Customization seems so limited/poor..

[RLKing1969]

Tell me mate, what is the point of this forum?!? To praise CDPR? "I'm throwing money on the screen but nothing is happening"? "Please take my money"? We all know its their game. We all know its their money. I won't even start that without people buying their games there would be no money to produce those games but whatever. We all know that at the end this is all their decision what they will do. But i will rather "bitch" now what I don't like than wait couple of months and have to listen to "you should have say what is your problem back then were something could be done about it" argument. I'm "shilling" for CDPR from 2008. Hell, even longer. Most of you didn't even knew were Poland is on a map when I was buying their products, but even I have my limit of fanatical fanboyism. If you so sure it will be "masterpiece" just because its CDPR, good for you mate. I just want to tell you that couple years ago, most people were saying such thing about Blizzard for example. And where are they now? "You guys don't have phones"??? Your strategy is to praise them whatever is happening? Ok, good for you. My strategy is to tell them where I see a problem. You know why I'm "bitching" here? Because I actually care. All this take it or leave it, is just pathetic. Seriously, once again, what is the point of this forum?

Nothing wrong with voicing concerns. It's valuable input. Problem is, it would be impossible to A.) Include everything everyone wants (Some things might be contradictory and thus impossible to implement). And B.) Because of the scale of the game and the upcoming deadlines, there may not be time/space to implement ALL suggestions. That however does not nullify the need for input. Who knows? If something wasn't able to be implemented into the core came, maybe it will be added to an expansion or a sequel somewhere down the road.

 

[MetalHead367]

Looking at the whole picture, this seems more and more like a Far Cry clone than an RPG. It makes sense for it to have limited customization options, because that's not the focus of the game.

Focus of the game will be moving from one mission and shootout to the next, listening to Keanu quotes, and maybe some minigames. Expect the whole shebang to be under 20 hours long. There is no way they were going to keep last year's customization options for a first-person shooter game under 20 hours, especially after they saw how little it added to Far Cry 5.

No idea where you're getting "Far Cry clone" from and it's definitely an RPG. That's pretty obvious especially from the recent 15 minute video and the fact the devs have said so numerous times over the years. As I previously stated you guys are drawing conclusions based off nothing i.e you saying it'll have limited custom options, and 20 hours long. I highly doubt a game that's taken nearly a decade to make is going to be limited and have such a short campaign. With everything it'll probably be more like 100+ hours.

 

[wmulls]

Guys its long game, (Think I read somewhere 200 hour with all side quests etc) so maybe more styles, fashion and customization opens up when the game progress further.

I'm sure more customization options like clothing and body mods open up the longer you play the game, but I'm still absolutely gutted they completely ditched this character creator and backstory options. Especially after how much positive feedback they received about it!

 

[Kretek]

We should balance our expectations with reality.

I totally agree with you. I just don't see how is more than 4 nose options or 7 eye color options something unrealistic. I'm not complaining about not being able to play as rockerboy because I know it would be extremely complicated to implement. I'm not complaining that we cannot pilot flying car wherever we want. I'm not complaining that we can't enter every building in Night City. I'm not complaining that there will be no entirely new map in cyberspace to explore. I'm not complaining about all that and more, exactly because I am balancing my expectations with reality. But if more than 4 options in character creation is too much to expect... I don't know what can I say about that. Also this "game is still in development" argument just don't work for me. In old demo we had more options. Now we have less. Simple. Back then it was also game in development. You can say that in both cases it is just place holder, and I know you are right. But if they showing us something like that, what reaction are they expecting? I mean, if everything we are seeing in those videos is just "work in progress" and we just can't assume anything, so at the end this game can be released as football manager and we can't complain because all footage shown before was just "work in progress". As I have said before. I will rather "bitch" now about this, than later regret, that I wasn't "bitching" enough.

 

[CyberBobber]

I'm sure more customization options like clothing and body mods open up the longer you play the game, but I'm still absolutely gutted they completely ditched this character creator and backstory options. Especially after how much positive feedback they received about it!
View attachment 11014247

That picture says "work in progress" though.

Fashion and Styles are big part of Cyberpunk, Im sure theres more to it.

 

[RLKing1969]

I totally agree with you. I just don't see how is more than 4 nose options or 7 eye color options something unrealistic. I'm not complaining about not being able to play as rockerboy because I know it would be extremely complicated to implement. I'm not complaining that we cannot pilot flying car wherever we want. I'm not complaining that we can't enter every building in Night City. I'm not complaining that there will be no entirely new map in cyberspace to explore. I'm not complaining about all that and more, exactly because I am balancing my expectations with reality. But if more than 4 options in character creation is too much to expect... I don't know what can I say about that. Also this "game is still in development" argument just don't work for me. In old demo we had more options. Now we have less. Simple. Back then it was also game in development. You can say that in both cases it is just place holder, and I know you are right. But if they showing us something like that, what reaction are they expecting? I mean, if everything we are seeing in those videos is just "work in progress" and we just can't assume anything, so at the end this game can be released as football manager and we can't complain because all footage shown before was just "work in progress". As I have said before. I will rather "bitch" now about this, than later regret, that I wasn't "bitching" enough.

As I said, input is still a good thing though. None of us knows WHAT will be in the final product. I sure don't. There might even be expansions for the things they couldn't fit in. At this point, it seems a bit premature to speculate.

 

[FiveByWire]

No idea where you're getting "Far Cry clone" from and it's definitely an RPG. That's pretty obvious especially from the recent 15 minute video and the fact the devs have said so numerous times over the years. As I previously stated you guys are drawing conclusions based off nothing i.e you saying it'll have limited custom options, and 20 hours long. I highly doubt a game that's taken nearly a decade to make is going to be limited and have such a short campaign. With everything it'll probably be more like 100+ hours.

You are not facing reality.

The game has, according to the developers, gone through multiple builds. CDPR is still a relatively small studio compared to something like Bioware or Bethesda, which means it can't run concurrent large projects. Those builds were probably small and limited in scope while the rights to the PnP were still being worked out.

Then they decided on the current iteration. The footage at EA 2018 was pre-alpha footage, a bullshot of what "could" be the game. A lot of what you saw in that original gameplay video has been removed, judging by the most recent gameplay, so it likely wasn't running on an alpha build of the game either, but a specially-built demo produced exclusively for E3 2018.

So, they most likely didn't have a working alpha build of the final game as late as August 2018. I'll be generous and say that they recorded that tech demo earlier in the year, so let's say they were working on an alpha as early as June of last year.

As an example, the original Mass Effect began production in early 2004. It was released in 2007. So, a three year development cycle for a game that clocked in at around 40ish hours if you do everything.

The core mechanics of Cyberpunk 2077 have only been worked on for a little over a year. They have seven months left, and they won't work on major features up to the wire, but let's be really generous and say 2 years.

If they had decided to use the same engine and assets from The Witcher (rigging, character skeletons, some animations, etc) then I would agree that the game could be at around 80 hours of content in two years of development. However, they are doing a complete departure from The Witcher - they are making a FPS, which they have never made before, with all new assets.

In two years.

There is no way this game is going to be 100+ hours. There's very little chance it will be more than 40. They are cutting things left and right (character backstories beyond the three we saw at E3, jobs like in the PnP, third-person cinematic cutscenes which constitute an enormous undertaking in a new engine because they have to adapt their old synching and modeling randomizer programs, or build new ones from scratch, and etc.).

That's where I'm getting my 20ish hours from. They don't have the time. It takes years to make a proper RPG. Far Cry 5, however, only took about a year for Ubisoft to make, start to finish. That's the type of game that this is looking to be.

 

[CyberBobber]

You are not facing reality.

The game has, according to the developers, gone through multiple builds. CDPR is still a relatively small studio compared to something like Bioware or Bethesda, which means it can't run concurrent large projects. Those builds were probably small and limited in scope while the rights to the PnP were still being worked out.

Then they decided on the current iteration. The footage at EA 2018 was pre-alpha footage, a bullshot of what "could" be the game. A lot of what you saw in that original gameplay video has been removed, judging by the most recent gameplay, so it likely wasn't running on an alpha build of the game either, but a specially-built demo produced exclusively for E3 2018.

So, they most likely didn't have a working alpha build of the final game as late as August 2018. I'll be generous and say that they recorded that tech demo earlier in the year, so let's say they were working on an alpha as early as June of last year.

As an example, the original Mass Effect began production in early 2004. It was released in 2007. So, a three year development cycle for a game that clocked in at around 40ish hours if you do everything.

The core mechanics of Cyberpunk 2077 have only been worked on for a little over a year. They have seven months left, and they won't work on major features up to the wire, but let's be really generous and say 2 years.

If they had decided to use the same engine and assets from The Witcher (rigging, character skeletons, some animations, etc) then I would agree that the game could be at around 80 hours of content in two years of development. However, they are doing a complete departure from The Witcher - they are making a FPS, which they have never made before, with all new assets.

In two years.

There is no way this game is going to be 100+ hours. There's very little chance it will be more than 40. They are cutting things left and right (character backstories beyond the three we saw at E3, jobs like in the PnP, third-person cinematic cutscenes which constitute an enormous undertaking in a new engine because they have to adapt their old synching and modeling randomizer programs, or build new ones from scratch, and etc.).

That's where I'm getting my 20ish hours from. They don't have the time. It takes years to make a proper RPG. Far Cry 5, however, only took about a year for Ubisoft to make, start to finish. That's the type of game that this is looking to be.

100 hour isnt that much in modern world. I rushed through AC Odyssey and it took me 90 hour. And Ubisoft's games are much more simplier than CDPRs.

 

[Kretek]

You are not facing reality.

The game has, according to the developers, gone through multiple builds. CDPR is still a relatively small studio compared to something like Bioware or Bethesda, which means it can't run concurrent large projects. Those builds were probably small and limited in scope while the rights to the PnP were still being worked out.

Then they decided on the current iteration. The footage at EA 2018 was pre-alpha footage, a bullshot of what "could" be the game. A lot of what you saw in that original gameplay video has been removed, judging by the most recent gameplay, so it likely wasn't running on an alpha build of the game either, but a specially-built demo produced exclusively for E3 2018.

So, they most likely didn't have a working alpha build of the final game as late as August 2018. I'll be generous and say that they recorded that tech demo earlier in the year, so let's say they were working on an alpha as early as June of last year.

As an example, the original Mass Effect began production in early 2004. It was released in 2007. So, a three year development cycle for a game that clocked in at around 40ish hours if you do everything.

The core mechanics of Cyberpunk 2077 have only been worked on for a little over a year. They have seven months left, and they won't work on major features up to the wire, but let's be really generous and say 2 years.

If they had decided to use the same engine and assets from The Witcher (rigging, character skeletons, some animations, etc) then I would agree that the game could be at around 80 hours of content in two years of development. However, they are doing a complete departure from The Witcher - they are making a FPS, which they have never made before, with all new assets.

In two years.

There is no way this game is going to be 100+ hours. There's very little chance it will be more than 40. They are cutting things left and right (character backstories beyond the three we saw at E3, jobs like in the PnP, third-person cinematic cutscenes which constitute an enormous undertaking in a new engine because they have to adapt their old synching and modeling randomizer programs, or build new ones from scratch, and etc.).

That's where I'm getting my 20ish hours from. They don't have the time. It takes years to make a proper RPG. Far Cry 5, however, only took about a year for Ubisoft to make, start to finish. That's the type of game that this is looking to be.

Nah mate. Now even I must say you are overreacting. This game WILL be rpg with shooter elements not other way around. And for sure it will be bigger than "20ish hours" experience. 100+ hours for sure. Maybe I'm cynical bastard and whine about everything I see, but even I will say that saying that this will be just some 20 hours long Far Cry clone is just to much. In worst case scenario it will be football manager.

 

[FiveByWire]

Nah mate. Now even I must say you are overreacting. This game WILL be rpg with shooter elements not other way around.

According to their official twitter description, it's now an "action/open world story game" and not an RPG. Take that how you will.

And for sure it will be bigger than "20ish hours" experience. 100+ hours for sure. Maybe I'm cynical bastard and whine about everything I see, but even I will say that saying that this will be just some 20 hours long Far Cry clone is just to much. In worst case scenario it will be football manager.

And where can they pull 100+ hours out in a two year development cycle?

A more recent comparison: Mass Effect Andromeda. 200 people, 18 month development cycle once it was out of development hell. Still only 40ish hours long, and we know exactly how that game turned out. CDPR is a much better studio than modern Bioware, but they aren't superhumans. They need to sleep and eat and go home and see their families.

And, judging by the time from announcement to demo, Cyberpunk had a similar development hell to Andromeda. And the Andromeda team was working with a new engine too, and had to make everything from scratch. Very similar, although they didn't radically change the Mass Effect formula.

 

[Bloodartist]

Ok so for example this article:
https://www.windowscentral.com/cd-p...cter-customization-options-following-feedback

Is this simply misinformed or not up-to-date? It mentions that many changes were made to expand character creation following feedback from 2019 E3?

The thing that bugs me is that the deep dive video SEEMED to show an INFERIOR version of the character creator, at least compared to the 2018 demo. I see less options. Look at the colors for example.

It could be that the demo showed a non-current version of the character creator but what would be the point of showing such a thing in a DEMO that is supposed to DEMONSTRATE what you have? I am so confused trying to match what the devs say and what they show us.... If they wanted us to not misinterpret stuff, then maybe they should show us more than COUPLE SECONDS of game video about it... The more misguided people are, the more they will speak against the game.

Most of the time it seems like the CDPR is climbing a tree ass backwards..

 

[Guest 3847602]

As an example, the original Mass Effect began production in early 2004. It was released in 2007. So, a three year development cycle for a game that clocked in at around 40ish hours if you do everything.

The original ME had to undergo an extensive revamp of its combat system less then a year before it got released (for example the direct control over squadmates was scrapped). Plus, BioWare, even in their prime, never had as much as half the manpower as CDPR have on CP2077. Just to be clear, I'm not saying everything is super duper over there, just that people often overlook the fact that 500+ developers working on an RPG is basically unparalleled.

 

[Kretek]

According to their official twitter description, it's now an "action/open world story game" and not an RPG. Take that how you will.

And where can they pull 100+ hours out in a two year development cycle?

A more recent comparison: Mass Effect Andromeda. 200 people, 18 month development cycle once it was out of development hell. Still only 40ish hours long, and we know exactly how that game turned out. CDPR is a much better studio than modern Bioware, but they aren't superhumans. They need to sleep and eat and go home and see their families.

And, judging by the time from announcement to demo, Cyberpunk had a similar development hell to Andromeda. And the Andromeda team was working with a new engine too, and had to make everything from scratch. Very similar, although they didn't radically change the Mass Effect formula.

I mean. I think we both know that Mass Effect Andromeda and nu Bioware explain everything. CDPR are not working with completely new engine. Its new version of Red Engine but it is still Red Engine. "Cyberpunk had a similar development hell to Andromeda". We absolutely don't know anything about that, but I really, really doubt it. Let be honest. Big chunk of Mass Effect Andromeda team, was just bunch of amateurs hired to "prove" every "incel", "nazi", "sexist", "misogynist", "shitlord" that having purple hairs and some weird gender pronounce in your twitter profile will give you super powers of game development. Maybe CDPR removed gender options from character creation and replaced it with "left body option" and "right body option" but they are still more than competent game developers. Hell, I still think that they are one of the best right now. Comparing them in any way to nu Bioware is just unfair. I mean, we are talking about this level of incompetence: https://theralphretort.com/a-cospla...l-animator-for-mass-effect-andromeda-3017017/

 

[ChristophWr]

I'm sure more customization options like clothing and body mods open up the longer you play the game, but I'm still absolutely gutted they completely ditched this character creator and backstory options. Especially after how much positive feedback they received about it!
View attachment 11014247

When i first saw that i was so hyped because i thought they are making a true pen and paper rpg and give us a lot more freedom this time.The character creator they showed now looks so boring and lazy....just pick a backstory here customize the character a bit and that’s it....i hope they bring that back

 

[Bloodartist]

The original ME had to undergo an extensive revamp of its combat system less then a year before it got released (for example the direct control over squadmates was scrapped). Plus, BioWare, even in their prime, never had as much as half the manpower as CDPR have on CP2077. Just to be clear, I'm not saying everything is super duper over there, just that people often overlook the fact that 500+ developers working on an RPG is basically unparalleled.

And its a well-documented fact that simply throwing more people at a programming problem doesn't truly solve it faster or better. There are some jobs you simply cannot divide, multiply or share.

 

[Shavod]

Ok so for example this article:
https://www.windowscentral.com/cd-p...cter-customization-options-following-feedback

Is this simply misinformed or not up-to-date? It mentions that many changes were made to expand character creation following feedback from 2019 E3?

The thing that bugs me is that the deep dive video SEEMED to show an INFERIOR version of the character creator, at least compared to the 2018 demo. I see less options. Look at the colors for example.

It could be that the demo showed a non-current version of the character creator but what would be the point of showing such a thing in a DEMO that is supposed to DEMONSTRATE what you have? I am so confused trying to match what the devs say and what they show us.... If they wanted us to not misinterpret stuff, then maybe they should show us more than COUPLE SECONDS of game video about it... The more misguided people are, the more they will speak against the game.

Most of the time it seems like the CDPR is climbing a tree ass backwards..

Remember that demo was made using a build that is already several months old by now, so of course the character creator is not up to date.

 

[Feiabel]

Anyway after the annoncement about lack off/removed TPP cutscene we now understand why the charabuilder and visual customization is so limited in the last trailer...
Because we will just almost never be able to see our avatar so it was just a waste of resources, Marcin Momot confirmed it.

Make sense, but also very disappointing.

 

[Johnysh]

Anyway after the annoncement about lack off/removed TPP cutscene we now understand why the charabuilder and visual customization is so limited in the last trailer...
Because we will just almost never be able to see our avatar so it was just a waste of resources, Marcin Momot confirmed it.

Make sense, but also very disappointing.

It's so limited because it's older than E3 2019. They said that they remade CC probably three times already. We haven't seen the last, actual version.

 

[Suhiira]

According to their official twitter description, it's now an "action/open world story game" and not an RPG. Take that how you will.

I wasn't aware they'd changed this but I'm very glad they did as it more accurately represents what CP2077 "is" rather then what it "could" be.

 

[fridgeband]

Tell me mate, what is the point of this forum?!? To praise CDPR? "I'm throwing money on the screen but nothing is happening"? "Please take my money"? We all know its their game. We all know its their money. I won't even start that without people buying their games there would be no money to produce those games but whatever. We all know that at the end this is all their decision what they will do. But i will rather "bitch" now what I don't like than wait couple of months and have to listen to "you should have say what is your problem back then were something could be done about it" argument. I'm "shilling" for CDPR from 2008. Hell, even longer. Most of you didn't even knew were Poland is on a map when I was buying their products, but even I have my limit of fanatical fanboyism. If you so sure it will be "masterpiece" just because its CDPR, good for you mate. I just want to tell you that couple years ago, most people were saying such thing about Blizzard for example. And where are they now? "You guys don't have phones"??? Your strategy is to praise them whatever is happening? Ok, good for you. My strategy is to tell them where I see a problem. You know why I'm "bitching" here? Because I actually care. All this take it or leave it, is just pathetic. Seriously, once again, what is the point of this forum?

I have to actually agree with this exactly because of The precise very point of everyone talking is so CDPR can be like "oh, yes we hear you!" Of course in the end it is their choice because it's their game, but we give our feedback because we care. We all want CDPR to be successful just as much as we want Cyberpunk2077 to be fun. We love the game, but we also love the company. We would all be doing CDPR a great disservice by NOT telling them what we have to say. So yes, I must definitely agree with you

Post automatically merged: Sep 3, 2019

Nothing wrong with voicing concerns. It's valuable input. Problem is, it would be impossible to A.) Include everything everyone wants (Some things might be contradictory and thus impossible to implement). And B.) Because of the scale of the game and the upcoming deadlines, there may not be time/space to implement ALL suggestions. That however does not nullify the need for input. Who knows? If something wasn't able to be implemented into the core came, maybe it will be added to an expansion or a sequel somewhere down the road.

I think what everyone is trying to say deep down inside is that it would be more harmful if everyone never said anything VS everyone putting out 100% of the information and allowing CDPR to think about it and make their own free choices.

I would rather say something and have it be considered if there is the possibility it could have helped, even if it doesn't end up doing anything,
VS
never saying anything, and CDPR never knowing what could have been of everyones thoughts.

Post automatically merged: Sep 3, 2019

I'm sure more customization options like clothing and body mods open up the longer you play the game, but I'm still absolutely gutted they completely ditched this character creator and backstory options. Especially after how much positive feedback they received about it!
View attachment 11014247

I agree. I liked the old style too. It just felt "right" now it's just in the style of "I don't feel anything except for uncertainty, but not in the sense of tension in the canon of the gameworld, so much as the new menu's or GUI makes me feel uncertain and bored as a player." New menu's or GUI just don't seem immersive at all and don't feel "Cyber" or "Punk". It's a huge step backwards in my honest opinion.

I would really appreciate it if CDPR went back to the old GUI Style, and then simply added super hyper ultra more customization options to it, so that it looks and feels right, but has vastly more customization than previously.

I totally agree with you. I just don't see how is more than 4 nose options or 7 eye color options something unrealistic. I'm not complaining about not being able to play as rockerboy because I know it would be extremely complicated to implement. I'm not complaining that we cannot pilot flying car wherever we want. I'm not complaining that we can't enter every building in Night City. I'm not complaining that there will be no entirely new map in cyberspace to explore. I'm not complaining about all that and more, exactly because I am balancing my expectations with reality. But if more than 4 options in character creation is too much to expect... I don't know what can I say about that. Also this "game is still in development" argument just don't work for me. In old demo we had more options. Now we have less. Simple. Back then it was also game in development. You can say that in both cases it is just place holder, and I know you are right. But if they showing us something like that, what reaction are they expecting? I mean, if everything we are seeing in those videos is just "work in progress" and we just can't assume anything, so at the end this game can be released as football manager and we can't complain because all footage shown before was just "work in progress". As I have said before. I will rather "bitch" now about this, than later regret, that I wasn't "bitching" enough.