- Status
kofeiiniturpa;n10867311 said:
I understand your viewpoint, you've explained it well and made some good points in the past. But I'm just not going to be as interested in an RPG from CDPR in which I can't see my character and his surroundings all the time if I so choose (or at least most of the time). I totally get why people would be into that and don't want to poop all over their fantasies, it's just really not my thing and it would be a deal breaker.
Luxorek;n10867431 said:
By FPS they mean perspective. Not gameplay style, near as I can tell.
kofeiiniturpa;n10867311 said:
This.
It won't be a no buy for me, of course, as I am Their Eternal Slave, but this is what's most important. Depending on what they do with the choices they've made will determine whether I like it, love it or enjoy it but am somewhat disappointed.
I'm personally almost sure it will have a third person camera whether there is first person one also or not. One of the most important things game studios can do to grow a strong fanbase and reputation is to make sure they release games that support among each other with enough similarities to "group" the kinds of gamers that would be attracted to those.
So then, CDPR's success and history is entirely built upon third person games? yeah, they're not gonna ruin that, especially not with this project. Maybe after a while when they have more IPs under their belt and people show signs of fatigue of their designs or whatever, but that's not happening anytime soon.
If this is in fact true, and its FP ONLY and no TP camera at all, then it'll be one of the stupidest business decisions I'd see in a long time.
So then, CDPR's success and history is entirely built upon third person games? yeah, they're not gonna ruin that, especially not with this project. Maybe after a while when they have more IPs under their belt and people show signs of fatigue of their designs or whatever, but that's not happening anytime soon.
If this is in fact true, and its FP ONLY and no TP camera at all, then it'll be one of the stupidest business decisions I'd see in a long time.
Geralt_of_bsas;n10867561 said:
While I am not convinced there will be no TPP mode even if the article was to be believed, I do not think CDPR could not make first person games only because their previous titles were third person. After all, they also always had a fixed protagonist, and that obviously changed. Developers can try new things that were not in their older games. Anyway, assuming there was really no TPP, in my opinion that would not be a business decision or something that was originally planned, but rather the result of having to cut the feature because it was too difficult to implement both perspectives well enough.
Snowflakez;n10867511 said:
I've read the article in Polish. They use FPS and FPP interchangeably. Doesn't matter much, I'm still convinced it's gonna be similar in that regard to the modern Deus Ex games. FPP with occasional TPP. Still, it's all rumours anyway and E3 isn't that far away. We will learn soon enough.
sv3672;n10867601 said:
The question then would be, why choose first person over third person if one had to be cut?
The obvious answer is "animations," but I feel like there would need to be more to it then that. CDPR flaunted their animation excellency in TW3, and they said it was one of their main goals with 2077 in that loan application some time ago.
Cloth physics, hair physics and other "modern" graphics technologies (doesn't necessarily need to be Nvidia-based, TressFX is AMD's open-source solution) are all things you can really sink your teeth into with a third person RPG. All optional, of course, I know some people hate it. CDPR has always wanted to be on the cutting edge as far as visuals go, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
People who are not happy with lack of TPP could always email CDPR, maybe its still time to implement it to some extent? Or maybe if enough people will complain we'll get some answers before E3 if these rumours are true. 
I cant find a reason why CDPR wouldn't make TPP/FPP as announced in 2013 other than technical difficulties with implementing both views in satisfactory manner, or/and lack of resources, animators and programmers to pull of both views.
I cant find a reason why CDPR wouldn't make TPP/FPP as announced in 2013 other than technical difficulties with implementing both views in satisfactory manner, or/and lack of resources, animators and programmers to pull of both views.
Snowflakez;n10867631 said:
Design decision maybe? TPP for eye candy is obviously better with all tech and visible animations. Design wise FPP could work better for what they envisioned with the game. Maybe we'll be able interacting with environment, picking items and other stuff... Maybe there is large number of in-door combat encounters in small space, who knows...
sv3672;n10867601 said:
As a general perspective, I do agree developers can perfectly do new things they didnt do before, but thats extremely rare, and it gets more and more unusual and risky the more successful a company has been so far with their tried and true formulas, which is of course exactly the case for CDPR.
Camera is not just another detail of a game like the protagonist or whatever, its far far more important for sales and popularity. In this mainstream world of gaming full of casuals that act almost always based on superficial aspects of games, the camera perspective is often the ultimate make or break factor for people.
Now as for the whole thing being not an intended decision but rather the consequence to a dev problem, thats the real scary thing, I agree here that if we end up with just a FPP its more likely because of that. But even then really I doubt it so much, they had the time, in fact they could've been silent all this year and take another year or more to release in 2020, their PR strategy seems very very confident so far.
See it as a blessing in disguise, when they implement a 1st person perspective they will have to make the world much more interactive, something that i didn‘t like about the the Witcher 3 was the rather static nature of houses and settlements. If you want to make a 1st person game believable you need to have mechanics like in TES where you can interact with almost anything in the worldspace to some degree.Suhiira;n10867201 said:
If true does any physicial features even matter? like the color of your hair gender the clothes you wear? remember the rumor that the game would have a fixed character well this kinda confirms it.
also FPS games usually have a silent protagonist as well =(
also FPS games usually have a silent protagonist as well =(
Not enough animation excellence for both camera views? I mean, bugthesda does both, and both are pretty bad.Sneky;n10867681 said:
Assuming it's ever true, though. Smartest move would be to make a unified set of animations and solve camera problems they way Star Citizen devs did it. Sure CDPR are smart... Right?
Sneky;n10867681 said:People who are not happy with lack of TPP could always email CDPR, maybe its still time to implement it to some extent? Or maybe if enough people will complain we'll get some answers before E3 if these rumours are true.
HIGHLY unlikely.
This is rumour number 800 about Cyberpunk. They don't respond and they are wise not to. If they do respond, you'll probably see a quick tweet or post saying, "Relax, no one knows anything, we aren't talking yet. You'll know when we do."
They are, of course, aware of the rumours. Their PR staff is on the ball.
Sneky;n10867681 said:
I too would find it odd.
I still am inclined towards it being TPP,as much as I love FPP games.
Ya just got done checking out the GP vid (they mention having an inside source at CDPR, who knows if true or not though) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssrWz4kF_KQ
Definitely not happy if this turns out to be true. As someone else said, perhaps CDPR are testing the waters to see how people react. (please be true)
I was expecting W3 style, with the vast majority of the game in 3rd person. This wall running stuff sounds kinda silly to me, also.
Definitely not happy if this turns out to be true. As someone else said, perhaps CDPR are testing the waters to see how people react. (please be true)
I was expecting W3 style, with the vast majority of the game in 3rd person. This wall running stuff sounds kinda silly to me, also.
I seriously doubt there's any validity to the rumors.Sneky;n10867681 said:People who are not happy with lack of TPP could always email CDPR, maybe its still time to implement it to some extent? Or maybe if enough people will complain we'll get some answers before E3 if these rumours are true.
Why would CDPR make "yet another FPS paying lip service to RPGs" game when there are a dozen or so already out there?
They know their strengths, they know their audience.
It's not that hard to do both TPP and FPP, it's not easy mind you, but it's not difficult.Sneky;n10867681 said:
The game mechanics are essentially the same, it's just a matter of altering the perspective the camera shows the game from and a few tweaks to the UI. This is why modders can alter TPP games to FPP fairly easily.
Beyond silly.Razrback16;n10867811 said:
Last edited:
Sneky;n10867681 said:People who are not happy with lack of TPP could always email CDPR, maybe its still time to implement it to some extent? Or maybe if enough people will complain we'll get some answers before E3 if these rumours are true.
I cant find a reason why CDPR wouldn't make TPP/FPP as announced in 2013 other than technical difficulties with implementing both views in satisfactory manner, or/and lack of resources, animators and programmers to pull of both views.
I guarantee they are monitoring people's responses to this "news".
Razrback16;n10867851 said:I guarantee they are monitoring people's responses to this "news".
Well, of course - but probably only mildly. If it IS true, they can't exactly change it now ( or can they...maybe we are years away still!). If it's not true ( I would bet this is the case) then it's Just Another Rumour.
- Status