The potential arrival of Cyberpunk Online (March - April 2022)

+
It's very interesting to read this conversation.

You are discussing monetization in other games and criticise it for being pointless. At the same time you are excited about monetization in Cybrepunk, even though you don't consider buying anything yourself. In your minds it's "gta crowd" who would, for some reason, come in and start making revenue for CDPR... you don't seem to understand why those largely popular games with microtransactions are so largely popular. And why people want to (or rather-- feel like they have to) pay additional real life money to get fictional, purely cosmetic items. Sometimes even consumables that once used-- are gone forever. And you don't understand why, because you yourself don't do it. Simple as.

Cyberpunk online, if it ever comes to be, wont make any money, because its main player base is largely composed of single player gamers who don't like the idea of paying after they already payed. Do you know who I'm talking about when I say "their main player base"? I mean myself, but also you guys, here. We simply don't spend money that way. We want the full experience for the full price and we expect that experience to be of high quality from day one.

I doubt there is many people in these forums willing to pay $70 for standard edition of the game, then additionally $20 to $40 for season pass, and then additional $20 to a $120 for cosmetics. We are simply not that kind of gamers. CDPR wont make a huge money out of us. And we would not pay for something that is obviously full of predatory monetization. If CDPR wants to make huge money out of Cyberpunk multi/online/call it as you wish, they will have to appeal to "gta crowd". And that will automatically make this game unplayable for us. Because GTA crowd might be into games like this. But we are definitely not into games like GTA online. We would complain and move on. Play "our" single player, and leave GTA Crowd to play "inferior" Online.

CDPR already tried to do "the right thing" with optional monetization in Gwent and Witcher Go. Did it make them all the money in the world? No. And its full of optional stuff to buy. Why are you guys not buying it? Because you are not that kind of gamers. And why "That kind of gamers" are not buying them? Because its not the kind of game they would play. :D

Being supportive is a beautiful thing. Until someone asks you to support them financially. I have a friend who always pirates games. His argument is "I will play it now and decide if its worth the money". Guess how often the game is "worth his money" at release price. But he will play it on release. And maybe, if its mind-blowingly good, he will buy it at 75%off on steam or get for free later down the line from humble bundle and such.
He sees nothing wrong with it. Because in his mind he values his money. At the same time he will complain that "good games with huge potential" always sell less than "cash-grab" games. Well, those underperforming games are targeted to people who "value their money".
Personally, I would pay for dlc cosmetics. A set of new styled clothing, new vehicle, new unique weapon, new skins for vehicles and so on.
I really would. But I would never pay for a season pass to be in a PvP environment.
I treat CP77 similar to how I treat say Mortal Kombat 11.
I like to play through the storymode, can grind every once in a while the towers of time and have some fun with the PvE.
But I'm not gonna pay a penny for the sealclub PvP environment.

Think about it: pay monthly only to be fragged in the world, completely and utterly destroying any sense of fun to be had? At worst, getting spawn camped by some idiot who thinks that is fun?

Na...
Give me a good single player experience with lots of stuff to do/keep doing and it cosmetics were available as microtransaction, I'd purchase some.
But I refuse any PvP.
 
Hi Chooms,

Like most of the people here in the forum, I think this is pure speculation and unsecured. One possibility of Cyberpunk 2077 online is definitely tempting but I think (personal opinion) there will first be the DLCs with affordable expansions. That alone will probably take around 2-3 years. By then, CDPR will certainly have a good overview to see whether Cyberunk 2077 online is worthwhile.
 
Cyberpunk online, if it ever comes to be, wont make any money, because its main player base is largely composed of single player gamers who don't like the idea of paying after they already payed.
You could make the same argument about people who played GTA 4 however.

There wasn't GTA 4 Online or GTA 3 online, and yet Rockstar managed to make money printing machine out of gamers who likely hadn't spend money on microtransactions before.

So just saying "well Witcher players aren't used to paying for microtransactions, so that won't happen" is kinda strange statement.

I'm sure it's the same with games like Hearthstone, where most gamers who started playing that came from Blizzard's other IP's like Warcraft and Diablo.

Well World of Warcraft had microtransactions or at least monthly fee's but still, even that game became insanely popular from a studio that had just made Warcraft 3 before. Nobody knew how much money they'd able to get from making World of Warcraft, and knowing now it's success they would've spend way more on marketing and development.
 
Last edited:
You could make the same argument about people who played GTA 4 however.

There wasn't GTA 4 Online or GTA 3 online, and yet Rockstar managed to make money printing machine out of gamers who likely hadn't spend money on microtransactions before.

So just saying "well Witcher players aren't used to paying for microtransactions, so that won't happen" is kinda strange statement.

I'm sure it's the same with games like Hearthstone, where most gamers who started playing that came from Blizzard's other IP's like Warcraft and Diablo.

Well World of Warcraft had microtransactions or at least monthly fee's but still, even that game became insanely popular from a studio that had just made Warcraft 3 before. Nobody knew how much money they'd able to get from making World of Warcraft, and knowing now it's success.
The single player world of GTA has already offered vehicle customization, multiple apartments etc etc. Cyberpunks world on the other hand doesn't. Some of those features were promised initially, then dropped, now adding them into the multiplayer just to milk some money would be a rather brave move, and I suppose the community wouldn't appreciate it. At least, you know, the 'hater' part of it.

However should CP77 get those singleplayer features added in the future, which I highly doubt, the picture could drastically change.
 
It's even weirder for Witcher 3- I can't imagine multiplayer in that world at all. How is this supposed to work? Customizable Roach and four Geralts in one team hunting monsters together? It just seems like a very stupid idea and I think greeks is right. Many W3 and CP2077 don't want this stuff in their singleplayer games and we won't spend a cent on it. In fact, I'm going to be very angry if they are going to patch my wonderful W3 with multiplayer crap and end up destroying the singleplayer experience.
 
It's even weirder for Witcher 3- I can't imagine multiplayer in that world at all. How is this supposed to work?
Well if there ever was multiplayer for W3 that would probably be either making a completely new Witcher character for multiplayer.

Or maybe there's some room where you can train against your own "reflection" who then can be played as another player in the original game.


I mean it's almost like arguing for Halo multiplayer not being possible because there's only 1 master chief. There's definitely more Witchers in the game, it's just there used to be way more in the past.
 
Well if there ever was multiplayer for W3 that would probably be either making a completely new Witcher character for multiplayer.
In the same way as RDR2, there is no "multi-Athur Morgan" (same world, new character) :)
Edit : There is one thing which I'm quite confident about TW3 multi, there will certainly be the possibility of playing Gwent between players.
 
Last edited:
None of you have the right to tell others what they can or cannot post about a topic, so please don't try to. A few posts deleted.
 
It's even weirder for Witcher 3- I can't imagine multiplayer in that world at all. How is this supposed to work? Customizable Roach and four Geralts in one team hunting monsters together? It just seems like a very stupid idea and I think greeks is right. Many W3 and CP2077 don't want this stuff in their singleplayer games and we won't spend a cent on it. In fact, I'm going to be very angry if they are going to patch my wonderful W3 with multiplayer crap and end up destroying the singleplayer experience.
So far CDPR caters only to SP RPG players, and I too hope it stays that way :howdy:
 
Any form of multiplayer or online bullshit is a waste of perfectly good resources (and some of those have been already wasted) and one step closer to game as a service scheme. Stop online elements. Stop multiplayer. Stop the madness.
 
Any form of multiplayer or online bullshit is a waste of perfectly good resources (and some of those have been already wasted) and one step closer to game as a service scheme. Stop online elements. Stop multiplayer. Stop the madness.

A nice idea, but that's never going to happen due to how lucrative online gaming is to developers and publishers.

Take-Two Interactive have made nearly $1Billion off Shark Cards, its worth it to these companies.
 
In the same way as RDR2, there is no "multi-Athur Morgan" (same world, new character) :)
Edit : There is one thing which I'm quite confident about TW3 multi, there will certainly be the possibility of playing Gwent between players.
I could see it working very well in Cyberpunk: team up with group of people and go on raids in corpo wars: faction system, variety of locations, goals and objectives, etc. Syndicate ( 2012 ) was Cyberpunk FPS game with a fun multiplayer that you'd do something like that ( fly with your team to location, where you fight a hostile faction with different goals in mind).
But real question is: what would CDPR offer that is different, engaging, nteresting product on the market? With multiplayer, there are a couple of game that dominate the market ( and make a lot of money), while vast majority fail.
It's highly unlikely anyone switch from R6Siege or Counter strike to CDPR's ( vastly simpler) version of the same.
I think they would need to massively expand and overhaul builds and gameplay mechanics to have any chance of competing ( like with techie who could build, control and customize whole host of drones, interact with environment, etc).
To me this just seems Gwent 2.0 all over.
 
Any form of multiplayer or online bullshit is a waste of perfectly good resources (and some of those have been already wasted) and one step closer to game as a service scheme. Stop online elements. Stop multiplayer. Stop the madness.
Too late. Why do you think the armor and weapon systems in this game are carbon copies of always-online PVE/PVP shooters?

I would guess that someone, at some point, decided something along the lines of "We're already making the online looter shooter companion; two different systems is a waste. Just put this shit in the campaign and call it a fucking day." What, in these two other open-world series games there are only basic weapons that can be insanely modified and handful of unique variants? The clothes you see on the character are what you actually get? A chance random encounter could end with you stripping your assailant's corpse? Absurd. Just throw a 15+ uncommon armor G-string in that Netrunner's back pocket.
 
I would play a multi-player version and why not. Group in game with people
you talk with on the forums, that would be awesome.
 
:shrug: the worst idea ever.

Imagine have a game bugged like Cyberpunk, with online multiplayer.
We will have all servers full of cheaters.

Remeber that CDPR couldn't defend himself (was hacked like 2-3 times).
Imagine in an online games.... :coolstory:
 
Yes. Just "yes".

CDPR can't release a patch in 6 months, but they can develop an online mode in a year? They can't get rid of both well documented and repeatable bugs, and those that appear randomly and are difficult or near impossible to reliably reproduce. What makes you think that all of a sudden online mode for Cyberpunk will run flawlessly? The engine itself is proven to be unreliable on both PC and consoles. Add to it online-specific issues and challenges and you'll end up with something even more impossible to play.

Here's what I think would happen with Cyberpunk Online: remember All Points Bulletin?


 
Top Bottom