The only element that would go counter to this logic is the fact we'll be covering ground much faster in cars, which one would think might necessitate stretching the map out, especially in the outskirts maybe.
Yes it should be big because your are driving your vehicle and if takes you 15 minutes to go around the whole map that isn't fun.
But it should also be dense with secrets, shops, ramps, places to do stunts, parking lots, police station, hospital all that but they places shouldn't just be plastered on the wall.
When I get hurt I should wake up in a hospital bed if I get caught for petty crime then I should go to jail.
If wanted entertainment I should be able to go to a club or cinema or arcade to have fun.
They should be bating cage, golf course, we've seen basketball court, maybe race track to race your vehicles for cash.
There should be places to go and things to see when you are not doings missions or side quests.
But it should also be dense with secrets, shops, ramps, places to do stunts, parking lots, police station, hospital all that but they places shouldn't just be plastered on the wall.
When I get hurt I should wake up in a hospital bed if I get caught for petty crime then I should go to jail.
If wanted entertainment I should be able to go to a club or cinema or arcade to have fun.
They should be bating cage, golf course, we've seen basketball court, maybe race track to race your vehicles for cash.
There should be places to go and things to see when you are not doings missions or side quests.
It takes roughly 10 minutes to drive a complete loop around the GTA 5 map... just saying.
Good point, I guess it depends on how much area outside the city is included, and if there is an easily accessible "click on map" fast travel mechanic. The perceived size of the city while driving is also increased by the player being forced to take longer routes, as it is not like an open landscape where one can ride from point A to B in a more or less straight line, there are large buildings in the way, dead ends, bridges and overpasses, etc., and many places are only reachable on foot. So, I am not sure if a city map that is half the area of TW3 horizontally would feel small in practice.
I don't know it only took like 15 minutes to get from one end of Velen/Novigrad to the other if you went full tilt. Still felt really big.
I thought it was more like 30 minutes, but that could be Geralt running. Here's a map comparison video, which always must be taken with a grain of salt, but notice the jump in size when the maps involve modern open world driving games. TW3 still is one of the biggest in its genre though.
Keep in mind CP2077 is not a driving game. Nor was W3 a horse riding one. Vehicles/horses exist in these games because they make sense not because they're a central focus of the game. You might as well say since Orbital Air exists in Night City CDPR has to include L.E.O., the Crystal Palace, and multiple destinations you can fly to via suborbital spaceplane (I actually expect there to be one or two, no actual space travel tho).
They're flavor not a central gameplay element.
Cyberpunk shouldnt have outskirts, its urban area on steroids, if you think Las Vegas is cool, multiply that by 10 and you get Night City. I suppose we will see.
Cyberpunk RPG book doesnt not tell as far I know. I personally hope its Urban Area 100% or the illusion is lost. More outskirt you add, more realistic is start to feel, imho, but the creator is on board so we will find out soon.
Almost every open world game has outskirt, it would be smart to do it differently too.
Well you did see those Hillbillies in one of the vids so i think you might be able to go outside the city .
Last edited:
I've been wondering about that shot since the moment I saw it. Santo Domingo? Or pehaps true outskirts.
There have been two interviews that mention it.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-08-24-the-big-cyberpunk-2077-interview
and
https://www.vg247.com/2018/12/17/cyberpunk-2077-night-city-buildings-npcs-deserts-mountains/
Should they just remove the outskirt? How they can add sequels if the Night City as full is already shown? So in Cyberpunk 2 we are gonna roam outside of Night City, that sucks. One option is to add those invisible walls to a Night City, so the illusion of bigger Night City remains. It might be too late. Or is sequel another City perhaps.
Hmm, or maybe the plan is to use different time period for sequel like 2168.
Hmm, or maybe the plan is to use different time period for sequel like 2168.
Last edited:
I would be very surprised if CDPR outright removed game world content at this point. Renfine it, sure. But I think it's unlikely that they'll waste work if that can be avoided.
Pondsmith's vision of Cyberpunk is global. It extends beyond just Night City.
I would imagine that CDPR would be planning a more elegant solution than invisible walls. Those are highly immersion breaking, which runs counter to a core priority of the team.
The world does have to be made finite in some way. However, if The Witcher 3 is anything to go by, it could be just the player being forced to fast travel at the edges of the map, which is basically the same as an invisible wall. But the boundaries are not a major issue if the player is not given a particular reason to cross them, that is, they never block the path between two points of interest, and it is made apparent in an intuitive way that the out of bounds area is not worth exploring (for example, because you see it is just an empty desert, or sea, or mountains you cannot climb).
