Therein lies the issue.
It's all extremely subjective and people generally have a hard time accepting that others experience things and think differently.
This whole conversation is doomed to lead nowhere.
- Status
Therein lies the issue.
It's all extremely subjective and people generally have a hard time accepting that others experience things and think differently.
This whole conversation is doomed to lead nowhere.
Strange comparison. Parents are parents, they are assumed to be important by default, especially in late medieval european village.
Jenkins from ME1 was a typical no-name redshirt and reference to age-old meme, nothing more
Post automatically merged:
They spent almost 10 years on development, and claimed it to become a revolution. After that one would expect hundreds of hours of gameplay, if needed.
And, once again, even that much wouldn't be needed, just move the Heist and mad run for a cure to a point later in the game, say, after Street Cred 20 or so. Let us take Jackie, Panam etc on gigs (intriduction of Panam etc doesn't require the Heist). If all these things would change the plot and gameplay, then let it be, i don't fear change and don't stick to canon for the sake of canon. You see current version of the game as Ming vase, me — as half-assembled car at best.
Last edited:
I think one thing happening here is that people are being overly defensive of the game.
I really liked the game - I just think it could be better. It has flaws like any game has flaws. I have one full play-through of the game and plan several more after the expansion.
It is incredibly odd to me too. For people who loved the game you would think their response would be "Heck yeah, more Cyberpunk would be awesome! I wish we could have experienced that six months and had more gameplay!". But instead it is "The developer decided to go this route, so that is the only thing possible - everything has to fit in that frame of reference!"
The Witcher 3 is my favorite game of all-time and there are things I wish would have been better about it. Like I thought the combat and skill system could have been better than they were. I thought the controls for Roach were terrible. So on, so on.
Cyberpunk is great, I just think it could be better... especially from a pacing standpoint when it comes to the story and how some of the characters were delivered.
Post automatically merged:
1. Strange, knowing that the "main plot" is V trying to find a way to survive.
2. Like I said, impossible. They want to not make the game longer (if you browse the forum, almost every characters in the game don't have enough screen time). So CDPR would end with a 200 hours game, at minimum
It's pointless to discuss this with you.
I'm saying they came up with a story, I wish we could have seen more of that story... then you turn around and try to say the story is just the second half of the game.
I say that the game is really good but I think some plot points could have been moved around or they could have made it a little longer to let us get to know characters more or because it would improve the pacing of the game... and you say that they wanted to keep the game shorter. I know they wanted the game to be shorter - I disagree with that decision and I disagree with the decision to have the heist so early in the game. I know the devs and writers disagree with me because they didn't do what I think is better... the point is I think they are wrong.
EDIT: Not saying that in a snarky way. I appreciate your feedback... but I think what I am saying is just going over your head or you are being intentionally stubborn.
Last edited:
Not that strange. Jackie is the dude who was very important at some point in V's life. Jackie took V under his roof for 6 months (even if it was Mama Wells roof in reality), introduced V to his friends and relations... In short, Jackie helped V find his/her feet when V was really all alone and his/her life was only a vast field of ruins. Seem an important person
But don't get me wrong, I never said that it was a good thing that the game is short... But at one moment, "someone" decided that they will make a game shorter (apparently because TW3 was "too long", something that I also disagree. Everytime I reach the end of TW3, I want more too). So everything which was not a part of the main plot (i.e V trying to find a way to survive) was "shortened" (so you see that Jackie was important to V by a "few minutes cinematic" and not with few hours of gameplay).
Edit : It's just an understandable decision knowing that they don't want to make a 100hrs long main quests/game.
Last edited:
Honestly I thought Vesemir was the worst aspect of an already bad introduction in Witcher 3.
Its introduction is plain dreary unless Yennefer's panties are your kind of thing. And Vesemir's world weary and characterless personality only makes it worse -- at that point in the story using such a character as an exposition dump is a cliché and not an engaging one. He is absolutely not a good character to take the player by the hand and introduce them to the world.
I happen to think the entire opening of Witcher 3 up to Novigrad was quite ill-judged. It takes far too long and there is not one iota of light to go with the shade, nor are any of the characters before Novigrad especially likable or interesting. I've just started playing it again and it's possibly even more dour than I remembered.
Cyberpunk judged it to my mind significantly better. Jackie is designed to have an immediately interesting/engaging personality because he has all the character depth of a piece of paper: what you see is what you get. It's why people like him, but also why he'd be a terrible and annoying character to have around for a protracted period of time. There is simply nothing there beyond his very basic goals.
But, yes, if people do no side quests at all in Act 1 it's going to be difficult to feel like Jackie is part of your life. Worst piece of advice I've seen online is to rush act 1 because more Keanu Reeves if you do. In almost all cases, Silverhand adds flavour but doesn't add so much substance to side content to justify breaking the emotional balance of act 1 to get there.
Maybe there should be a, perhaps optional, "do x number of side quests" gate before you can do the heist.
Last edited:
I'm enjoying all the ideas for alternative structures to the gameplay in this thread, make very good sense in the main, and can see how they would have made a satisfying experience. But... CDPR came to a decision about the amount of content we were getting, either because of genuinely wanting a shorter time investment from players, or because they really, really needed to release something.
So I don't think anyone here is saying 'the story is set in stone, changes are heretical'. It's more a pragmatic viewpoint that if you want more of one thing, you'd have had less of another, like it or not. And we'd be arguing about why Kerry's arc was so short or something else.
Which news?I've just learnt about this news .. wow .. good work CDPR ..
One DLC.
And since CDPR are moving away from the RedEngine, then it looks like we won't be getting a second one ..
That is very likely. I have to mention that it is not 100% that it will be only one expansion (DLC is small stuff like new apartment or new guns or something like that and expansion is 'hearts of stone'/'blood and wine' from the witcher 3).One DLC.
And since CDPR are moving away from the RedEngine, then it looks like we won't be getting a second one ..
Maybe CDPR will release only one expansion, but I don't think it would be related to Red Engine. Not need to work on the "current state" of Red Engine to provide more content I suppose
But to implement and maintain new content in the Redengine would need on-going expertise in the Redengine? CDPR could choose to do that of course, they've got the resources. But how likely is it they could keep a team together just for what would be a legacy engine?Maybe CDPR will release only one expansion, but I don't think it would be related to Red Engine. Not need to work on the "current state" of Red Engine to provide more content I suppose
If there's a single expansion, then yeah it's a shame that this phase of the Cyberpunk story will have ended earlier than hoped. It must be disrupting inside CDPR as well and I hope they can transition successfully. But I can't really share the sense of betrayal some seem to have. Got to be excited to imagine the next iteration of Cyberpunk in Unreal with the backing of Epic to shape it into something which just wouldn't be possible in Redengine.
While i agree with most of this its not that odd that people feel betrayed, they said expect atleast Witcher 3 levels. I get that plans change and all but i hade atleast some hope for an expansion too change some things and make the game more fun for me. I am too pretty interested in seeing what happends with UE5 and CDPR but its several years atleast in the future, and it seems alot of storys are just left with cliffhangers. Doubt we will ever know what happends in most of them.
Unless the next game is a direct sequel, witch i kinda doubt. A return too Night city in UE5 seems interesting but at the same time... Rebuilding it all must be a pretty big undertaking. Anyways they haven't really said anything yet so we shall see. I do hope the Witcher 3 next gen will be good and possibly witcher 4 is going too be interesting too see what they do.
Yeah I don't mean to diminish the feelings that others have for sure. I was still hoping that the 1.5 patch had given them a proper solid platform and all focus would be on expansions as intended, but the Unreal decision changes the landscape. Seems inevitable in a way. If they'd delayed launch until the game was much more polished, we'd maybe still be at the same place we are now.
Totaly agree. Sadly it becomes a waste too keep supporting it and would slow down learning the UE5 platform for the team that has too stay on RE. I get why there doing it and all, its just a bad outcome for the players. Im not that in love with cp2077 so id rather see them have another go at it, hopefully i like the sequel better.
So when I look at this from a business perspective I do not blame them at all. They seem convinced that Red Engine was the issue with Cyberpunk and it is an issue they want to avoid in the future. I'm unsure of how much of the issues with the Cyberpunk launch were engine vs. investors wanting to rush the game out/wanting to put the game on two generations of consoles when it probably didn't belong/etc. But they seem convinced it was the engine or at least mostly the engine.
So they went out and fixed their problem. They are excited to implement that fix and move beyond what was a disaster of a launch and over a year spent of not developing anything that would make additional revenue... but just fixing the game they released. On top of that they have the goal of developing two AAA titles side-by-side... and with that I imagine they are eager to get as close to 100% of their staff working on UE5 as possible.
So I get that.
But I also get the sense of betrayal.
CDPR went from releasing what a lot of people (myself included) consider the greatest game of all-time. They promised the next greatest game of all time. They went overboard on those promises. Then they delivered a buggy mess that probably should have been released closer to today's date than when it was actually released. The false promises, the missing features, the buggy mess is on them... even if they admit it.
They then went on to say that Cyberpunk would get AT LEAST as much expansion/DLC content as The Witcher 3. It also seemed heavily implied that it would most likely be getting more. They also went on about how they would have another AAA title out within the next year or two - which I believe was the since scrapped Cyberpunk AAA multiplayer game. Now it seems likely we don't get nearly as much expansion content as The Witcher 3 and there will be no multiplayer version of the game. On top of that DLC/patch content has slowed considerably and the expansion for the game will be released 2+ years after the game debuted.
On top of all of that I would be willing to bet (though I could be wrong!) that we are going to see some more disappointing things in the expansion. I haven't looked at spoilers, but if any part of the expansion happens before the end of the game (like Hearts of Stone) I can almost guarantee that Johnny Silverhand will either be missing from it, silent or have VERY LITTLE to say because Keanu either isn't on board or they weren't willing to pay him for the additional content.
So I can see where people feel betrayed. Before the release of Cyberpunk 2077 they were considered the best in the business. The Witcher 3 expansion content earned them such an immense amount of love and respect from fans... and they lost most of that love and respect. Can they build that back? Sure. But I think the point most fans are making is they shouldn't be in the position to earn it back. Cyberpunk 2077 had good enough 'bones', a good enough 'skeleton' to deliver on all of the promises... they just messed up.
1. They should have waited until closer to release to talk about everything in the game and make promises.
2. They shouldn't have announced the release date for the game if it was in the state it was in.
3. They should have waited another 1-2 years to release the game until it was done (or at least a lot closer to done)... and working off of point 1 they shouldn't have promised a 'last gen' release, it seems like it would have fixed a ton of their issues.
4. Knowing the game was in the state it was they shouldn't have said expansion announcements would come alongside the game.
5. Knowing what they knew for 3 and knowing the engine was a problem they shouldn't have then promised as much or more expansion content than The Witcher 3.
If they end up breaking the expansion content promise I think they should deliver a statement to their fanbase and just be like - hey... we messed up. We thought we could deliver this stuff and we can't - with the issues we face it would just take too long. We wanted to give you as much as we could, but now we have to move on to our next projects... we'll do better in the future. Not because I think I or fans deserve that - but I think that would be a good business decision on their part.
I agree, but were sitting here with hindsight too. I dont think they were fully aware of how bad it would be on the non pro consoles and most sales were on PC atleast at release. The investors atleast seems too have been some what kept in the dark and just Imagine if it was released in april. They should not have done alot of things i agree, hopefully they have learned there lesson. Announcing it this early and showing off what they think they can get done is not a good ide apperantly. Yes it says work in progress but that really just means its pointless too show off. Show us what you have done now next time. Say your working on this and that but dont show it like its already done and working.
The Ue5 switch i hope will speed up development for them and also make it easier for them too implement improvments. Not sure im gonna wait another 10years for the next CP (not even sure im still alive by then
) I just hope it will move in the direction i like them too do, witch is more RPG not less. But we shall see.A proper apology if they cant keep what they said would probably help some people atleast. The haters probably wont really care but most of them seems too have moved on too so.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it will "mainly" depend if the expansion is a success or not. If it is success, the question to keep the teams (which have the expertise on Red Engine) working on an additional expansion could be considered even if Red Engine will no longer be in devellopement itself. If it's not, sure evrything will be dropped and they will move on the future projects
I wont say its impossible. But even if the Expansion sells well it might be a fools errand too keep people working on it, if the plan too implement more then just story missions that is(new systems for example like mutations/runewords in W3). If they just release story missions with already completed stuff they could probably keep going forever exept for the voice acting (been reading some stuff about that, wont say anything more in case its true).Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it will "mainly" depend if the expansion is a success or not. If it is success, the question to keep the teams (which have the expertise on Red Engine) working on an additional expansion could be considered even if Red Engine will no longer be in devellopement itself. If it's not, sure evrything will be dropped and they will move on the future projects
Also depends on price of the expansion and how big it will be, theres info about it but its very shady and im not sure its true. If its a shorter expansion they cant really charge too much and must still make a profit, been working pretty hard on it with quite a lot of people according too the distribution charts. They could take a short time loss for a long time gain in reputation and goodwill i guess. But thats not really what most companys does today....
- Status