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

+
25 pages of arguing about having one apartment in the game. From people who want immersion. Unbelievable. I've never owned more than one home at a time in real life, and I only know a handful of people who do. Guess I must be living in an alternate timeline.

i also never cut someones legs of with mantis blades, yeah real life is a lot different than what you can do in a video game, nice point that you are making
 
25 pages of arguing about having one apartment in the game. From people who want immersion. Unbelievable. I've never owned more than one home at a time in real life, and I only know a handful of people who do. Guess I must be living in an alternate timeline.

It's not only about the appartment mate. It grew into an interesting discussion about what the game's focus is going to be, wether it has shifted or not, and if that's a good thing.

The appartment is representative of a "sandboxy", "interactive" open-world experience. Which might be a lie, an illusion. But we still want to live there, you know ?


I'm sure people agree that the focus of the game should be the narrative, but some people do feel more and more restricted by the game's tight focus, we don't know yet if that's a good thing and if it's really a design choice or too much ambition that led to erased features. We'll have to see.
 
25 pages of arguing about having one apartment in the game. From people who want immersion. Unbelievable. I've never owned more than one home at a time in real life, and I only know a handful of people who do. Guess I must be living in an alternate timeline.

Would you own one apartment if you were a hired gun/assassin? you think your enemies wouldn't find out where you live? This isn't godfather where you stay at a compound with all our "family" and risk it.

I'm not mad that we don't have more apartments, I'm bothered that it makes no sense in this world to have 1 apartment.

HOWEVER.

If they introduced a way to transfer the same design of the apartment to another interior in a different city while the first location get's replaced. I'd be happy to have that.

If the design is the problem, because I don't understand what's so hard in adding the option to buy more apartments. Work around it, find a different solution, in that world you would expect your apartment to be destroyed as soon as you mess with a gang. Or to find cameras in your apartment.
 
25 pages of arguing about having one apartment in the game. From people who want immersion. Unbelievable. I've never owned more than one home at a time in real life, and I only know a handful of people who do. Guess I must be living in an alternate timeline.

What does it have to do with immersion? Realistic graphics are immersive. This is about being able to play out a rags to riches story in the game world. People wanna accrue wealth and see it manifest in this BEAUTIFUL futuristic city around them.

Being okay with 1 starter apartment is like being okay with Tony Montana in Scarface starting out in a taco truck and ending as a millionaire still living in a taco truck.
 
I like a single apartment as your armoury would have on show your collection of weapons. We wouldn’t go around buying more of the same weapon for each apartment would we.
 
Such a strange argument that since you're a hired gun you NEED to have multiple apartments. Like having 5 suddenly makes it harder to find you.


Well a little bit harder but i get What you mean. Thats why they need to find a different solution because 1 absolutely doesnt work
 
Such a strange argument that since you're a hired gun you NEED to have multiple apartments. Like having 5 suddenly makes it harder to find you.

I can't even... It's not about NEED. It's about WANTING to see our characters progression.
Rags to riches. End of story.
 
I can't even... It's not about NEED. It's about WANTING to see our characters progression.
Rags to riches. End of story.
I suppose you missed justification of V being a mercenary so he/she can't stay at one place because of possible headhunt.
And rags to riches is also a weak argument. Many games did that in the past with only one house. At best you unitially start in some rat hole, but at some point in the story you have an opportunity to get yourself a "castle". End of story.
Post automatically merged:

Well a little bit harder but i get What you mean. Thats why they need to find a different solution because 1 absolutely doesnt work
It worked many times in the past and it will work in this game as well.
 
I suppose you missed justification of V being a mercenary so he/she can't stay at one place because of possible headhunt.
And rags to riches is also a weak argument. Many games did that in the past with only one house. At best you unitially start in some rat hole, but at some point in the story you have an opportunity to get yourself a "castle". End of story.
Post automatically merged:

It worked many times in the past and it will work in this game as well.

I get you're a fan of CDPR, I am too. But stop talking down to people who ask for gameplay features you don't care for. You wouldn't like it if I said something you wanted to see in the game was stupid.
 
I suppose you missed justification of V being a mercenary so he/she can't stay at one place because of possible headhunt.
And rags to riches is also a weak argument. Many games did that in the past with only one house. At best you unitially start in some rat hole, but at some point in the story you have an opportunity to get yourself a "castle". End of story.

What did you think we were talking about here? There is a big misunderstanding in this thread apparently.

V can only have one apartment =
(choose A or B)

A.) You can acquire a different apartment/safehouse as the game progresses, but hold only one at a time.

B.) V has only one apartment that stays unchanged for the whole game

I (and others I think) have been under impression that it's B, and been complaining about that.
 
I suppose you missed justification of V being a mercenary so he/she can't stay at one place because of possible headhunt.
And rags to riches is also a weak argument. Many games did that in the past with only one house. At best you unitially start in some rat hole, but at some point in the story you have an opportunity to get yourself a "castle". End of story.
Post automatically merged:

It worked many times in the past and it will work in this game as well.
Worked by playing the pretend game.

Im a game that strives for realism, should there be pretend situations? I dont think
 
I get you're a fan of CDPR, I am too. But stop talking down to people who ask for gameplay features you don't care for. You wouldn't like it if I said something you wanted to see in the game was stupid.
Wanting something wasn't the point of the discussion. It was about arguments that people bring why it needs to be in the game. A specific one at that.
Post automatically merged:

What did you think we were talking about here? There is a big misunderstanding in this thread apparently.

V can only have one apartment =
(choose A or B)

A.) You can acquire a different apartment/safehouse as the game progresses, but hold only one at a time.

B.) V has only one apartment that stays unchanged for the whole game

I (and others I think) have been under impression that it's B, and been complaining about that.
Point the exact phrase in my post that argues what you typed here?
Post automatically merged:

Worked by playing the pretend game.

Im a game that strives for realism, should there be pretend situations? I dont think
All games are about pretending. And realism isn't something that CDPR advertises. I'm reading about mature themes for mature audiences, branched storytelling and gameplay choices.
 
Last edited:
Wanting something wasn't the point of the discussion. It was about arguments that people bring why it needs to be in the game. A specific one at that.
Post automatically merged:

Point the exact phrase in my post that argues what you typed here?
Post automatically merged:

All games are about pretending. And realism isn't something that CDPR advertises. I'm reading about mature themes for mature audiences, branched storytelling and gameplay choices.

They want to make the game as detailed as possible thats synonymous with realism. And if im not wrong i think i read that the combat changed to a more "realstic" combat. And i know i saw in an ign interview the talk about the chokehold being real enough and them not wanting to leave much chance for V to leave. Theres that too. Lets not play ourselves, they do want realism.
 
But there is a difference between gameplay realism for combat, and gameplay realism regarding house hunting. I mean, I've bought a house. Not super enthralling. Lots of walking around empty houses, paperwork, home inspections, mortgage payments, etc etc. Not really the thing I'd want depicted realistically.

I'll also reiterate that shopping for a home is not my idea of "cyberpunk."
 
They want to make the game as detailed as possible thats synonymous with realism. And if im not wrong i think i read that the combat changed to a more "realstic" combat. And i know i saw in an ign interview the talk about the chokehold being real enough and them not wanting to leave much chance for V to leave. Theres that too. Lets not play ourselves, they do want realism.
Sure, let's not. Many games have realistic elements in them. But it's not the driving force. If more realistic gun handling helps making gameplay more fluid and enjoyable, it's worth pursuing. But it's still "gameplay first" approach. If managing multiple apartments makes the game more convoluted, irrational and wastes too much resources without a worthy pay off, it needs to be cut. And it doesn't matter that plenty of people go through several living places in their lives.
 
Well, I was right, I guess...

00:45 - 1:05

He's not saying anything that's proving you right in that interview though, OR proving you wrong for that matter. There's no mention of starting positions. He's just saying that dialogue options change if you pick a different background. That doesn't preclude starting positions being different, or the same between backgrounds.

It's like mentioning that crows fly. That doesn't prove anything about whether they can walk or not.

At this point though, I'm afraid to make ANY claim, and I'm doubting whether it's even worthwhile. :LOL: I'm fully prepared to get proven wrong and see you vindicated after the fact, as CDPR makes up its mind in the next 9 months.
 
Last edited:
I've been taking an extended break from active discussion here, and will continue to do so, but because I feel like people are starting to get disingenuous (on both sides), thought I'd check in to lay things out for everyone's convenience.
  • I don't believe most people care about actually owning more than one apartment.
  • I don't believe most people want to have a "house hunting experience" (wut, Rawls?) like they would in the real world.
  • There are two ways to interpret the devs' previous statement that there's a "chance" V will own other apartments. 1. It could be taken to mean there's a "chance" the feature will even be implemented at all. 2. It could be taken to mean the PLAYER will have a "chance" to own other apartments, but will not be forced to do so, or perhaps they can miss their "chance" if they don't take action fast enough.
  • If you automatically assume your interpretation (no matter what side you fall on) is correct, and the other persons is incorrect, perhaps it would be wise to re-assess and understand the different ways someone could logically read that statement.
So, those are the misconceptions. What do people ACTUALLY want?
  • The ability to feel like you're progressing through the world. Read the source material. It is not uncommon for edgerunners to have nicer apartments, and despite what some believe, edgerunners are not perpetually broke. In fact, the source material describes them as "wealthy" and successful members of the underground city. BUT, they never live adjacent to corpos (YUCK). The furthest they'll go, according to the Night City sourcebook, is a nice downtown apartment.
  • If we must only own one apartment at a time, people would still unlock different apartments throughout the story. VERY FEW PEOPLE ARE SERIOUSLY ASKING TO BE REAL ESTATE MOGULS. Think of it in GTA 4 terms. One of your safehouses (spoilers?) burns down, and you have to find a new one. It doesn't need to work like that in 2077, but that's an example of replacing one dwelling with another.
  • The feeling of immersion you'd get from having to move from place to place throughout the story; whether it's an upgraded dwelling or not. Edgerunners rarely stay in one place, but despite what Sard frequently claims (no offense, buddy!), yes, they can and do own (Edit: rent?) and live in apartments. Right there in the 2020 materials. Not a controversial claim. Now, whether or not you ran your personal campaign in that fashion is another matter. But it's not anti-lore.
Hope this helps clarify things for some.
 
Last edited:
Sure, let's not. Many games have realistic elements in them. But it's not the driving force. If more realistic gun handling helps making gameplay more fluid and enjoyable, it's worth pursuing. But it's still "gameplay first" approach. If managing multiple apartments makes the game more convoluted, irrational and wastes too much resources without a worthy pay off, it needs to be cut. And it doesn't matter that plenty of people go through several living places in their lives.

Thats true, but i still like to voice this as they should at least try to work around it by finding a way that doesnt make the game convoluted. I imagine they just dropped the idea and thats it.
 
Top Bottom