP (aka a GTA clone -- not enough resources most likely to pull it off properly) but what a financial windfall it would be to be honest. This kind of world online could easily make 1B+ if done really well.
 
It would be MUCH MUCH smarter and more profitable to add multiple apartments to MP versus SP. If they made a strategic decision to take out certain features (I don't think this personally, I think they literally can't get it done with the time they have left) like this for MP, it was a brilliant financial move even though of course I don't like it for the SP game. People might be shocked at how lucrative ESO is for example with just housing/furniture, etc. The bottom line is that if I was a minority shareholder in this company, I would be very happy with everything I have heard in the past six months. The stuff most people are complaining about are not huge money hits with enough people to matter, and their FPP and heavy shooting will draw new fans for sure. I don't think it's an accident their very first big reveal was strategically crafted to resemble GTA and they then strategically had a secret RPG message afterwards to tweak that audience too to appeal to multiple types of gamers. The ultimate kicker down the road is if they actually have a TPP option for MP so you can buy cosmetics to adorn your character that you can now see all the time! (in jest in part, but this really would be smart)

Action/adventure blended with some RPG (like a standard Venn diagram in crossing multiple genres) is a financial winner too, you won't lose most RPG people from W3 reputation alone, and you will attract new non-RPG players to both SP and especially MP. They are going to make plenty in the SP game, and they are probably going to create a nice revenue tail with legs for their MP game. Very impressive from a fiscally strategic standpoint if this is their aim. In all seriousness, I don't see this road for MP (aka a GTA clone -- not enough resources most likely to pull it off properly) but what a financial windfall it would be to be honest. This kind of world online could easily make 1B+ if done really well.
:rolleyes:
 
YES! great news!
I hope it has a coop mode and a pvp mode
like 4 player coop and team deathmatch like 6 vs 6, in all maps of night city
It will be awesome! :cool::love:

it should have bots, until players join

and no region lock, or at least a server browser
 
Last edited:
I'm definitely in the minority here, but GTA Online: Cyberpunk Edition is what I want this multiplayer to be. Despite the microtransactions, I find GTA Online to be insanely fun as there is just so much to do. If they could utilize the aspect of the players creating their own missions and races and raids (Like GTA does), I think the potential for this mode is insane.

However, I do understand why people are worried about this. I think a good common ground is kind of like how The Division handles it, there's a specified area where you can PVP, but the majority of it is just co-op missions. But I still definitely want an open world multiplayer where I can see other people, and the aspect I want most is that the players themselves can create missions.
 
I honestly don't see how proper MP can be done without draining resources from SP. I see so many apologists saying don't judge until MP is released, but come on guys, no studio except Rockstar has pulled this off and even Rockstar atruggled with it, a studio of 2000 devs. There's simply no way a studio of 450 can put the same quality into both SP and MP.
 
I honestly don't see how proper MP can be done without draining resources from SP. I see so many apologists saying don't judge until MP is released, but come on guys, no studio except Rockstar has pulled this off and even Rockstar atruggled with it, a studio of 2000 devs. There's simply no way a studio of 450 can put the same quality into both SP and MP.
Multiplayer will be released a long time after the DLC's get released. Nothing will go to waste. The game will be postponed either way, probably. My guess is October 2020. So yeah, chill.

As to the multiplayer - I really hope we can get something similar to GTA Online, but something that is more mature and offers even more freedom.
 
Just assuming, I can't look behind the scenes and do not have a fitting professional experience to make more educated guesses:

If they will start tackling MP (even if they may recruit for it now) in serious fashion only later down the line when most SP content has already been finished or delivered, then I don't fully buy the "diverting resources from SP" argument. Or rather, the argument becomes weaker in my eyes. Hiring an MP focused dev won't touch the SP side of things much, either, if we assume them to be working around the expected capacity.

But I suppose we'll see more down the line and are better able to judge this beyond guesses going either way, pro or not.


Lastly, my personal opinion is that too many give take "GTA:Online" in their mouth (or put it on the screen, rather) with a negative connotation.

I played and play GTA:O on occasion, I know what people likely refer to and that is how gameplay can end up there. I also agree that if CP was to go into that direction, it would need to tweak or change certain things to result in a 'more mature' end result. But the general core concept of GTA:Online isn't bad, it's rather something players benefit from in my eyes. Why?

  • Just like in the SP version you use the same big open world or map - you are not detached from the world
  • You can freely make a or multiple characters
  • You can pursue countless missions and activities, including social ones
  • You can purchase private or business related property and many types of vehicles
  • Any sort of interaction possible with strangers in this big open world, from friendly / ignorant to hostile
  • Gambling (yay)
  • Mission editors, custom content players can add to a certain level
  • And likely more I can't think of right now

The design itself is good. If CDPR would aim for something similar in concept, I think the trick is taking the good aspects and tweaking what people consider bad aspects. If it ends up less arcade-y I'd also consider adding VOIP functionality to speak to people. If it ends up in some sort of dedicated server basis players can further specify or customize, you can even see the potential of different communities beginning to form that offer different content on their servers, like PVP or RP oriented ones.

But alas, this all is speculation or preference posting. In the end we can only wait ... and / or suggest things to CDPR. Or, well, discuss our own preferences or dislikes amongst each other.
 
I honestly don't see how proper MP can be done without draining resources from SP. I see so many apologists saying don't judge until MP is released, but come on guys, no studio except Rockstar has pulled this off and even Rockstar atruggled with it, a studio of 2000 devs. There's simply no way a studio of 450 can put the same quality into both SP and MP.
That's why they purchased Strange New Things studio and rebranded them as a CD Projekt Red Wrocław, specifically so they would work on multiplayer, while the core team and Cracow team keep working on base game (and future single player content). They also hired Digital Scapes studio (which previously worked on multiplayer modes for Warhammer: Dawn of War 2 and Dying Light), so basically a third party developer, specifically for that purpose. Both teams combined makes nearly 40 people for multiplayer mode and over 400 for the main stuff.

And again, I think you are going with the wrong assumption that they are developing something akin to multiplayer mode for GTAV or RDR2, which is ridiculous (knowing the size of the team). All we know is that they want to develop some kind of multiplayer mode, but it can be pretty much anything (however the fact they are looking for people familiar with current trends in Online Action/RPG games might be some kind of hint).
 
GTA:O, without the artificially increased grinding for the purpose of buying shark cards, is actually a decent concept and mode that works, as proven, with a single-player focused game. The question is how to introduce paid expansions without segmenting the playerbase. If paid expansions is something they want to focus on.
 
GTA:O, without the artificially increased grinding for the purpose of buying shark cards, is actually a decent concept and mode that works, as proven, with a single-player focused game. The question is how to introduce paid expansions without segmenting the playerbase. If paid expansions is something they want to focus on.

For me, Rockstar ruined GTA:O after introducing too many weird-ass expansions and payware. Stuff like OP flying bikes or whatever the heck that is, that ruined the game and made it too cartoony-fortnitey for me.
 
GTA:O, without the artificially increased grinding for the purpose of buying shark cards, is actually a decent concept and mode that works, as proven, with a single-player focused game. The question is how to introduce paid expansions without segmenting the playerbase. If paid expansions is something they want to focus on.
Without having areas sectioned off, there isn't a way to really have paid content living in the same instance as people who haven't paid. "Portals" or whatever you want to call them would be the only way. Honestly, If they did it like GTAO with free expansions and kept prices of things reasonable, they could do microtransaction eddy packs for those that want them. That's where I have a problem with GTAO. I wouldn't have had an issue paying a couple bucks for a new car but when it's like $20+ of real world money it's a bad thing
 
Without having areas sectioned off, there isn't a way to really have paid content living in the same instance as people who haven't paid. "Portals" or whatever you want to call them would be the only way. Honestly, If they did it like GTAO with free expansions and kept prices of things reasonable, they could do microtransaction eddy packs for those that want them. That's where I have a problem with GTAO. I wouldn't have had an issue paying a couple bucks for a new car but when it's like $20+ of real world money it's a bad thing

Especially considering the name is short for "Grant Theft Auto", not "Grand Expenses (for) Autos"
 
Top Bottom