Multiplayer confirmed

+
I don't see a lot of people being concerned about the singleplayer of just 'this game' but rather being concerned about the long term future of CDPR's overall focus.

I mean... R* completely moved away from SP DLCs after GTA online, no sign of starfield from BGS in the near future after fallout 76 (even though their last SP game is already nearly 4 years old) and Bioware completely changed its theme for live support oriented games (After Anthem, DA4 is rumored to be completely rebooted for incorporating live elements). With all these happening to all the once beloved SP game developers, can you really blame people for their concerns?
Well put.
 
multiplayer will literally released likely 1-2 years after launch, why are people assuming this is going to effect the singleplayer of this game, AT ALL?

Just because they are hoping to do a multiplayer iteration of this wonderful IP after already so much planned stuff (singleplayer content (probably something along the lines of Blood and Wine, which released a full year after release)), it is now all of a sudden going to leak all over the singleplayer game that is coming out likely 2 years prior?

Some of you are really reaching in order to be upset, it's honestly impressive what lengths you go

Opportunity cost.

Any resources going towards a MP mode is, by definition, resources not going towards the SP experience. Completely making up a number for a second....one MILLION dollars! /drevil

Well, that's one million dollars that is being spent on Cyberpunk 2077's MP mode that I have absolute zero interest in that could have been spent on the SP mode.

This isn't a reach. It's just basic logic. If you have one million dollars that you're investing in the game that is being spent on making a MP mode that some people have no interest whatsoever in, then that's one million dollars NOT being spent on the mode that those people - like me - have a whole lot of interest in.

Now add into that the worry that there is a long, LONG history of companies who switched their focus away from what made them great to begin with going over to the dark side when they do this sort of thing. (Bioware, Bethesda) Why shouldn't people who are big fans of the single player experience not greet this announcement with skepticism?

Bioware literally was CDPR before they sold out to EA and now it's been something like a decade since I had even a passing interest in their games because, and this is important, they don't make the same sort of games anymore. They are targeting a completely different market than what they were pre-EA and are dying a slow, long, and extremely well deserved death as a result.

Personally I hope that Cyberpunk's MP mode fails so horribly that the company never tries anything remotely similar again. It would be nice if there were ONE company out there that just makes the sort of games that CDPR has made to date and doesn't feel the need to chase the latest fad, be it MMO, live services, mobile, or (fill in the blank) other latest gaming BS trend.
 
Last edited:

Keive

Forum regular
Wow, CDPR peeps must be smashing their head at the keyboard with having people complain about

1. Graphics
2. TPP/FPP Cutscenes
3. Multiplayer
in the span of all, well now Lol.

Multiplayer is at least one of the things focused on later, though I understand the concern of there never being another update for single-player later on.
But guys, have some faith, eh?
Anyway, then you can play the game with actual people, perfect for immersion :cool:
 
Opportunity cost.

Any resources going towards a MP mode is, by definition, resources not going towards the SP experience. Completely making up a number for a second....one MILLION dollars! /drevil

Well, that's one million dollars that is being spent on Cyberpunk 2077's MP mode that I have absolute zero interest in that could have been spent on the SP mode.

This isn't a reach. It's just basic logic. If you have one million dollars that you're investing in the game that is being spent on making a MP mode that some people have no interest whatsoever in, then that's one million dollars NOT being spent on the mode that those people - like me - have a whole lot of interest in.

Now add into that the worry that there is a long, LONG history of companies who switched their focus away from what made them great to begin with going over to the dark side when they do this sort of thing. (Bioware, Bethesda) Why shouldn't people who are big fans of the single player experience not greet this announcement with skepticism?

Bioware literally was CDPR before they sold out to EA and now it's been something like a decade since I had even a passing interest in their games because, and this is important, they don't make the same sort of games anymore. They are targeting a completely different market than what they were pre-EA and are dying a slow, long, and extremely well deserved death as a result.

Personally I hope that Cyberpunk's MP mode fails so horribly that the company never tries anything remotely similar again. It would be nice if there were ONE company out there that just makes the sort of games that CDPR has made to date and doesn't feel the need to chase the latest fad, be it MMO, live services, mobile, or (fill in the blank) other latest gaming BS trend.
I would usually agree with you here, but we already know we're getting singleplayer expansions and free DLC.

Could that money have TECHNICALLY been spent on more SP content? I guess? Sure? But as long as we get what we got with the Witcher 3, I won't be disappointed or worried. You could have made a similar argument for TW3. Did Thronebreaker really need to exist? What about Gwent standalone? couldn't that time and $ have been spent on more content for The Witcher 3?

Again, as long as we get two or so solid expansions out of 2077, I'm happy. Any multiplayer stuff they do after that is just icing on the cake, provided it's handled well.
 
I don't think MP will affect SP plans for CP77.

I also wouldn't bother that far ahead about the possibility of CDPR transforming into Blizzard or any other exclusively online service company. Let's experience CP77 first.
 
I would usually agree with you here, but we already know we're getting singleplayer expansions and free DLC.

Could that money have TECHNICALLY been spent on more SP content? I guess? Sure? But as long as we get what we got with the Witcher 3, I won't be disappointed or worried. You could have made a similar argument for TW3. Did Thronebreaker really need to exist? What about Gwent standalone? couldn't that time and $ have been spent on more content for The Witcher 3?

Again, as long as we get two or so solid expansions out of 2077, I'm happy. Any multiplayer stuff they do after that is just icing on the cake, provided it's handled well.

Thronebreaker was a SP game that I very much enjoyed for the record.

Gwent...well, I kind of hope that sort of thing finances more of the stuff that CDPR does that I'm actually interested in. That sort of Magic the Gathering type of game complete with gambling mechanic loot boxes is absolutely the sort of cash cow that a lot of the industry is chasing lately.

I get where you're coming from. I had my doubts with Witcher 3, and some of the other things that they were doing at the time that made me wonder if those resources could be better spent on focusing on W3. CDPR completely proved me wrong there and I hope they do again.

But for me, MP isn't "icing on the cake". It's "if this didn't exist, would we be getting a third Cyberpunk 2077 expansion instead of just two?"

Put a different way, if they had done a MP mode for Witcher 3 would you be okay with that replacing the Blood and Wine expansion? What sort of Blood and Wine level gaming experience are we forgoing with the money being spend on a MP mode for Cybperunk instead of another SP expansion?
 
I'm not too concerned with MP eating into the development time and cost of their future plans for SP. That 7 million dollar grant they got from the Polish government was specifically to be used for advancing multiplayer in games.

Also they've been hiring MP programmers and designers for what, over 7 years now? They started recruiting for MP even before TW3 was released so it's been something they're researching for a long time now.
 
Put a different way, if they had done a MP mode for Witcher 3 would you be okay with that replacing the Blood and Wine expansion? What sort of Blood and Wine level gaming experience are we forgoing with the money being spend on a MP mode for Cybperunk instead of another SP expansion?

For the record, I completely get your perspective and like I pointed out, usually I'd wholeheartedly agree with it.

But to answer this question, no, I'd not have been okay with that. But for me, two Cyberpunk expansions is perfectly adequate. It's what I got with the Witcher 3.

If two instead of three means that the coop crowd (and, to be clear, that's the only MP mode I will support) can enjoy the game with their friends, I'm on board. I don't consider it a sacrifice, but if it is a sacrifice, in this case I'd say it's a worthy one. I agree that opportunity costs are a thing, though. You just have to decide at some point that enough is enough, and that you're more than satisfied with what you already got.

At what point is 2077's content "finished"? When would you say "OK, anything else that releases is separate from this core experience and its DLC/expansions"? At what point does CDPR move on and start working on Cyberpunk 2177, and the MP as a side project?
 
Put a different way, if they had done a MP mode for Witcher 3 would you be okay with that replacing the Blood and Wine expansion? What sort of Blood and Wine level gaming experience are we forgoing with the money being spend on a MP mode for Cybperunk instead of another SP expansion?
Except the team CP has is considerably larger than that of W3's even when they were running at full capacity. Plus Multiplayer has been in R&D for quite a few years now.
 
For the record, I completely get your perspective and like I pointed out, usually I'd wholeheartedly agree with it.

But to answer this question, no, I'd not have been okay with that. But for me, two Cyberpunk expansions is perfectly adequate. It's what I got with the Witcher 3.

If two instead of three means that the coop crowd (and, to be clear, that's the only MP mode I will support) can enjoy the game with their friends, I'm on board. I don't consider it a sacrifice, but if it is a sacrifice, in this case I'd say it's a worthy one. I agree that opportunity costs are a thing, though. You just have to decide at some point that enough is enough, and that you're more than satisfied with what you already got.

At what point is 2077's content "finished"? When would you say "OK, anything else that releases is separate from this core experience and its DLC/expansions? At what point does CDPR move on and start working on Cyberpunk 2177?

Yeah, those are completely fair points regarding your "enough is enough" thoughts. In particular, your thoughts are fairly selfless vs. my own "I want more of what will make me personally" happy sort of thoughts.

To a certain extent, I think your comments are weakened just a little bit by the strong likelihood that Cyberpunk2077 isn't going to be a stand alone game but the first in a franchise though. Unless CDPR themselves are going to be done with the IP after this game, then there's more SP content that could be/could have been added in and anything that is done on the MP side really is something that is NOT being done on the SP side.

I won't complain to much if we get a Witcher 3 level of content and experience and then they do the MP mode. I'll still wonder what 20 hour expansion I'll never get to play that I'm missing out on, since I won't touch the MP, but if they deliver a Witcher 3 + Expansions level game then I'll be more than happy to just shrug and let the MP crowd have their icing on the proverbial cake. :)
 
Yeah, those are completely fair points regarding your "enough is enough" thoughts. In particular, your thoughts are fairly selfless vs. my own "I want more of what will make me personally" happy sort of thoughts.

To a certain extent, I think your comments are weakened just a little bit by the strong likelihood that Cyberpunk2077 isn't going to be a stand alone game but the first in a franchise though. Unless CDPR themselves are going to be done with the IP after this game, then there's more SP content that could be/could have been added in and anything that is done on the MP side really is something that is NOT being done on the SP side.

I won't complain to much if we get a Witcher 3 level of content and experience and then they do the MP mode. I'll still wonder what 20 hour expansion I'll never get to play that I'm missing out on, since I won't touch the MP, but if they deliver a Witcher 3 + Expansions level game then I'll be more than happy to just shrug and let the MP crowd have their icing on the proverbial cake. :)
Fair enough!
 
Except the team CP has is considerably larger than that of W3's even when they were running at full capacity. Plus Multiplayer has been in R&D for quite a few years now.

That really does not address the concept of Opportunity Cost.

Anything, whether it is manpower or money, that is being directed at a MP mode is resources that is NOT being directed at the SP.

Whether it is 50 people or $5 million dollars, whatever is being invested creating this multiplayer is resources that are not being used to make a better SP.

If ALL you care about is the SP, then it's wasted resources. This is a YMMV sort of thing. If you like the idea of MP, then you might consider this resources well spent. If you have literally zero interest in it, then just for YOU PERSONALLY, then it's resources that you might as well be flushing down the toilet.
 
That really does not address the concept of Opportunity Cost.

Anything, whether it is manpower or money, that is being directed at a MP mode is resources that is NOT being directed at the SP.

Whether it is 50 people or $5 million dollars, whatever is being invested creating this multiplayer is resources that are not being used to make a better SP.

If ALL you care about is the SP, then it's wasted resources. This is a YMMV sort of thing. If you like the idea of MP, then you might consider this resources well spent. If you have literally zero interest in it, then just for YOU PERSONALLY, then it's resources that you might as well be flushing down the toilet.
That would imply there are no diminishing returns. Considering the team is already proportionally larger compared to that of W3's, and with W3 we got two quite substancial DLCs, especially when compared to most games out there.

So while what we are discussing is all speculation obviously. In my mind Multiplayer is a cherry on top of an already quite hefty Singleplayer roadmap.
 
Multiplayer is not the reason why I would get CP2077.. but woohoo.

39695-Jon-Stewart-Stephen-Colbert-wo-GJmW.gif
 
That would imply there are no diminishing returns. Considering the team is already proportionally larger compared to that of W3's, and with W3 we got two quite substancial DLCs, especially when compared to most games out there.

So while what we are discussing is all speculation obviously. In my mind Multiplayer is a cherry on top of an already quite hefty Singleplayer roadmap.

It's more a personal valuation on SP vs. MP than it is diminishing returns. Like I said, YMMV.

We don't disagree on how amazing W3 and the expansions were. Where we're not completely in sync in our discussion here is in the relative value of a third expansion vs. a MP mode.

I thought Hearts of Stone was amazing and that Blood and Wine was HoS level incredible multiplied by a factor of 1.3. In other words, they were both among the best gaming experiences I've ever had.

Even if we're assuming that a third expansion would have been getting into the territory of fatigue/over-saturation, I'd likely have gotten a ton of enjoyment out of it.

Whereas my relative enjoyment of any sort of MP mode for Witcher 3 would have been...zero. Absolutely no interest and therefore it has absolutely no value to me. Even an expansion that failed to measure up to the first two would have been infinitely more valuable to me than something that I'd never touch.

Even diminishing returns level SP expansions are going to have a value much higher than nothing at all. Again, just for me personally.
 
Thronebreaker was a SP game that I very much enjoyed for the record.
Speaking of Thronebreaker, wasn't there a plan for releasing SP campaigns for all the factions but now they're in total silence about it because TB did not do as good as MP Gwent? :cry:

Money and the influence of shareholders are always crucial things, no matter how passionate the developers are in a company. Not many CEO would allow a company to invest much in project A if project B earns them double with half the investment. At least I wouldn't If I were. ;-)
 
Virtual beers, and live podcasts. I'm good. lol

But for real, considering CDPR's RPG mechanics are stronger around dialogue gameplay, i'm curious to see if the
Directive Scene System will be kicked up a notch and will not just simply be: Player 1 initiates talk with an npc while everyone listens as he/she represents the whole group.

i.e scenarios where P2, a street kid netrunner might be able to cut mid conversation with the same npc P1, a corpo solo is talking to, affecting gameplay and direction because of their different life paths. Or a noir style quest where you share interesting dialogue choices through calls while being in separate locations conducting different forms of investigations(talking, searching). If it's PvP, might have an npc for each side, supporting a story-based quest where you're trying to get a hold of a key item or such, potentially culminating in a dialogue heavy stand-off where interesting choices and consequences can occur.

Point of speculating here is, it's Coop PvE and PvP in a nutshell. We know how shootouts and combat scenarios are going to end. But if it's implemented in a way that's full of cdpr's strong points, it might be a huge step up to their story telling game, something they're really keen on getting proficient at. Cause to them, good story telling = benefit. I would love to support that.
 
Last edited:
I don't think MP will affect SP plans for CP77.

I also wouldn't bother that far ahead about the possibility of CDPR transforming into Blizzard or any other exclusively online service company. Let's experience CP77 first.

I agree completely about MP/SP impact, and being fair, I gave Bethesda and Bioware the benefit of the doubt until there was actual evidence that showed they were not the same developer anymore. Absolutely I will (and I think everyone else should too) afford CDPR that same benefit of the doubt and basic courtesy until proven otherwise.
 
So now we know why the cut RPG elements are gone. The more they reveal about this game the less I like. Extremely disappointing.
 
Top Bottom