Happy Anniversary *beep*

+
For four games people go back and forth on this forum. Not sure if it's a good or bad. Probably bad, a strong formed community will remain a community even if developers are no longer active. And boy, CDPR deserves a strong community, not back and forths.
 
ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
I already imagine you getting disappointed by this game then. The PnP is the basis to build the game, but it's not the video game itself. I know there will be all the classes in the game. But there's no way in hell for them to make every class for example as detailed as it is in the PnP game. Even in an interview Mike Pondsmith said that there is a lot of subtlety in the classes. They are gonna be different dont get me wrong. But not as hugely different as you want.
Btw there has to be action. It's a video game. Combat is not what i look forward in an RPG video game but it has to be there because it's a video game.
I personally would love if they really focus on dialogue options. And that you can complete for example the whole main quest without killing anyone. But if they don't do that it's ok. Because the diolague in TW3 was pretty superb.
They are making the closest thing to a virtual world of Cyberpunk. No one would do it better than CDPR. So i think people need to be thankful and understand how lucky we are that a game like this is even happing at this scope with this studio. Normally Cyberpunk games have a lower ambition. They just can't be as big as this game will be.
Also Mike Pondsmith is heavily involved in this. Any other studio would probably ignored most of what he has to say, or not even consult him. Not CDPR. The fact that he even said he's very exited about the game and likes what they are doing is an indication that this game is in the right track. I mean he's the guy who made the 2020.

Yep, this pic from the official blog illustrates this well:






It's hard to make a RPG based on a PNP game, we must not forget that.

 
Snowflakez;n10246912 said:
The mainstream audience isn't going to care. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm going to guess that the majority (or at least a very, very large portion) of the audience has never even heard of 2020.

Indeed they don't.

My bet would be... they wouldn't care even if the game had a tad deeper RPG systems (and their use) than what what is the current industry standard (loose shit that does fuck all aside from posing as the posterboy telling people "Hey, I'm an arpeegee! Believe me!") as long as the game meets other common triple-A standards.

I think that while thereis certainly stupidity among the mainstream audience, it's actually a misconception to think that they are all a bunch of raving baboons who just wish to smash things in a shiny interactive movie-thing and unable to comprehend and appreciate depth and complexity if such is offered to them in a neat enough package.

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
I already imagine you getting disappointed by this game then.

It's possible (even probable). I've been bracing myself for it for quite some time already.

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
Classes... They are gonna be different dont get me wrong. But not as hugely different as you want.

How different do you think I want them to be, exactly?

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
Btw there has to be action. It's a video game. Combat is not what i look forward in an RPG video game but it has to be there because it's a video game.

No, that's not true. Nowhere is it said that combat is a requirement for a videogame. There will be combat and action in CP2077 for sure, but how it is done and how much of it there is, is still up in the air. How much does the desired expreience require it, how optional a feature it will be or will it rule the gameplay singelhandedly. What kind of action, how does it play out...

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
Because the diolague in TW3 was pretty superb.

It was nicely written and acted, but as mostly as a cavalcade of overlong cutscenes, it hardly offered any intrigue from a gameplay perspective.

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
No one would do it better than CDPR.

That's... debatable....

ChrisStayler;n10248582 said:
i think people need to be thankful and understand how lucky we are that a game like this is even happing at this scope with this studio.

What's there to be thankful for? We know next to nothing about the game.

Should we throw our standards away and be grateful just because BigAssGames here is being mighty kind to us poor gamerfolk by bestowing us a thing that has promising title not often used nor used well by others? For all we know the game will turn out to be complete and utter shite not worth a wooden dime. I'd rather have no game than a bad game. And I don't believe anything's going to be good, let alone awesome, before I see it for myself.

I'm not quite ready for that. CDPR are good guys, but I don't have that kind of "company man" attitude, that cleanses them from any doubt or criticism. They still have to walk the walk.
 
Last edited:
metalmaniac21;n10250162 said:
For four games people go back and forth on this forum. Not sure if it's a good or bad. Probably bad, a strong formed community will remain a community even if developers are no longer active. And boy, CDPR deserves a strong community, not back and forths.

This statement confuses me.
 
kofeiiniturpa;n10251992 said:
Indeed they don't.

My bet would be... they wouldn't care even if the game had a tad deeper RPG systems (and their use) than what what is the current industry standard (loose shit that does fuck all aside from posing as the posterboy telling people "Hey, I'm an arpeegee! Believe me!") as long as the game meets other common triple-A standards.

That's... debatable....

Yeah, agreed. I don't think the average gamer is an idiot or anything, I don't think anyone's tastes are inferior to anyone elses. If you like action games, you like action games. If you like simple games, you like simple games. Not objectively better or worse, just different.

But when you have so many games that already cater to that audience, it's not asking too much for one good game (hopefully) to be different. I also don't think the game will be as action-y as we fear. I think it will at least lean quite a bit more towards RPG than the Witcher 3 did. But you have every reason to be skeptical with the state of the gaming industry (Especially the AAA portion) right now.

Also, just curious - who do you think would be better suited to making 2077? While still keeping it open world with plenty of customization and such.

If I had to choose between a much smaller, linear story (like Pillars of Eternity) and a street-level story in a world that feels large and living, I'd pick the latter, but that's just me.

kofeiiniturpa;n10252472 said:
Sounds to me that he wants a non-migrating commnunity that stays put even during quieter times.

Oh. Yes, that would be ideal. I think we sort of had that prior to the *beep* situation. Most of you have been here for years.
 
Snowflakez;n10252542 said:
But when you have so many games that already cater to that audience, it's not asking too much for one good game (hopefully) to be different.

Yeah that's what I tried to say. You can offer them something different and if it's well done, it gets its audience. I don't believe majority are some sort of actio-FPS purists the same way I might sound like an RPG purist. CDPR should dare to try something a bit out of the loop with CP2077.

Snowflakez;n10252542 said:
Also, just curious - who do you think would be better suited to making 2077?

I don't know about specifically all around better, but one I'd have great interest in seeing how they'd tackle it if it was them who got the job...

Obsidian.

CDPR is more of a visual or cinematic storyteller, as they have these grand epics with the Witcher games, while Obsidian has much better grasp on the systems side of things (telling stories through gameplay and systems as well as through specific writing), and they have more of an oldschool mentality when it comes to RPG's and how they work even when they're doing modern games (see Fallout New Vegas for an example).
 
I think rather than the actual gameplay, marketing has bigger impact on how mainstream audience will pick up the game. Then, if the game is received well and gets continuous praising, like The Witcher 3, it might get longer term success. At this point the gameplay has bigger impact but I dare to say it wasn't what got people talking about TW3.
 
NightSavior;n10253962 said:
I think rather than the actual gameplay, marketing has bigger impact on how mainstream audience will pick up the game. Then, if the game is received well and gets continuous praising, like The Witcher 3, it might get longer term success. At this point the gameplay has bigger impact but I dare to say it wasn't what got people talking about TW3.

You're right. Marketing and how the game is portrayed are certainly key elements. You can make just about anything look good or bad in trailers, interviews and yes, even gameplay demonstrations. I mean, look at Andromeda - people still bought it (though many have certainly refunded it by now) because of EA's massive marketing budget. Same goes for any massive flop of the last decade or so.

But you also don't want to misrepresent your game. If you make a hardcore RPG but don't advertise it as a hardcore RPG, you are going to have upset customers, no doubt about it. Similarly, if you advertise your game as a hardcore RPG but it ends up being a shooty bang bang GTA-like with a perk system, you're going to piss people off.

It's one reason people have suggested that Evolve failed so hard. There were plenty of other reasons, of course, but the game's marketing team kept advertising it as "a game for Call of Duty fans" which it absolutely was not, and a "high octane FPS", which it absolutely was not.
 
Being a cynical bitch I tend to ignore advertising and hype other then to put stuff on my radar for future inspection.
I almost never pre-order games, tho I did with Fallout 4 and DA: Inquisition ... and both taught me valuable lessons about not assuming a new title in a series will be similar to past ones. So while I may not get it first I'll wait till a game releases and see how it actually plays via the net. Saved me with Andromeda. And as much as I'd like to pre-order CP2077 till I know for certain there's a non-FPS option and character skills matter (i.e. it's not "just a shooter") I'll wait. Might be the story and rest of the game still makes it worth getting (if there's an EZ/Story combat mode) and I'll still get it, but we'll just have to wait and see.

I know lots (most?) of people don't operate this way. I guess they're ultimately optimists (or naive) and buy based on what they hope something is rather then what it actually is. This is a pity only in that it encourages the sort of misleading advertising that's become so commonplace you just sort of assume it's all BS.
 
Last edited:
Suhiira;n10254962 said:
Being a cynical bitch I tend to ignore advertising and hype other then to put stuff on my radar for future inspection.
I almost never pre-order games, tho I did with Fallout 4 and DA: Inquisition ... and both taught me valuable lessons about not assuming a new title in a series will be similar to past ones. So while I may not get it first I'll wait till a game releases and see how it actually plays via the net. Saved me with Andromeda. And as much as I'd like to pre-order CP2077 till I know for certain there's a non-FPS option and character skills matter (i.e. it's not "just a shooter") I'll wait. Might be the story and rest of the game still makes it worth getting (if there's an EZ/Story combat mode) and I'll still get it, but we'll just have to wait and see.

I know lots (most?) of people don't operate this way. I guess they're ultimately optimists (or naive) and buy based on what they hope something is rather then what it actually is. This is a pity only in that it encourages the sort of misleading advertising that's become so commonplace you just sort of assume it's all BS.

Yep, absolutely.

Personally, I function a bit differently - if it's a company that has historically (and I mean in the past year or two, not 10 years in the past) made games I enjoy, that generally launch in an OK state, and don't do any anti-consumer things, the company gets my pre-order until such a time as they prove they don't deserve it anymore.

For instance, I pre-ordered Bethesda's published and developed games until Dishonored 2. Loved Oblivion, loved New Vegas, loved Skyrim, loved Dishonored 1, Fallout 4 was meh but still got my money's worth... but then they launched Dishonored 2. It ran like garbage on my PC, I couldn't push past 30 FPS. They tried to fix it with performance patches, but to no avail - it's just terribly optimized and still is to this day.

They broke my trust, and I won't pre-order any more of their games as a result. This was a smart move, since the latest Wolfenstein allegedly launched in the same condition.

Same has gone for EA, for Activision, and for countless other companies. It doesn't mean I won't buy their games, but I won't give them that blind faith anymore.

In CDPR's case, I'll be pre-ordering 2077. If it comes out and has any of the issues I consider a dealbreaker, I won't be so trusting in the future.

Anyway, I still totally agree with what you said and I think it's a super logical way to go about things. To me, though, I see a pre-order as a way to reward a company for doing good. Not only am I giving them my $60, I'm giving it to them in advance because I believe they deserve it. If they screw me over, that reward goes away - kinda like training a dog.
 
Last edited:
Snowflakez;n10255162 said:
In CDPR's case, I'll be pre-ordering 2077. If it comes out and has any of the issues I consider a dealbreaker, I won't be so trusting in the future.

Anyway, I still totally agree with what you said and I think it's a super logical way to go about things. To me, though, I see a pre-order as a way to reward a company for doing good. Not only am I giving them my $60, I'm giving it to them in advance because I believe they deserve it. If they screw me over, that reward goes away - kinda like training a dog.


That was the most beautiful way to put it I have ever seen. I too will be pre-ordering Cyberpunk. I had decided a long time ago that I was and this 5 year hype has made me decide that I'll even buy what ever season pass they may have and believe me when I say, I hate season passes.
 
Snowflakez;n10248612 said:
It's not too much to ask for CDPR to make an actual RPG. Combat can exist without it being action based.

As for being thankful... I don't owe CDPR anything. If the game isn't up to my personal standards (which are, admittedly, not as stringent as others on these forums), I won't buy it. They've established some goodwill with me by now, but if they just make Cyberpunk: The Shooter (+ dialoguez & stuff so it's totally an RPG guys) I'm not going to be even remotely interested. We have dozens of shooters already. Time for something new.

If you want an action game, GTA and Red Dead Redemption are that-a-way!

"It's not too much to ask for CDPR to make an actual RPG" What are you on about? The only non RPG game they made is Gwent. And if you think TW1, TW2 and TW3 are not RPGs then you are wrong. There's no discussing that. And they are very good at being RPGs as well.
You can't pick your skills or dialogue in RDR or GTZ. Very important parts of an RPG. They are open world action story based games.
Also what's with people like you anyways. "It's action, so it's not an RPG. I want a proper RPG..." An RPG can be action based. And if you don't want to play an action based RPG they are plenty of them out there now. Stop acting like they aren't. No one goes to Divinity's Original Sin forums and says why the game isn't action based.
I truly believe CDPR will give us a game with good combat. Not just guns that pew pew and done. Expect to have many skills not just related to gunplay. But who knows katanas, mindhacking where you can be some techno wizard who by the flick of your hand fries enemies high tech advanced brains.
 
ChrisStayler;n10256222 said:
"It's not too much to ask for CDPR to make an actual RPG" What are you on about? The only non RPG game they made is Gwent. And if you think TW1, TW2 and TW3 are not RPGs then you are wrong. There's no discussing that. And they are very good at being RPGs as well.
You can't pick your skills or dialogue in RDR or GTZ. Very important parts of an RPG. They are open world action story based games.
Also what's with people like you anyways. "It's action, so it's not an RPG. I want a proper RPG..." An RPG can be action based. And if you don't want to play an action based RPG they are plenty of them out there now. Stop acting like they aren't. No one goes to Divinity's Original Sin forums and says why the game isn't action based.
I truly believe CDPR will give us a game with good combat. Not just guns that pew pew and done. Expect to have many skills not just related to gunplay. But who knows katanas, mindhacking where you can be some techno wizard who by the flick of your hand fries enemies high tech advanced brains.

Here's my recommendation: Read up on Vampire: The Masquerade's gameplay mechanics. Heck, if you want to go even more into RPG territory read up on KOTOR and KOTOR II's gameplay mechanics. Those are RPGs. Although I'd say that they aren't quite as good as VTM, since there's less player agency.

As I said: you already have countless action games on the market. Action RPGs or otherwise. There are very few true RPGs. It is not too much to ask that CDPR makes a true RPG. Note, I use the word "True" only because I can't think of a better word, I'm not saying it's the defacto form of RPG and everybody must always love it 24/7.

This exact issue has been debated dozens of times on the forums, I'd prefer not to repeat myself. We will have to agree to disagree. You can browse through a few threads on the 1st or second page if you want to see some of the arguments I and others have made.

I don't understand the defensiveness, it's not like I'm saying you shouldn't enjoy the game or that I hate CDPR or something. People have different tastes. Nothing wrong with that.
 
Last edited:
ChrisStayler;n10256222 said:
...What are you on about? The only non RPG game they made is Gwent. And if you think TW1, TW2 and TW3 are not RPGs then you are wrong. There's no discussing that. And they are very good at being RPGs as well.
...
Also what's with people like you anyways. ".. Stop acting like they aren't...

Tone. Be polite and courteous. No one is trying to harm anyone else here and there is no argument to win. Do not attack other posters as being "like anyone else". This applies to everyone reading this, by the way.

Friendly. Polite. Interesting. (mostly) On topic. Welcome to the Cyberpunk forums, those are the guidelines.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Snowflakez;n10256282 said:
Here's my recommendation: Read up on Vampire: The Masquerade's gameplay mechanics. Heck, if you want to go even more into RPG territory read up on KOTOR and KOTOR II's gameplay mechanics. Those are RPGs. Although I'd say that they aren't quite as good as VTM, since there's less player agency.

As I said: you already have countless action games on the market. Action RPGs or otherwise. There are very few true RPGs. It is not too much to ask that CDPR makes a true RPG. Note, I use the word "True" only because I can't think of a better word, I'm not saying it's the defacto form of RPG and everybody must always love it 24/7.

This exact issue has been debated dozens of times on the forums, I'd prefer not to repeat myself. We will have to agree to disagree. You can browse through a few threads on the 1st or second page if you want to see some of the arguments I and others have made.

I don't understand the defensiveness, it's not like I'm saying you shouldn't enjoy the game or that I hate CDPR or something. People have different tastes. Nothing wrong with that.

Having not played Bloodlines, I can see some great ideas that 2077 could be inspired by, absolutely. But the game appears to be an action RPG which is still unlike what RPG elements some have suggested. Either way, its still make for a great game regardless, as I expect 2077 to be an action RPG.

Even as an action RPG, I like how each of the character roles in Bloodlines has very specific traits, skills and characteristics. Especially playing as the nosferatu which is the outcast of society and changes how the world perceives the player as well as gameplay options. Not many games really let you play a fully realized bad guy. I can certainly see how Cyberpunk roles could be very different in terms of gameplay as well as how becoming an enemy of the world as it reacts to the player. Among many other things.


 
Snowflakez;n10256282 said:
Here's my recommendation: Read up on Vampire: The Masquerade's gameplay mechanics. Heck, if you want to go even more into RPG territory read up on KOTOR and KOTOR II's gameplay mechanics. Those are RPGs. Although I'd say that they aren't quite as good as VTM, since there's less player agency.

As I said: you already have countless action games on the market. Action RPGs or otherwise. There are very few true RPGs. It is not too much to ask that CDPR makes a true RPG. Note, I use the word "True" only because I can't think of a better word, I'm not saying it's the defacto form of RPG and everybody must always love it 24/7.

This exact issue has been debated dozens of times on the forums, I'd prefer not to repeat myself. We will have to agree to disagree. You can browse through a few threads on the 1st or second page if you want to see some of the arguments I and others have made.

I don't understand the defensiveness, it's not like I'm saying you shouldn't enjoy the game or that I hate CDPR or something. People have different tastes. Nothing wrong with that.

You're rigth i guess we won't agree. Like you said, you can't find a better word so you use "true" But that's the thing. I have had disscusions with many poeple like you and they seem to have a view of their style of RPG is the best or True version. Which is just bs imo. As i said they are many type of RPGs. Just becuse i'm not that into JRPGs i don't go around saying they arent true RPGs.
I have played Vampire: The Masquerade. I heard KOTOR is really good as well. But CDPR have a way of making RPGs just like many other companies have their way of making them. There many type of RPGs and i think that's a good thing.
 
Top Bottom