How would you feel about Cyberpunk 2077 always online ?

+
How would you feel about Cyberpunk 2077 always online ?

or discs being watermarked so that it only works on that system?

i think piracy is a big problem especially when it comes to PC gaming and eastern europe/asia..
im pretty sure they would make more money by having it always online but they need to get the servers working day 1.
 
Well, I personally am 100% online anyway, so it wouldn't make a difference. Also, seeing as how 100% of games which aren't always online are cracked by the guys at Razor1911, SKIDROW or RELOADED, or if not them, then someone else, I can quite easily understand why you'd want an always online system.

Even "always online" systems are cracked. Something such as WoW is much harder, since the game is streamed from a server to your computer in a big part. Anything that exists 100% on the install DVD will be cracked, regardless of DRM. DRM is nothing but a speed bump, and as such complete and utter waste of time and simply a PitA for the honest customer.

So, to answer, I would buy the game whether it required you to be online or not, but I can understand why someone wouldn't.
 
CDPR many times stated that they will be aiming at their future games being 100% DRM free. I don't believe they would ever, EVER go into always-online territory.

I can only imagine the huge backlash they would get for such a decision. It would be huge and it would never stop. So this is an issue I have no fear of, as they are the last developer on this planet that would hurt their legal customers like that.
 
CDPR many times stated that they will be aiming at their future games being 100% DRM free. I don't believe they would ever, EVER go into always-online territory.

I can only imagine the huge backlash they would get for such a decision. It would be huge and it would never stop. So this is an issue I have no fear of, as they are the last developer on this planet that would hurt their legal customers like that.

what if stats showed it would double their profit???
which would result into hiring more people and more games..
 
haha...but seriously i hate casual gamers.

It's funny how when you get a steady job, in which you spend 7-8 hours of five days a week, add 1-2 hours for commuting minimum, taking care of stuff you need to when you live alone in your own house or flat (whether you own or rent it) such as groceries, laundry, dishes, cleaning the place up and so on, have some other hobbies other than gaming (exercising comes to mind), take care of other important business such as meetings and so forth, see your RL friends every once in a while, and give in to your other vices such as movies, TV, drinking, and so on, how little time there actually is for gaming.

...and that's when you're single.

I think your "hatred" of "casual" gamers might get a new point of view Pris2013, if and once you get into the aforementioned situation yourself. Give it a few years. Age comes whether you want it or not, and you find yourself in a situation not being able to just coast along while someone else takes care of you.

Having said that, never lose the spark though. I'd do anything not to. :)
 
I don't hate casual gamers. I hate poorly written and executed games. The last... I don't know, dozen Need for Speed titles come to mind... =p
 
My internet connection is on all the time, but I despise the ideas behind always-online DRM. If I'm playing a single-player game, or even a multiplayer game with my friends on a LAN, the game should NOT have to phone home. That's [one of the reasons] why I stopped playing Diablo 3. I would prefer the game companies I buy from to treat me like an adult, not a 3 year old.

-- Ben
 
I wouldn't care about the game, simple as that. Intrusive DRM is not how you gain the appreciation of your consumers. We all know by their past behavior that CDPR would never resort to such a thing, so I pose this question to you Pris2013: why make this thread? It has the same merit of existing as if you made a thread titled "What if CDPR wasn't CDPR?"
 
Ok, editor doesn't work. Thats two Tommy Lee Jones stares for this grand idea. That CDPR will never do.
 

Attachments

  • tommy_lee_jones_does_not_approve.jpg
    tommy_lee_jones_does_not_approve.jpg
    42.4 KB · Views: 61
  • 30710d1322702699-cost-building-strat-tommy-lee-jones-no-country-old-men.jpg
    30710d1322702699-cost-building-strat-tommy-lee-jones-no-country-old-men.jpg
    17.8 KB · Views: 48
Dealbreaker. Most def. Ham-handed DRM like that is always a dealbreaker for me.

I will say registering disks and such doesn't bother me. But once I've paid for the game, that should be the end of it. Copy protection doesn't bother me. But forcing me to be signed into a network for a single player game....

I will direct your attention to the bungled launches of Diablo III and SimCity....

Let's not go there, if at all possible. There MUST be another way.
 
I will say registering disks and such doesn't bother me. But once I've paid for the game, that should be the end of it. Copy protection doesn't bother me. But forcing me to be signed into a network for a single player game....

I will direct your attention to the bungled launches of Diablo III and SimCity....

Let's not go there, if at all possible. There MUST be another way.
Right there with you. /co-signed
 
The only, and I mean the only, way I would be cool with always online on a single player game is if it meant we got a world that was was absolutely enormous... one that was evolving and growing... because the world itself was stored on servers, like an MMO... but the game should not be an MMO, at least not in the traditional sense... You should be able to limit the people in that world... say a max of ten, so you can play with your friends, like if you were playing the tabletop game.... But the world would have to be truly immense... Fill that world with enterable buildings, hundreds of different kinds of vehicles, diverse terrain and weather conditions, and fleshed out NPC's. In other words, an MMO world, but one where the population is mostly NPC, as opposed to a game like WoW or Everquest or whatever, where there are thousands of assholes running around, laging up the game, begging to group with you, or just being douchebags. Limit it to yourself AND, if you choose, up to 9 other people and thats it.

In that world in addition to the set goals and storylines, people should be able to create their own "events" pick a location, pick a goal, pick the number of friendlies and enemies, random rewards based off diccidulty... off you go...

You should be able to disallow objects if you think they are game breaking or harmful to immersion.... "Ie clicking a filter to disallow rpg's, so you don't have the bazooka asshole running around all the time."

The disk itself would mostly contain the character generator, which would be more indepth than anything seen before...

And the game would have to not only be multi-platform, but cross platform as well... allowing people with Playstations to play with people with X-Box's to play with people on PC's . (I never played it, but I know the Final Fantasy Online game was cross platform, at least for PS2 and PC users...)

But anything less than all of those things, would be a complete deal breaker for me.
 
it would be annoying if as designed, it was a sandbox game and the DRM blows the thing up because of a minor connection drop out. the smart thing would be to have it only send a request when needed...say for online content. but still let the person putter around with offline content while awaiting the connection to come back
 
The only, and I mean the only, way I would be cool with always online on a single player game is if it meant we got a world that was was absolutely enormous... one that was evolving and growing... because the world itself was stored on servers, like an MMO... but the game should not be an MMO, at least not in the traditional sense... You should be able to limit the people in that world... say a max of ten, so you can play with your friends, like if you were playing the tabletop game.... But the world would have to be truly immense... Fill that world with enterable buildings, hundreds of different kinds of vehicles, diverse terrain and weather conditions, and fleshed out NPC's. In other words, an MMO world, but one where the population is mostly NPC, as opposed to a game like WoW or Everquest or whatever, where there are thousands of assholes running around, laging up the game, begging to group with you, or just being douchebags. Limit it to yourself AND, if you choose, up to 9 other people and thats it.
Not that I'm a code-monkey, but from the teeny bit I *do* know about game design, I don't even know how you could do this feasibly. The massive, persistent world, on the company's servers: totally do-able.

Opening up a session that's *only* open to ten people at a time, with multiple sessions running concurrently? No idea how they'd be able to feasibly, realistically do that.
 
Top Bottom