"V will have only one apartmant in the game." - Kasia Redesuik (gamestar.de interview)

+
live wherever they wanted (look at all the CP2077 articles from 2018 repeating "multiple purchasable apartments").

June 9/18 Peter Gelencser: "“V’s apartment will be a standard thing, you can own your apartment and there is a chance to own multiple apartments. "
 
They said in 2018 that the player would be able to
  1. live wherever they wanted (look at all the CP2077 articles from 2018 repeating "multiple purchasable apartments").
  2. choose out of a pallete of life goals, including getting rich, or getting even with someone (e.g. play what you want).
That's a lot of freedom, which is great! But now the game is a rail shooter with RPG elements and an unavoidable Keanu who will constantly pester you with colour commentary. They went from "revolutionary" to "more of the same" - chasing MacGuffins round and round.

That's the problem, not the apartment itself, nobody really takes the apartment thing too seriously, but the whole vision has changed and is now less attractive and revolutionary than what they proposed last year. Ah well, wait for price drop?

Regardless, it's clear what this game will be, a rail shooter with a cute story and Keanu, as opposed to the groundbreaking immersive world it was last year.

They never confirmed multiple apartments. You seem to making a lot of assumptions. I would chill out and wait until the game actually releases before we start assuming.
 
Completely agree with RaduMihai.

Last year I felt the game being the real revolutionar RPG game. Now it feels like it's different, more linear, less freedom and won't be so amazing. And I understand why they changed their twitter description to an open world, action-adventure now.
 
They said in 2018 that the player would be able to
  1. live wherever they wanted (look at all the CP2077 articles from 2018 repeating "multiple purchasable apartments").
  2. choose out of a pallete of life goals, including getting rich, or getting even with someone (e.g. play what you want).
That's a lot of freedom, which is great! But now the game is a rail shooter with RPG elements and an unavoidable Keanu who will constantly pester you with colour commentary. They went from "revolutionary" to "more of the same" - chasing MacGuffins round and round.

That's the problem, not the apartment itself, nobody really takes the apartment thing too seriously, but the whole vision has changed and is now less attractive and revolutionary than what they proposed last year.

While I doubt that the game will turn into the dismissive rail shooter you claim it to be, I agree with you that some of the blurbs that came out last year compared to now, have changed.

While not much, this is what was claimed on the subject of appartments:



I could opt into the opinion of the realities of game development, excuse it as a "work in progress" and that this 3-word confirmation was completely overblown, but I will choose to hold it against CDPR that they could've managed expectations better. These slips of the tongue led us to the situation we're in now.

The CDPR employee in that chatbox could've minded their tongue/typing fingers more. In that, my goodwill towards the company *is* lowering, in that they might have helped built the hype in erroneous ways on one or two (accidental) occasions. This was plastered all over the gaming news websites.
https://gamerant.com/cyberpunk-2077-purchase-multiple-apartments/

Not to the extend that I'm not still very much looking forward to CP77, or that a successful launch won't be able to complete restore it mind you, but still! This is a point where I'm willing to hold the company accountable.
 
Last edited:
I think this interview

https://www.fandom.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-the-fandom-interview

FANDOM: Will you be able to buy apartments in different districts of Night City?
Pietra:
Absolutely. You will be able to buy a couple of apartments in different locations, so obviously upgrading yourself will push you towards a certain path in the game but saying any more would be too spoilery right now.


makes the apartments sound like it will be very important feature and they won't change it regardless of what will happen.

I mean "absolutely" sounds like it will be there 100%.

Or is this same case as with "public" demo and we don't understand it correctly? This "public" demo was first thing that made me said: "What is happening CDPR?" Their marketing is... something.
 
I think this interview

https://www.fandom.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-the-fandom-interview

FANDOM: Will you be able to buy apartments in different districts of Night City?
Pietra:
Absolutely. You will be able to buy a couple of apartments in different locations, so obviously upgrading yourself will push you towards a certain path in the game but saying any more would be too spoilery right now.

Yup! I'm one of the game's defenders and don't mind the whole apartment thing, but even I can't deny that CDPR has somewhat... vacillated on certain issues. That has only exacerbated issues. This is the one thing where the people who think that fewer appartments is a big thing, will find somewhat of an ally in me.

FAQ or no FAQ, it's still something they walked back on. Could've been better handled. Let's be fair here people.

Otherwise, I'm still okay and looking forward to this game. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
I think this interview

https://www.fandom.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-the-fandom-interview

FANDOM: Will you be able to buy apartments in different districts of Night City?
Pietra:
Absolutely. You will be able to buy a couple of apartments in different locations, so obviously upgrading yourself will push you towards a certain path in the game but saying any more would be too spoilery right now.


makes the apartments sound like it will be very important feature and they won't change it regardless of what will happen.

I mean "absolutely" sounds like it will be there 100%.

Or is this same case as with "public" demo and we don't understand it correctly? This "public" demo was first thing that made me said: "What is happening CDPR?" Their marketing is... something.

thanks for finding this, i remember this interview but couldn't find it. should hopefully put an end to the argument that cdpr said there is only a "chance" to buy multiple appartments.
 
Dude please, don't assume that CDPR guys are dumb, because it sounds like so. I'm sorry but some of you are posting things impulsively. It's been proven here that some information have had their contradictory twin, so how could you assume the one or the other is the true info ? I don't know what to say, maybe wait for the Q.A. so you'll probably have a clear statement of the current dev progress.

If you're believing that the devs are shooting themselves in the foot (= reducing RPG elements to make the game more of a FPS shooter "on rails"), then if this is right they would receive a massive negative karma, like lots of people will want to boycott future games coming from them, etc... ; but if it turns out that the game becomes a great RPG, you guys are going to feel bad about not trusting them in the first place.
 
And I think that here, we're at the heart of our discussion. This is the very essence of our divergent opinion:

CDPR is building a game. In a way, it is much like a road. This road is leading in a certain direction. It is incomplete, but it's apparently heading... somewhere.
You know there's a river up ahead and you deduce this road must eventually turn into a bridge. All the evidence is there. You give all your reasons: The game already has a backstory, race, factions, cars, clothes. There must also be a multitude of player housing! It's the logical and cohesive addition to the direction of this road: A big beautiful bridge!
And once again I agree with you. A big beautiful bridge would be awesome. However, I'm adapting a wait and see attitude.

Then suddenly, CDPR starts digging down and it becomes clear they're going to tunnel underneath the river instead of ford it. Multiple apartments will not be in the game. There's apparently reasons for that, vague as they might be. I once again agree with you that I would've liked seeing a big beautiful bridge. The difference is that you're still invested in the bridge because you had all these reasons to believe it would be so, while I've already put on my hard hat to see how construction is going underground.

The continued discussions is on whether the bridge was a missed opportunity and whether the road has devalued because it runs through a tunnel instead of a bridge.
I argue that the road will work out just fine. You argue that the road's value has depreciated fundamentally for a lack of a bridge. Some argue that a bridge was always the entire point and that we don't want no stinking road. Priorities have somewhat scattered and will continue to do so as CDPR finishes its road and snakes it in different directions than we had anticipated.
But your analogy falls apart when you realize that the expectation of a "bridge" isn't an inference, wish, or deduction. The "architects" (devs) a year ago told the public that they had drawn up Blueprints for the "Bridge" and all the material was being transported to the location of the "bridge" and for a year the public was allowed to imagine what it would be like to bird watch and fish and commute on this "bridge" then suddenly the "architects" are like "sike! this totally congruent and reasonable design and location for this "bridge" that is obviously significant to a percentage of the townsfolk. Well we scraped that. Its a tunnel now, but only for trains, you cannot drive through it if you wish, there will be no foot traffic either. No options for you!". There, fixed your analogy



https://www.fandom.com/articles/cyberpunk-2077-the-fandom-interview

"FANDOM: Will you be able to buy apartments in different districts of Night City?

Pietra: Absolutely. You will be able to buy a couple of apartments in different locations, so obviously upgrading yourself will push you towards a certain path in the game but saying any more would be too spoilery right now."
Aug 30, 2018
 
Last edited:
But your analogy falls apart when you realize that the expectation of a "bridge" isn't an inference, wish, or deduction. The "architects" (devs) a year ago told the public that they had drawn up Blueprints for the "Bridge" and all the material was being transported to the location of the "bridge" and for a year the public was allowed to imagine what it would be like to bird watch and fish and commute on this "bridge" then suddenly the "architects" are like "sike! this totally congruent and reasonable design and location for this "bridge" that is obviously significant to a percentage of the townsfolk. Well we scraped that. Its a tunnel now, but only for trains, you cannot drive through it if you wish, there will be no foot traffic either. No options for you!". There, fixed your analogy

Aye. That reasoning in that metaphor is founded on the basis that the Devs have been tight-lipped and we've been allowed to imagine what we will. I made those arguments when in debate with PlanetaryCon, whose reasoning was that we were right to expect such features since other games had them too and their inclusion would've been the most desirable and natural outcome (which I agree with). He ommitted the dev's earlier statements in his arguments.
Should we include the dev's earlier vacillation in that debate however, my position becomes less tenable. I was perfectly aware that I was undermining myself too by admitting to that a few posts later. :LOL: Such is the drawback to wanting to consider multiple perspectives and a desire to second-guess my own opinion.

Considering the dev's earlier statement, I can't do much more than clear the field and admit you people have an even better point CollegeWiFi, and admit that your disappointment is better founded than I previously made it appear in that analogy.

That of course, doesn't mean I'm someone who has now begun to care about multiple apartments as strongly as others do, but I like debate for the sake of debate. There's still a bag of counter-arguments left that I could fling at the subject under the banner of "the realities of game development". I won't though, and will let you have this one:
You caught me in a contradiction. That argument was flawed and you're right. I've been parried and that reasoning struck down. Well done.

I really do hope you'll have your apartments. I'll go lick my wound somewhere and come back some other time when I'm under the assumption I have something decent to add. I do so love a good debate.
 
Last edited:
Last year I felt the game being the real revolutionar RPG game.
Nothing of what devs said painted it as a revolutionar RPG. If anything, it was rather by the book modern cinematic RPG and the only thing that set it apart - expectation of very high quality, bar set by Witcher games. In addition, there was always a warning "we're figuring it out, everything is a subject to change". Revolutionar RPG existed only in the heads of fandom.

Related to the topic "are we overhyping the game".
 
Last edited:
Aye. That reasoning in that metaphor is founded on the basis that the Devs have been tight-lipped and we've been allowed to imagine what we will. I made those arguments when in debate with PlanetaryCon, whose reasoning was that we were right to expect such features since other games had them too and their inclusion would've been the most desirable and natural outcome (which I agree with). He ommitted the dev's earlier statements in his arguments.
Should we include the dev's earlier vacillation in that debate however, my position becomes less tenable. I was perfectly aware that I was undermining myself too by admitting to that. :LOL: Such is the curse of being able to consider multiple perspectives and wanting to second-guess my own opinion.

Considering the dev's earlier statement, I can't do much more than clear the field and admit you people have an even better point CollegeWiFi, and admit that your disappointment is better founded than I previously made it appear.

That of course, still doesn't mean I'm someone who cares about multiple apartments, but I like debate for the sake of debate and there's still a bag of counter-arguments left that I could fling at the subject under the banner of "the realities of game development". I won't though, and will let you have this one:
You caught me in a contradiction. I'm wrong and you're right. My argument has been parried and my case struck down. Well done.

I really do hope you'll have your apartments. I'll go lick my wound somewhere and come back some other time. I do so love a good debate.
Well, you took that well. I personally care more about the personalization of a single (but movable) apartment than having multiple. Really what I want is a main apartment about the size of the E3 2018 demo and have supplementary safehouses/1 room apartments strewn throughout the many districts. whether that's in the form of a van, a faction affiliated safehouse/base, with a romanced NPC, in hotels ect I am open to. I just don't want to be stuck in an apartment in Pacifica with the Voodoo Boyz out for my blood. It doesn't even need to be that decorative-able just upgradable, I want that Armory in V's apartment to expand, the Door to the apartment to be upgradable to some super strong alloy of the future. IDK the "Dark Future" of Cyberpunk is a scary place and I want to be able for my character to feel safe in it and 1 noncustomizable apartment is not it.
 
Nothing of what devs said painted it as a revolutionar RPG. If anything, it was rather by the book modern cinematic RPG and the only thing that set it apart - expectation of very high quality, bar set by Witcher 3. In addition, there was always a warning "we're figuring it out, everything is a subject to change". Revolutionar RPG existed only in the heads of fandom.

Related to the topic "are we overhyping the game".

It was clear from the beginning we will be getting Witcher 3 in Cyberpunk setting and with FPS gameplay. People that in their heads imagined something else probably did not play previous CDPR games.
 
Nothing of what devs said painted it as a revolutionar RPG. If anything, it was rather by the book modern cinematic RPG and the only thing that set it apart - expectation of very high quality, bar set by Witcher games. In addition, there was always a warning "we're figuring it out, everything is a subject to change". Revolutionar RPG existed only in the heads of fandom.

Related to the topic "are we overhyping the game".
I would say it's because it's also made by pen and paper game where you have freedom of doing a looooot of things. So that's why I expected something like digital version of Cyberpunk 2020. But I'm just talking about the freedom of choices in everything. And honestly 4-5 minigames to do outside of the main missions don't sound like a big freedom. That's why I and some people feel bad about removing multiple apartments. It was one of the things you could do outside of the mission.
 
There’s no reason these can’t mixed to certain extent, though.

Obviously, both need to bend over a bit for the otherone to work, but that’s not really a big sacrifice considering all the ways a good reactive story can be told.

Which IMO happened in Witcher 3.
 
I'm not a game maker but I don't think adding extra houses would be too much time consuming for the devs, I'm sure if people really ask for we will have more at least in future expansions, I personally like the idea of starting with a very low life ugly one and make me work hard for a decent place to live, it feels somehow "ciberpunk-ish"
 
Top Bottom