Possible dissapointment if the final game is drastically different than the initial reveal.what is it?
Possible dissapointment if the final game is drastically different than the initial reveal.what is it?
As much as I hate to say it, maybe they shouldn't have shown any gameplay till this year since now they might have to deal with the WIP dilemma.
My point was not "CDPR needs to prove me something", mine was an answer to yours whataboutism citing DOOM or TLOU2. It was not whataboutism? Fair enough, not really important. I just explained the difference in perception people can have between a new IP and sequels and the reasons behind it, in particular if the sequels come from companies which have done many games from the same genre (FPS for id software, story driven action adventures for ND) while the new IP comes from a company who has done 1 single open world game before. Therefore, in my humble opinion, the comparison is absolutely not applicable.CDPR doesn't need to "confirm" anything or "prove" anything. They need to make a great game if they want to have great sales. That's it. That's all of it. AAA or AA or BBB or whatever status you've decided their other games are has nothing to do with the driving standard behind -all- their games: quality. That's it. That's everything. And the game will do that, or not, when it comes out.
The rest is simply what you've decided they need to prove to you. Which the game will do, when it's out. And I'm sure you'll see lots and lots of marketing a month or two before launch, as you are now with Doom Eternal and will probably see soon for Last of Us 2.
Again, 2077 is not short of hype, preorders or expectations. At all. CDPR doesn't need more. Arguably, they need less.
That being said, of course we may agree to disagree.
people like games that are called RPG's, but they don't like games that play like RPG's
That said, I will say that although feedback is valuable, negative, non-constructive feedback like, "I think they should show me more" isn't really valuable at all. I, too, would like them to show me more. But that's not in the cards.
Do you mean Cyberpunk world of 2020 TT or Cyberpunk genre in general?
Shadowrun games are good cyberpunk games, also Cyberpunk 2020 and Shadowrun are same setting just in one you have magic add, but concept is same powerfull corporations rule the world and use shdaowrunners(not sure what is official term for players in Cyberpunk 2020) to wage a proxy wars against each other.
But yeah, "this is work in progress, it can change" is really old and at this point little stupid, it was ok in 2018 demo, but by now they really need to have everything in place and to know how things going to work.
It was so cool to find prostitution is middle class thing in Night City for example, that makes me instantly want to pre-order a game.
The same points being repeated 30 times over for the last year aren't very constructive criticism.
I think this year's E3 they should show gameplay demo to everyone, that going to be 3 months before game come out, it would be really stupid and little offensive to again show demo to just few selected youtubers and game journalists.
Yet there are regulars who participate in discussions without bringing up the same points time after time.Maybe not, but then there's no point in being a regular on the forums.
My point was that not showing pre-launch content and keeping marketing to a minimum is a sign that developers have something to hide
Yet there are regulars who participate in discussions without bringing up the same points time after time.
I'm 100% with Sard on this one; there are many, many things and topics to discuss that don't involve bringing up old critiques from 2018. And yes, discussions not revolving around opinions and points that are either closer to two years old or just generally have been discussed to death are definitely more constructive.
I know I often see various, smaller details in interviews and other news that get overlooked and never discussed here because the same news also touches on some major topic. People are who create discussions on here, and if people only focus on certain aspects, then... well.
----------
As for the topic itself, no preference. I won't mind if nothing new is shown; even E3 is only three months before release so there won't be long to go at that point, and Gamescom is less than a month before release.
I don't follow. How does this discredit my own point?
Maybe not, but then there's no point in being a regular on the forums.
Yet there are regulars who participate in discussions without bringing up the same points time after time.
Ah, okay, fair enough. Yeah, it was a blanket statement, and not an accurate one.That was the only thing I was directly countering; the rest was just agreeing with what Sard had said plus expanding on it.
As Snowflakez got it: My point was that not showing pre-launch content and keeping marketing to a minimum is a sign that developers have something to hide - that the product is faulty in some way and they try to hide that and cash in as much as possible on the initial launch sales which would drop sharply once people get wise to the faulty product. Being quiet on marketing front does not create confidence in users in my opinion. This was the gist of my previous post, and the basis of my "they should show more" message.
topics will be rehashed, repeatedly
Also, Latins said "repetita iuvant".Especially topics that are considered - by certain audience - pretty crucial to the experience the game is set out to offer, but which do not ever get any *real* responses (because no-one who gets to ask questions does not ask about them).