Stop drawing conclusions when CDPR openly states that things are placeholders and subject to change.

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Care to share more? I'm curious.

It’s a personal preference. The game would be better off with as few cutscenes as possible by default anyway (zero would be golden). And since they’ve been so adamant about keeping the game in FPP for whatever they mean with ”immersion” and ”narrative reasons”, they shouldn’t break the flow with unnecessary out of character cinematics either. They’re pointless and add really nothing to the game - or, nothing that couldn’t be achieved with an ”in-game” occurence from the chosen perspective.

(I think they should ditch 3rd person driving too)
 
It’s a personal preference. The game would be better off with as few cutscenes as possible by default anyway (zero would be golden). And since they’ve been so adamant about keeping the game in FPP for whatever they mean with ”immersion” and ”narrative reasons”, they shouldn’t break the flow with unnecessary out of character cinematics either. They’re pointless and add really nothing to the game - or, nothing that couldn’t be achieved with an ”in-game” occurence from the chosen perspective.

(I think they should ditch 3rd person driving too)
That's really cool and interesting. I love this idea, and I would be totally fine if that's what CDPR ended up doing. (I still deeply care for very advanced heavy customization of V's body/clothing/house/vehicles/weapons of course!) but it doesn't bother me in the least bit if they also want to include SOME Third person stuff too, but only if it feels right. If they want to go 100% First person, but theres some special key areas where there is third person because the believe perspective is important to the immersion or the story, so important that it's worth temporarily breaking the immersion gained by the first person perspective, then I would be okay with that. It would mean though, that it was really beautiful and very deep and there was a very good reason for it. I think a game that did this excellently, probably the game that did it better than any other game I have ever played was "MAFIA 1". Not in terms of first or third, but in terms of scene transition.
 
Stay cool people, this is the maker of The Witcher and Mike Pondsminth, a real gaming oldschool innovator and OG. Its not EA or Pethesda.

This game will be the bomb.
It's interesting to call people out for drawing conclusions that things about the game will go wrong or not be good from what we know about it and have seen of it, then end on drawing the conclusion that the game "will be the bomb". Is this one of those cases of "no bad thoughts allowed, only happy thoughts"?

People can't be 100% positive this game will be anything other than merely a decent game, at least not logically. Sure, it's by the maker of The Witcher series and that would mean a lot if this wasn't a near-complete departure from everything they're known for. And banking on it being a success just because Pondsmith is involved? Yeah, we celebrate his success with Cyberpunk 2020 or 2.0, but we apparently forget his slight misstep with CyberGeneration and the straight-up faceplant with Cyberpunk 3.0.

No one wins forever. Everybody fumbles eventually. There have been a number of development teams that were riding high on the goodwill garnered from fans of their popular games that eventually made a game with decisions that didn't resonate with all their fans but ignored the feedback given because "artistic vision", and then became memes as fans eventually turned on them when the game imploded. Could this happen to CDPR with this game? Who knows, maybe maybe not. But if you're warning people not to jump to conclusions that something might go wrong, you might want to heed that suggestion when it comes to humping to the conclusion everything will go right.

And one more thing; people keep claiming everything is a place holder and CDPR has eight months to "fix it in post", so most of it is subject to change. I wouldn't get my hopes up too high on that. Why? Between the going gold time cutoff deadline and the time needed for approval from the console makers, try maybe five months at most. Probably around 60%-70% of what we saw is a done deal, and outside of some polishing, that's what we get, warts and all. The only real question is what will fortunately be swapped out and what players will get stuck with.
 
Last edited:
It can be frustrating to see people drawing "negative" conclusions based on what we've seen, but it's also impossible for people to not come to certain conclusions based on previous data.

For instance, I've all the confidence that Cyberpunk 2077 will be a great (nothing is perfect) release and that multiplayer won't have much impact on this game.

Yet it's difficult for me to not wonder what ramifications this will have on future iterations. With the success of Witcher 3, CDPR has massively grown. Most all of the major players in video gaming have changed (IMO for the worse) with this live service or multiplayer model. Yet I can't really blame them as businesses.

Let's take a small look at GTA Online. The "micro" (they're not small by any means) transactions in the multiplayer generated far more revenue for Rockstar than the actual game sales did. EA has infused pretty much every game they own with this stuff now. Bethesda has joined in on it as well. Bioware will have sacrificed two major releases (Andromeda and DA4) for a live service game.

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to imagine CDPR doing the same a release or two from now.
 
-Yet it's difficult for me to not wonder what ramifications this will have on future iterations. With the success of Witcher 3, CDPR has massively grown. Most all of the major players in video gaming have changed (IMO for the worse) with this live service or multiplayer model. Yet I can't really blame them as businesses.

-I don't think it's too much of a stretch to imagine CDPR doing the same a release or two from now.

I think that as long as CDPR continues to be the people who are not those who have changed for the worst, CDPR will always have the respect and the support of their fans/community. The very reason(s) CDPR is successful are:

1. They're very honest
2. They're VERY HONEST
3. They have souls. They have a conscience. CDPR actually seems to feel bad/dislike the idea of "screwing over" their customers or milking them for every penny, because CDPR actually cares about us. This strongly reflects in the whole entire philosophical motives and guidelines on how they run gog.com and how their games are made and how the DLC works and everything.
4. They're generous in how they make their fans feel loved and happy. They make amazing products and they're fair and just so good in every way that it never hurts as a customer or a fan to go an support them. I never feel the sense of doubt or apprehensiveness that I did when I used to buy video games from... other... corporations.... That sense of physical pain and psychological dread manifesting inside my wallet, simply does not happen when I'm going for a game made my CDPR, because I know that It's not a waste. I know I'm not being played as a fool.
I could go on and on listing good things about CDPR. The main and most simple point is that they're GOOD. They're the complete opposite in every single way to everything that is so bitter and totally not worth it about so many other things out there. CDPR knows the difference, and I think they're going to always keep their special place atop the mountain of righteousness because to be honest, I don't see any others rushing to try and climb it...

God bless CDPR. (regardless of religion or not) :D
 
That's really cool and interesting. I love this idea, and I would be totally fine if that's what CDPR ended up doing. (I still deeply care for very advanced heavy customization of V's body/clothing/house/vehicles/weapons of course!) but it doesn't bother me in the least bit if they also want to include SOME Third person stuff too, but only if it feels right. If they want to go 100% First person, but theres some special key areas where there is third person because the believe perspective is important to the immersion or the story, so important that it's worth temporarily breaking the immersion gained by the first person perspective, then I would be okay with that. It would mean though, that it was really beautiful and very deep and there was a very good reason for it. I think a game that did this excellently, probably the game that did it better than any other game I have ever played was "MAFIA 1". Not in terms of first or third, but in terms of scene transition.

Yes that it is agreeable. And I am okay with making every aspect of the game in FPP. I am even okay with making the character creation in FPP. But what is important to consider is that when you take something out, you have to give something else in return.

So removing any TPP instances from the game in favor of FPP mode in order to have more immersion does not mean that this immersion would magically happen just because we have no TPP scenes. As this trade-off would require an extra work from the devs in order to make these TPP instances more interesting and immersive in FPP instead.

Excluding TPP just for the sake of less work on animations or believing that it will achieve more immersion, simply by removing these TPP instances without putting more work in FPP, would only lead to quality reduction to the overall gaming experience. And I am certain that this is not the case with Cyberpunk. So if the devs found, for instance, that TPP is the best approach in cutscenes, then things will remain as it is. On the other hand, if they managed to make cutscenes look better in FPP, then they will do it.
 
This is not a FPP/TPP thread so please do not try to turn it into one. Yes, CDPR have made decisions regarding perspective but that does not mean the subject "What if [x] is FPP?" can be used to hijack general threads.
 
I think that as long as CDPR continues to be the people who are not those who have changed for the worst, CDPR will always have the respect and the support of their fans/community. The very reason(s) CDPR is successful are:

1. They're very honest
2. They're VERY HONEST
3. They have souls. They have a conscience. CDPR actually seems to feel bad/dislike the idea of "screwing over" their customers or milking them for every penny, because CDPR actually cares about us. This strongly reflects in the whole entire philosophical motives and guidelines on how they run gog.com and how their games are made and how the DLC works and everything.
4. They're generous in how they make their fans feel loved and happy. They make amazing products and they're fair and just so good in every way that it never hurts as a customer or a fan to go an support them. I never feel the sense of doubt or apprehensiveness that I did when I used to buy video games from... other... corporations.... That sense of physical pain and psychological dread manifesting inside my wallet, simply does not happen when I'm going for a game made my CDPR, because I know that It's not a waste. I know I'm not being played as a fool.
I could go on and on listing good things about CDPR. The main and most simple point is that they're GOOD. They're the complete opposite in every single way to everything that is so bitter and totally not worth it about so many other things out there. CDPR knows the difference, and I think they're going to always keep their special place atop the mountain of righteousness because to be honest, I don't see any others rushing to try and climb it...

God bless CDPR. (regardless of religion or not) :D
That's all well and good, and you may even be right about them, but think about this; can you name one developer/publisher that started out evil, soulless, anti-consumer, garbage tier or all the aforementioned? They all start out good, wanting to produce fun titles for gamers or even works of art...it's later that for whatever reason, they lose their way.

Fun fact #1 for the younger crowd: Even EA and Activision used to be "the good guys" and their games used to be the ones you trusted just because their name was on the game case.

Fun fact #2 for the younger crowd: See, video games used to come on these things called disks (or discs) and those came in these plastic things call "cases". We weren't always able to just download them...what wondrous times we live in now. :LOL:
 
That's all well and good, and you may even be right about them, but think about this; can you name one developer/publisher that started out evil, soulless, anti-consumer, garbage tier or all the aforementioned? They all start out good, wanting to produce fun titles for gamers or even works of art...it's later that for whatever reason, they lose their way.

Fun fact #1 for the younger crowd: Even EA and Activision used to be "the good guys" and their games used to be the ones you trusted just because their name was on the game case.

Fun fact #2 for the younger crowd: See, video games used to come on these things called disks (or discs) and those came in these plastic things call "cases". We weren't always able to just download them...what wondrous times we live in now. :LOL:

Are you trying to say to us, that from your past experiences with CDPR that you have reason to believe they may have turned EA level evil between the witcher 3 and now?
 
Are you trying to say to us, that from your past experiences with CDPR that you have reason to believe they may have turned EA level evil between the witcher 3 and now?
Where did you read that? It certainly wasn't in anything you quoted. There's the suggestion that many companies started with good consumer faith like CDPR and then ended up where they are now.

I mean, pre-Fallout 4 Bethesda were supposedly the "good" guys. Only took a few years to reach the level of negativity that they're at now. It's entirely possible that the same happens to CDPR as well, but no one is saying that is what has or will happened.
 
Where did you read that? It certainly wasn't in anything you quoted. There's the suggestion that many companies started with good consumer faith like CDPR and then ended up where they are now.

I mean, pre-Fallout 4 Bethesda were supposedly the "good" guys. Only took a few years to reach the level of negativity that they're at now. It's entirely possible that the same happens to CDPR as well, but no one is saying that is what has or will happened.

Ah, well ok then....
 
Seriously. People are losing their marbles over something the company is saying at the beginning of the Video are placeholders. This just goes to show how much BS the gaming industry has exposed people to in the past, so that we are now seeing people jump to conclusions and be this viciously precautious about another potential bad investment / letdown.

Stay cool people, this is the maker of The Witcher and Mike Pondsminth, a real gaming oldschool innovator and OG. Its not EA or Pethesda.

This game will be the bomb.


Immediately thought Fallout series
 
But if you're warning people not to jump to conclusions that something might go wrong, you might want to heed that suggestion when it comes to humping to the conclusion everything will go right.

To be fair, a humble point of view I wanted to underline or highlight again. While I personally expect a great game despite subjective "downgrades" opposed to prior outlooks, I think it's also vital that some shouldn't expect the next world wonder or "too much" because this can quickly lead to disappointment. Realistically you can't do or have it all in a game due to time and resource constraints, you eventually have to focus on aspects even if there could always be more.

It's also a subjective question in the end. Some like X, others Y more, and some dislike Z. :shrug:

E: I think it's also good to add that (at least I look at it like this) this is just the first CP game by them in what will likely be a series of games. People often praise the Witcher 3, but did the Witcher 1 start with the care and quality and technical possibilities 3 did? Probably not? It's a new learning process for them again, at least in some areas - e.g by a dev statement in the commentary on the deep dive demo where they speak about some aspects being new for them, like gunplay or verticality in level design.
So expect that they learn from CP2077 and weave in new experiences, feedback gathered and new approaches into the follow-up games.
 
If they announce something and they get a lot of feedback that an announcement is liked (or not) then that gives them a valuable opportunity for course correction.

For example: CDPR reacted very quickly to the NA region not having a physical boxed PC CE and fixed it. FULL CREDIT AND KUDOS.

I wouldn’t call that a good example of CDPR listening to constructive criticism and taking it into account.

The introduction of CE in North America happened solely because the more people buy those useless trinkets the more monetary gain for the shareholders. Simple as that.

Don’t make the mistake of touting it as some instance of them looking after their customers.
Post automatically merged:

Are you trying to say to us, that from your past experiences with CDPR that you have reason to believe they may have turned EA level evil between the witcher 3 and now?

Speaking for myself here, the Witcher 3 had a major shift in both UI and overall visual quality while CDPR reps kept claiming the game would look even better than its 2014 gameplay demo. Also the promised modding tools on par with RedKit (modding tool for Witcher 2) turned out to be severely limited and wimpy ModTools.
 
Last edited:
Are you trying to say to us, that from your past experiences with CDPR that you have reason to believe they may have turned EA level evil between the witcher 3 and now?

As crazy as it sounds EA, Activision were once loved Devs.
On Ps1 they used to release the best games around, some loved classics where made by them.
The Dreamcast flopped in part becaude EA didn't released games on it.

They all started as passionate game makers, then they grew bigger, started to own 2 then 3 studios, with even more employees, they had to pay the rent, pay the salaries, so they started to make more "mainstream" games, to find more lucrative approach.
Does it ring a bell?

It's not being evil, it's business.
Is CDPR evil? No
Could they follow some shitty business tactics to keep their head out of the water? Absolutely.

They do, we all do.
Money is the nerve of war.
Remove your pink shades, "Gaming" isn't a passionate niche anymore, it has been molded in a massive business in the past 15years, it's almost as big as the movie industry

With their success CDPR went to a level that they can't step back from, have money coming from public domain (polish government) etc...
So of course they have a big pressure to be "bankable".

Does it means they went evil?
Nope
It means they have to make sure they'll mainstream and standardize their products in a way that will maximize their profit so their 2studios, employees, Gog and the money they've been lended can get back in their owner's pocket and maybe make a lil bit more just "in case"
They're maybe in Poland, but still, that's a shitload of money we're talking...

That's like people asking for artists to release physical media, it costs a lot if you want to make it good and not throw money out of the windows, so if you plan on living with it, you better find a way to make it lucrative, unless you're a crust punk living in your van (and even there, you still need money)

I think that CDPR went out of the "niche" market with Cyberpunk, which may make them do some decisions that could lead them to be in a EA/Activision position.

The bigger you become, the more money you need and sorry but you don't fill your bank account with RPG's once you're that big and independant :/
They need to find the right middle, hense why they talked sometimes about possible microtransaction, or why they opted for a multiplayer (the idea is cool, but that's a good way to keep milking your game, which isn't illogical if you see it from a businesd POV), it's not a passion anymore, it's a job.

When you're creating your indépendant job, they basicaly told you to "keep your heart at home, it's business, not a love affair".

Hense why they're not evil, but...
 
Last edited:
I'm still cut that we can't buy apartments / move up in the world.
Regardless, even if it has or hasn't got the stuff we are all crying about it could still suck balls or be an amazing game.

(Apart from not having a customizable penthouse with neon codpiece change room, viewable in the third person, in which case i'm not buying the game)
You can though lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom