[POLL] The Multiplayer Thread

[KILLTACULES]

My first choice would be a saints row style coop, it's how cyberpunk is played, 4 40yo virgins in their parents' basement working together . An MMO would be awesome too but not if it sacrificed too much immersion

 

[FenrisKrigsgaldr]

I love the idea of a full out Cyberpunk 2077 MMO!
Night City seems amazing and I'd love the idea of being able to explore it with my friends. It would also be closer to the table top game as the table top game is multiplayer only.

Making it more of a sandbox MMO would be great. If you want to be rockers and have your group get a band together and play shows and do missions on the side that's great.

Want to become fixers and sell missions and items to other players great!
Want to work your way up the corporate empire or start your own great!
The possibilities are almost endless.

 

[Metropolice]

I love the idea of a full out Cyberpunk 2077 MMO!
Night City seems amazing and I'd love the idea of being able to explore it with my friends. It would also be closer to the table top game as the table top game is multiplayer only.

Making it more of a sandbox MMO would be great. If you want to be rockers and have your group get a band together and play shows and do missions on the side that's great.

Want to become fixers and sell missions and items to other players great!
Want to work your way up the corporate empire or start your own great!
The possibilities are almost endless.

I would not say no, but I would prefer a sandbox or "emergent gameplay" MMO over an average Theme park MMORPG.

Why? Because those (latter) are usually less immersive and clunkier tech-wise. And restrictive to player conflicts.

However do you expect natural or sudden conflicts and encounters to develop if all you can do is RP them in text or ask for a duel!?

Face of Mankind was perhaps controversial or not really known but even though I never played, it got the rough concept right for such a world from what I read about it.

There, players could control a lot and even had some over other players due to policies or rights. There, cops and soldiers could actually enforce stuff. Player politicians or rulers could set policies.

If you moderate this or restrict it somehow to prevent actual grieving or clear misuse, you'd have an immersive world to play in.

I also understand this isn't for all, but certain abilities or the ability to cuff or engage other players would make certain roles like cop or corpo feasible, if done reasonably.

I won't even say to no a CP theme park MMORPG, but it would be wasted potential in my eyes.

Can't have it all, eh?

 

[FenrisKrigsgaldr]

You really can't have it all.

I side with you that having your theme park MMO is kind of a waste for Cyberpunk. Having a sandbox MMO with a linear story that you can choose to follow would be more like it.

I love the idea of having people being cops and actually able to enforce laws on other players if they see them break the laws or have players be corpo.

 

[Suhiira]

Good discussion of multiplayer games.
The topic is "Loners in MMOs" but the concepts and issues are much the same in any multiplayer game.

 

[Audie_Carpenter]

Digital Scapes is working with CDPR. The article implies there might be some multiplayer aspect coming in play post-launch.

https://www.destructoid.com/cyberpunk-2077-is-getting-extra-help-from-a-multiplayer-focused-studio-526277.phtml

 

[Snowflakez]

Yeah. This was inevitable. We always knew there was going to be some sort of "seamless" MP experience. How much it affects the development of the singleplayer game (and its future DLC) remains to be seen, and it's also tough to say how it will be monetized (microtransactions, loot boxes, etc.).

I'm not excited about it either way, but like I said in the news thread, I'll be sold on the concept of multiplayer not having an impact on singleplayer if Rockstar pulls it off with RDR2, without any cut or missing content (that is then added to MP) or scrapped DLC.

If R* can do it, maybe CDPR can make some sort of fun coop experience. But I'm not getting my hopes up. It'd be a lot of work for no reward, unless it was a paid DLC. The only alternative I can think of is a MTX-filled "GTA Online" experience.

 

[Rawls]

It'd be a lot of work for no reward, unless it was a paid DLC.

If they end up doing multiplayer (which seems more likely with the current news), I would guess they announce it as an expansion. Would seem the most likely option since they generally don't favor loot boxes and stuff like that.

 

[Mebrilia]

I truly hope a sort of multyplayer that could mimic the pen and paper feel like nwn did in past with a separated client for the Narrator that had the tools to spawn object ennemy possess npc and things like that.

But i honestly doubt it will be like that i think will be more in line with generic coop, arena like match or invasion ala dark soul frankly i would not be interested in a multyplayer like that.

 

[Rawls]

Yeah I doubt it will be like that. I'm not sure what I expect from it frankly, but it's there first foray into MP, so I'm next expecting anything too out there.

 

[Poison19]

I think it will be Dark Souls style multiplayer, you know messages, invasions and maybe social interactions in the net.

 

[Harthwain]

If they end up doing multiplayer (which seems more likely with the current news), I would guess they announce it as an expansion. Would seem the most likely option since they generally don't favor loot boxes and stuff like that.

It's 100% what's going to happen (unless they offer it as a free addition, but I doubt that), because they said that multiplayer is going to happen - if it's going to happen - after the release [of CP77] and the release will only feature a single-player experience.

 

[Azriel7]

Well, not surprised but not happy about. To me, that is just resources (money) that could be used to make the SP better. The only way I can see it put in is if it is a complete separate game built around multiplayer, how would you even incorporate it into the singleplayers "cinematic" experiences unless you shut them off or the extra people are just background characters that cannot interact with anything? I can see getting friends together, but it will just be your usual shooting fest filled with griefers if its random people thrown together, ROLE playing will go out the window. Regardless, it will be a feature I will probably never use, playing with random people is just not fun for me. And for all that is good, please do not have some inegrated "social" feature that automatically puts multiplayer in our singleplayer game like dark souls. Singleplayer should be singleplayer only.

 

[Metropolice]

Long story short, if they can pull off seamless or dynamic coop where the second or xth player is considered by the environment and can actively participate, then I will even gladly throw money at such an expansion.

What I always miss in large sandbox like RPGs that have a big world, various factions, action and more.... is the ability to experience all of this with another or several players, whether friends or strangers.

I would not even say no to a larger GTA online-like experience with more players per instance or server, if you can later have dedicated servers for various playstyles such as Role play, etc.

Might cost, but I'd pay for that.

 

[Heart Of Dawn]

Well, not surprised but not happy about. To me, that is just resources (money) that could be used to make the SP better.

It doesn't work like that. CDPR aren't betting the farm here. They will have the the development budget for the SP campaign already worked out (with gant charts, spreadsheets and everything), anything that they do beyond that won't detract from what they are already doing.

Remember, CDPR is a company of highly competent people. They will have done a cos/benefit analysis before agreeing with DS. If, and it's still just an 'if' until we hear otherwise, they are developing an MP game they will have a fairly good idea that it will be worth the time and money involved.

All that being said, I am with you in this; I'd like to see MP as it's own thing. Use the SP campaign's assets, the world, and maybe even some of the game mechanics from the, sure, but the SP side needs be free to tell the story of V as best it can.

I think it will be Dark Souls style multiplayer, you know messages, invasions and maybe social interactions in the net.

I don't think that would work here. There is only one V in Night City - you. There shouldn't be other Vs leaving you hints as to what is to come.

 

[Poison19]

I don't think that would work here. There is only one V in Night City - you. There shouldn't be other Vs leaving you hints as to what is to come.

V is mercenary at first, we don't know much but instead of "missing data" in name line we could actually type something. And this name can be used in invasions. It even can be implement to the story, like contracts on "quest board" or something.
Messages from other players can be ads on streets or posts in web of Night City. And etc.
In general, we know nothing about multiplayer to so confidently deny any assumptions.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

It doesn't work like that. CDPR aren't betting the farm here. They will have the the development budget for the SP campaign already worked out (with gant charts, spreadsheets and everything), anything that they do beyond that won't detract from what they are already doing.

Remember, CDPR is a company of highly competent people. They will have done a cos/benefit analysis before agreeing with DS. If, and it's still just an 'if' until we hear otherwise, they are developing an MP game they will have a fairly good idea that it will be worth the time and money involved.

You say that as if a Single player expansion would not make money and for that reason cannot be done.
Because from what we've heard, there is still lots of things to implement: joinable Factions with their own storylines, the ability to play other Roles, etcs...

Post automatically merged: Oct 9, 2018

Besides, as for me it's wasted ressources as you cannot have MP where players are no different than NPCs when it comes to interaction.

 

[Snowflakez]

My philosophy is pretty simple - for a singleplayer game, singleplayer experiences should take precedence 100% of the time. That means singleplayer DLC, singleplayer free content (if they want to do that again - I certainly don't expect or require it).

Obviously, that will not happen here. I'm not sure why, to be honest, because the Witcher 3 did extremely well, as did its singleplayer DLC. But it is what it is.

So, it's a a matter of how they handle multiplayer. Free addition to the main game? Unlikely, unless they want to include microtransactions, which I'm against and I know CDPR is against in their mainline titles.

Paid DLC? Better, because they can recoup their losses and make a profit, and if it's a coop experience, they can just have players do peer-to-peer and avoid ongoing fees entirely. However, paid multiplayer-focused DLC means no paid singleplayer-focused DLC, or at least one less.

An entire title dedicated to multiplayer, separate from all SP stuff? The only downside here is potentially a longer wait for the next CDPR game, but that's a price I'm willing to pay if it means their main games aren't impacted in any way. I'd rather have an AWESOME, exclusively SP game next year (or 2020, whatever) and then wait 6 years for Cyberpunk 2088 (or Witcher 4) than have the core experience compromised in favor of a GTA Online-like "Game as a service" addition.

Look at what Bethesda is doing with FO76. It was risky, but I think it will pay off.

 

[Suhiira]

Unless CDPR gives us a tool set similar to what Beth does with Fallout/Skyrim the only multiplayer I can see is some sort of dungeoncrawl or deathmatch content. As others have stated, you can't add/mod NPCs to create missions/stories, you can't create new dialog trees, you can't alter existing areas/maps. What else is there besides killing stuff?

 

[Heart Of Dawn]

You say that as if a Single player expansion would not make money and for that reason cannot be done.
Because from what we've heard, there is still lots of things to implement: joinable Factions with their own storylines, the ability to play other Roles, etcs...

Post automatically merged: Oct 9, 2018

Besides, as for me it's wasted ressources as you cannot have MP where players are no different than NPCs when it comes to interaction.

Yes there is a TON of stuff still to do for 2077's development, as the game is still in pre-alpha, but they already have that planned out and budgeted for. Expanding the game is an odd thing to say when it's already going to go there. It will be as big as they want it to be.

Now if you are talking about SP DLC, that's a different story. For all we know that's what DS are working on, talk of MP is pure speculation at this point.