They are top company...in my eyes...
It isnt enough. Still lots of people doesnt respect them at all. Yeah, I dont care what they do, but I personally see Battleroyal is one path they could take.
It isnt enough. Still lots of people doesnt respect them at all. Yeah, I dont care what they do, but I personally see Battleroyal is one path they could take.
I can only see it being gameplay where it was like a combat zone free-for-all that was just absolute chaos. Maybe a capture the immortality chip, last person standing type of thing...
I'm going to play whatever they release because I know, even if it was a battle royal type thing, CDPR can make it an amazing experience.
I still end up agreeing with @xer21 on this though.
Multi-player is under development.
Multi-player will not be included at launch.
Chances are whatever multi-player is eventually developed it will not be even remotely close the the "Battle Royal" many seem to desire for the simple reason that CP2077 is a cooperative not a competitive game.
do they even care about that supposed respect?
who honestly is hating on CDPR because they dont have multiplayer?
Any one who likes games and doesn't have respect for CDPR is...uhh...well...
Ive never played Battleroyal myself, but I know its one of the trends so for that reason, it would make sense they go for Battleroyal.
If there is one thing that potential multiplayer mode for Cyberpunk 2077 definitely won't be, it's GTA Online. Let's be realistic, they have a studio of around 40 people working on it and even if they would be able to reuse the map, locations and mechanics from the base game, the idea of something that in the end would be MMORPG in Cyberpunk universe made by a team this small would be pure insanity.
Chances for it being a Battle Royale game is also extremely small, mostly because I'm confident that they are analyzing market all the time and can see that this genre is currently oversaturated, with more and more people getting tired of it, especially after Witcher Battle Arena, which was released during the time when the market was oversaturated with MOBA type games, ended being a big flop as the result of that.
Gwent was different, because when it was being developed, there was still not that many card games on the market of this type and it was something that many fans wanted, in fact there was a sizeable demand for it. Now how many people who are interested in Cyberpunk look at it and think: "Yep, that baby need some Battle Royale". In fact if I would create a poll asking people what would they prefer for CDPR to add to the game - Battle Royale or usable toilets - I have a feeling that usable toilets would win with overwhelming advantage.
Chances for it being a Battle Royale game is also extremely small, mostly because I'm confident that they are analyzing market all the time and can see that this genre is currently oversaturated, with more and more people getting tired of it, especially after Witcher Battle Arena, which was released during the time when the market was oversaturated with MOBA type games, ended being a big flop as the result of that.
Gwent was different, because when it was being developed, there was still not that many card games on the market of this type and it was something that many fans wanted, in fact there was a sizeable demand for it. Now how many people who are interested in Cyberpunk look at it and think: "Yep, that baby need some Battle Royale". In fact if I would create a poll asking people what would they prefer for CDPR to add to the game - Battle Royale or usable toilets - I have a feeling that usable toilets would win with overwhelming advantage.
Last edited:
Yeah I feel the same way comes about a you only can have so many of them and have one for cyberpunk we just be unnecessary.
Why would you jump on one of the worst trends to happen to games if you don't even play them?
And then hope it shows up in the biggest game to come out in your lifetime?
I'm pretty sure the best "battle royal" players are burnt out by now and only keep playing because it is what they are known for and it's easy for them.
The last game I played that has any resemblance to a "battle royal" was "Conkers Bad Fur Day" capture the flag more than a decade ago on the N64...that was fun...and I don't even know if that counts...but the stuff nowadays is made flashy and popular for kids...small humans...children. It's popular because it is easy, quick, and flashy. It is a trend that will die out soon and is only popular because most kids have been dumbed down, to the bone, by society.
CDPR does the exact opposite. They give people a mature story driven world which is one of the most reassuring things to happen in video games ever. I still can't believe they are making Cyberpunk...
Your opinion is welcome, but do you have any more ideas for the multiplayer?
I waiting for a mod to jump in and say: "Back on topic! Stfu about the battleroyal trash."
I actually like usable toilets...
i mean, that's not why it's popular at all. PUBG didnt get big because it was easy and for kids.
Battle royales got huge because it was both a fairly unique concept for multiplayer and because it was a really good platform for streaming. Yes, Fortnite has evolved into something beyond just trying to make a game but that didnt happen UNTIL fortnite's battle royale exploded beyond what Epic could have ever hoped for.
this idea that anything popular happens because stupid kids like it is both ignorant and insulting to a lot of people who are usually way smarter than you want to give them credit for.
we're not inhernetly superior just because we choose to play games like this instead of fortnite.
Ok, Makes sense. Sorry for the brash statement. I'm not into any of those types of games, so I don't actually know much of anything outside of being a passive observer. Ignorant and insulting wasn't what I was shooting for.
I was mainly trying to hint at the popularity behind Fortnite and the glorification of war/violence with other games set up under the broad "battle royal" term. Especially if it uses bright colors and a cartoon version of war and death. It gives, mainly kids, a very confused idea about what violence is. They forget how stupid it is, and how fragile their lives are IRL.
If people want to play those games it's fine, but I just really don't like the trend of battle royal mechanics expected to be the norm in video games nowadays. It gives people a more absurd idea of those things being "normal" for games, just because a game has guns in it.
That's one reason I love story driven things. If it has guns and violence, that's fine, I am all for it. If it puts people in positions to make hard decisions due to those things being implemented, great, but killing has become a funny and trivial thing with popular titles that are mainly enjoyed by young people. If there is, at least, some education about morality in games then things would make more sense. As it stands now kids are going for head shots nonstop and are being exposed to forms of addiction through gambling, but aren't allowed to see nipples?
Yeah, I think it's stupid AF, but most kids who started playing those types of games are grown up now.
It gets normalized, and a young target audience doesn't know it's a target until later on.
And this is just going back to how many people think 2077 is going to be a FPS and then tie it to a battle royal experience because a MP is mentioned. It's played out and boring, but this is all only my opinion.
Most people don't play these games because of a true interest in killing people, they do it because it is a trend, popular, and fun to see people die in the safest way possible, because they get rewarded for it. Most of those people don't know anything about actual weapons or what to do with one if it was in their hands, except for maybe take a selfie with it.
I am not one for censoring anything and I'm not trying to sound like an asshole, but I am glad Cyberpunk looks like it will not have much to do with a battle royal-like format if/when a MP comes out.
its just competition. I'm not into battleroyales either but its just about a flavor of competition. I don't think kids are being desensitized to violence because of fortnite, as if violence doesn't exist in all the other media they consume or as if they're the first set of adolescents playing violent games.
its just a competition, no different than basketball or monopoly. people elove to play things against each other.
its just a competition, no different than basketball or monopoly. people elove to play things against each other.
I'm not a fan of battle royale games usually, but after trying Apex Legends for an extended period of time (with Sigi!), I have to admit, I really, really enjoyed it. And I'm one of those people who has always been vehemently against battle royale modes coming to my favorite franchises.
That said, I have no interest in Fortnite or PUBG. Apex Legends really did just feel unique to me for whatever reason, perhaps due to its shooting mechanics being superior to a lot of other games.
Also, I definitely wouldn't want a BR mode here, but I'm pretty sure I've said that before. Co-op or bust, that's my viewpoint. I don't want Cyberpunk Online (not in the vein of GTAO, anyway). I laid out a very specific (and I think pretty cool) idea for how coop could function back on the first page or two, so I won't repeat it here.
That said, I have no interest in Fortnite or PUBG. Apex Legends really did just feel unique to me for whatever reason, perhaps due to its shooting mechanics being superior to a lot of other games.
Also, I definitely wouldn't want a BR mode here, but I'm pretty sure I've said that before. Co-op or bust, that's my viewpoint. I don't want Cyberpunk Online (not in the vein of GTAO, anyway). I laid out a very specific (and I think pretty cool) idea for how coop could function back on the first page or two, so I won't repeat it here.
That is profoundly unfair to CDPR. They could pull it off.Cyberpunk 76 confirmed
If there has to be PvP multiplayer, maybe it could be a smaller scale Fifth Corporate War, maybe instead of taking what PUBG and Fortnite have done and improving upon the formula, take what was good from the better examples of Battlefield and have large scale 32v32 battles with objectives to try to complete and defend against? Arasaka versus Militech no holds barred for control of Night City!
Or, on a smaller scale sort of in the vein of the old Splinter Cell "Spies vs Mercs", how about a 8v4 MAX-TAC vs Maelstrom? You have four players taking on the roles of cybered out to the max Maelstrom members with the goal of creating a certain amount of property and life damage to the city (that would be them in a state of cyberpsychosis) , and then have somewhere between four and eight players (depending on how well armed they are compared to the Maelstrom players, not to mention how squishy as well) filling the role of the MAX-TAC members with the sole goal of putting the rampaging cyborgs down. I could be down for something like that.
Or, on a smaller scale sort of in the vein of the old Splinter Cell "Spies vs Mercs", how about a 8v4 MAX-TAC vs Maelstrom? You have four players taking on the roles of cybered out to the max Maelstrom members with the goal of creating a certain amount of property and life damage to the city (that would be them in a state of cyberpsychosis) , and then have somewhere between four and eight players (depending on how well armed they are compared to the Maelstrom players, not to mention how squishy as well) filling the role of the MAX-TAC members with the sole goal of putting the rampaging cyborgs down. I could be down for something like that.
That's kind of a broad question...what kind of balance are you looking for? Weapon balance? Build balance? Balance between the factions? There are already successful examples of how to properly balance gameplay like that out in the wild, as well as examples of how patently not to do things unless failure is the goal. All CDPR has to do is look at them all, take inspiration from what worked and avoid what didn't like the plague. You know, the exact opposite of what BioWare did with Anthem.
Yuuup, I totally agree.
I am not a person into sports or competition though and I would never want to censor anything. If the right game came around like what @Snowflakez was describing I would give it a shot. I just notice many(not all) battle royal games being used to push boring-ass violence, mainly to kids, and then they get presented with options where a few dollars can get a better gun and like...a derpy costume.
It's totally shady.
I like it when games have a very defined line between what is suitable for kids and adults. Mainly so people know absolutely 100% it's a game for adults, or not, but there is no question about it at all. I want to play games with blood, guts, violence, perved-out nastiness and choice on my part if it want to spend money on it. If I had kids then I would be able to choose if I would allow them to play or not. They would totally be able to play anything because I dgaf, but some parents do...and some parents should. Some kids are crazy and/or stupid AF.
I hear about these kids spending their parents money on straight up stupid in-game features and I am just...astonished. We are in a time where games are evolving and many studios take advantage of people, lots of times, kids because they are very impulsive. If you are using shady tactics on young people because they have always been the target audience for video games then there will be problems at some point. I never had A/o rated games when I was young. Violence was laughable, and there sure weren't any loot boxes. Now that there is and things are really violent and sexy, things need to adapt, but not in shady ways.
Things like that are what even keep games from evolving. For instance, the nudity/censorship thing...I want pervy things in my game(!!!) because I am an adult. Why is that even an issue? They are everywhere in Japan, but anyone who hints at sexual things in games in the US is always put on a pitchfork.
These "practices" make a lot of money, but I do not ever want to feel pressure to buy something or to kill something. If it happens, it's cool, but I want the least amount of outside interference as possible. That includes unwarranted hype or popularity.
Post automatically merged:
If it goes along with the story and world building for 2077 then I am all for it.
What ever titles come out for 2077, I'm going to be playing them...even if it turns out like a battle royal extravaganza.