Cool thing is, it actually IS a playable game. It was made in Dreams, so as long as you have a PS4 and this guy shares it publicly, you can do everything he just did, and possibly more, if he adds actual missions and such.
- Status
I have no doubt it'll be far more then a run of the mill FPS.
The question is how central/essential to the gameplay will the FPS be?
I suspect not very central, if there are so many other ways of approaching a situation. But we still haven't seen anything of the Techie playstyle (except opening a door which I don't count).
We've seen almost nothing of the other play styles. Everything we have seen has been vertical slice, which is not real gameplay.
we've seen fast solo, strong solo and netrunner. We just miss techie and its bots.
Think TW3. Same frequency of dialogues, exploration and fighting (= FPS here). Most likely.
Pretty much what I expect, and dread, too.
I got thru TW3 by playing in "Story" mode and flailing around until stuff died, rarely dodging anything. I also recall a couple fights early in TW2 that almost caused me to give up on even playing the game.
Regarding "Looks like average FPS criticism"
I don't want to appear overly defensive, nor do so between the lines, but personally I wonder what some people expect?
My point here isn't that it will be a bad game, nor that it will be perfect (that is subjective a lot anyway).
It's just that despite good innovation and experience based on prior works like the Witcher, and company ethos and a lot more, in the end we're all bound by very real physical limitations, whether that is a time frame, finances, having to go with technology that is available or feasible, and a lot more. In some areas, you likely can't invent the wheel anew or not do so in a realistic timeframe not based on limited resources. This by no means intends to overmask things people will now or later subjectively nitpick on or criticize if they so desire, but the main point is: Were/Are the personal expectations real?
Personally, I think I have pretty 'realistic' or, say, 'believable' expectations. The rest, I can personally only judge once I get to play it or watch it extensively like in a Let's Play.
My own expectation and impression (subjective, sure) is that yes, some core mechanics won't be breathtakingly new (and likely can't be) but what plays over them will likely be very good or above-average RPG and storytelling and worldcrafting details. Shooting and other core gameplay aspects might be similar to other games but the overall product will likely be the "gem".
That's how I personally see it right now anyway. With time, more knowledge comes.
Wait and see. It's what? 3 more months in a nutshell.
I don't want to appear overly defensive, nor do so between the lines, but personally I wonder what some people expect?
My point here isn't that it will be a bad game, nor that it will be perfect (that is subjective a lot anyway).
It's just that despite good innovation and experience based on prior works like the Witcher, and company ethos and a lot more, in the end we're all bound by very real physical limitations, whether that is a time frame, finances, having to go with technology that is available or feasible, and a lot more. In some areas, you likely can't invent the wheel anew or not do so in a realistic timeframe not based on limited resources. This by no means intends to overmask things people will now or later subjectively nitpick on or criticize if they so desire, but the main point is: Were/Are the personal expectations real?
Personally, I think I have pretty 'realistic' or, say, 'believable' expectations. The rest, I can personally only judge once I get to play it or watch it extensively like in a Let's Play.
My own expectation and impression (subjective, sure) is that yes, some core mechanics won't be breathtakingly new (and likely can't be) but what plays over them will likely be very good or above-average RPG and storytelling and worldcrafting details. Shooting and other core gameplay aspects might be similar to other games but the overall product will likely be the "gem".
That's how I personally see it right now anyway. With time, more knowledge comes.
Wait and see. It's what? 3 more months in a nutshell.
I dont expect the combat to be any more special than "standard fps", but its the world, the details, the writing, the characters, the immersion etc everything else that is going to make this game awesome.
In fairness, delivering another experience on par with TW3 would likely be a resounding success. Not that TW3 was successful because of the combat. The game lacked in a lot of areas but made up for it in others in spades.
I've historically been in a more negative or at least critical camp when it comes to this game, but I do think most of the news, gameplay, etc. we've seen so far suggests this is going to be more than a typical FPS/shooter style of game. I think @Suhiira and @Mybrokenenglish raise a lot of excellent points, but the whole "it's just going to be Witcher 3 with constant mandatory action etc etc." stuff is very incorrect, IMO.
We will need to wait for more information (such as hands-on demos from people who have similar concerns) before making a final judgement, but everything I've seen so far suggests there is way, way, more ways to play the game than run and gun.
Understand that the reason they show constant action and shooting in the demos and media is because that's what gets people visually hooked. That does NOT mean that's all the game is. I am at least 85% confident we will have many ways to approach every, or almost every, situation, stealth and hacking and engineering included. I'm sure combat will be forced in some scenarios (or you can just run away since there are no game overs outside of deaths).
Again, you can be critical, but look at the thread we're in. This is the information hub. Everything we've been told, time and time again, is "FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY, FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY, FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY." Will it 100% live up to that, of course not, no game does. But I'm pretty sure they wouldn't push this as a big feature if it was BS.
We will need to wait for more information (such as hands-on demos from people who have similar concerns) before making a final judgement, but everything I've seen so far suggests there is way, way, more ways to play the game than run and gun.
Understand that the reason they show constant action and shooting in the demos and media is because that's what gets people visually hooked. That does NOT mean that's all the game is. I am at least 85% confident we will have many ways to approach every, or almost every, situation, stealth and hacking and engineering included. I'm sure combat will be forced in some scenarios (or you can just run away since there are no game overs outside of deaths).
Again, you can be critical, but look at the thread we're in. This is the information hub. Everything we've been told, time and time again, is "FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY, FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY, FREEDOM OF GAMEPLAY." Will it 100% live up to that, of course not, no game does. But I'm pretty sure they wouldn't push this as a big feature if it was BS.
I expect the next gameplay we see will be considerably different than what's been shown so far since it'll be a near final build. I'm holding out hope gunplay will actually be good. Maybe not on par with a dedicated shooter, but close to it. They have around 500 people on the game and no doubt some will be new hires experienced in FPS design. And a bit of a confession: I've been overly cynical lately because I'm just getting impatient and want to see more of the game, lol.
I was not complaining. I have absolutely no problem with action games or combat systems. My main problem with TW3 was how levels were used that led to damage sponges, unrealistic situations and a superfluos (IMHO) progression system (progression systems are not superfluous per se, TW3's one was when it comes to effects on gameplay).
Yeah, I mean, I agree. What I meant is that the game's frequency of dialogues, exploration and enemy encounters will be the same as TW3's. Of course we'll have more options to face those enemies (fight, stealth, whatever).
I really wasn't clear.
Agreed.
CP2077 is not intended to be an action or shooter game. It's just that CDPR has decided to use those mechanics for many aspects of the game. The question is: "How much will those mechanics influence actual gameplay." Intended or not the use of these mechanics puts very real limitations on what CDPR can, and can't, do gameplay wise.
One could imagine you will visit them at least once because of story.
I got amazing idea, what if player could call NPC to him? Lets say you go to a club, you sit down, you call to NPC, he comes to you.
Last edited:
I do hope for a healthy investment from the devs into "moddability" because no matter the amount of clubs or what you can do in them, modding could take it further. I'll keep it at that though, because there is a dedicated thread about modding 
I don't think it has been confirmed that all those places will be in the game. The video is mostly a lore dive of the pen & paper source material.
I'm sure we'll see some of them but I doubt all of them will be major locations within the video game.
- Status