Needs to be a coop done right option. I get bored halfway through 1p games, but i'm not gonna bother w/a halfassed coop either.
I never trusted anyone saying that money used for a part of a video game isn't taken from another part, and I still have to find me wrong on this (even if sometimes it takes years for confirmation).
People, time and money are ressources which can always be put to work on something else than multiplayer.
Why is it a "mortal sin" to keep it single or multiplayer only game? Some of the most successful expansive games were one or the other (Like Skyrim and WoW) which allows them to focus all of the mechanics and world interactions around which paradigm makes the most sense. Some good games are hybrids, I'm not saying you can't have a good single and multiplayer experience, I'm just saying that a developer isn't objectively wrong for not making everything online.
Wait what? So anyone who doesn't want exactly what you want lack imagination and somehow THEY are the one's being narrow minded? Some people prefer single player games, some prefer multiplayer games, and some want everything to be Division, and all of those are fine, but to think one category is "right" and the others are wrong is pretty short sighted.
It's a "mortal sin" in my opinion because one of the things that made 2020 standout was personality, if you can't meet other players in Night City and see how they made their character, what they have been up to, what gang/corporation they choose to support, etc, then what's the point, that's why people have being playing WoW for almost 14 years, because they have lots of stuff to do and most of it requires player interaction.
In Cyberpunk 2077 you won't be roleplaying as Geralt, you are not the Dragonborn, if you want this game a SP only then you missed the point.
And yes, narrow minded, because of all the diverse options for online player interaction this poll shows the majority wants absolutely none of them.
Post automatically merged:
Yeah ofc, I sure hope they get netrunning right and polish the gameplay a lot, but CDPR recieved 4 grants from the polish goverment if I'm not mistaken, they are determined to make another masterpiece.
Last edited:
I think you missed the point that it was never an MMO or even MP. it was always a single player game. and thank christ for that.
Minus for some of us those player interactions are one of the problem there's 99% chances they won't see Roleplay the way you do, thus breaking immersion.
And that's not even speaking about how superficial interractions can be between multiples players and the world as a whole.
Actually V is V. It's an already well defined character which can just be tweaked. The Dragonborn is actually a lot less defined than V.
I challenge you to actually give me an example of multiplayer which won't break immersion for me.
If you find one I'll change my vote.
This assumes a REALLY idealistic vision of multiplayer. I have been playing multiplayer games since MUDs were the only option (not including PB(EM/BBS) here bc that is a table top game played online, not an online game). Far more often I have experienced people who act out of line with the game's world than in line with it, and this trend has only increased in the recent years.
A well-made single player game can provide plenty of rich interactions that are consistently appropriate for the context of the game, sorry that I don't see the benefit of adding in a bunch of bunny hopping bake brains chanting about kekistan and disrupting NPCs for the lulz.
If they make an online game that is separate from the single player game, we both get our way, hell I'd be playing both because I do see value in an online game, but I ALSO see value in a true single player game, but somehow seeing value in 2 different options rather than wanting to put everything in a blender is "missing the point."
Sure, some players just want to partner up to get over a mission, I get that.
The V we saw in the demo is not the same V reviewers and content creators played 3 months ago and I will not be the same V players will make when they get the game, V is only a nick name and you'll suppose to create him/her a background, a Dragonborn's role is pretty pretty defined in whatever story he shows up.
Challenge accepted:
-Assassinate mode from the first AC games, you are given a unique target to kill (they give you a picture) and have to find it among a crowd of NPCs in a small map, other player get to hunt you aswell.
-Hack missions from the Watch Dogs games, you have to hack another player's phone by invading his "world" (he doesn't know you invade him until you start the hack), then you have to hide in a small circle among the other NPCs or behind cover until the hack is complete, you can not kill your target.
None of those modes affects the story of those games at all.
Post automatically merged:
I do agree about the single player interactions, and now that you don't play a defined character is gonna interesting how they are gonna pull this off, but at the end of the day your are not gonna be the hero of the story.
Also, what if some retard online wants to murder civilians and fuck around, it fits Night City perfectly.
Last edited:
Which is a great idea on paper, but in practice the person being hacked can kill the instigator, so you go to hack them and they just start mowing down everyone near them to try to end the hack, OR the instigator doesn't care about the minigame they just get in a car and start driving it through the crowds of people that are near you because they are bored. The times where these minigames turn out to be the cat and mouse game they were designed to be are few and far between.
Both of these actions where the other person isn't really taking the game seriously don't fit Night City perfectly, because while NC is a super dangerous city, crazies exist, etc, these actions are being taken because in the modes you are suggesting, everything is inconsequential. Since there is no real danger to the player, they can run amok until they get killed at which point they will respawn with nothing lost, and jump into the next instance they can to rinse and repeat. They aren't acting like unhinged maniacs or violent criminals, they are acting like people who exist outside of the world and can temporarily possess random people in it solely with the idea of causing chaos and misery and the only thing at risk is the body they have temporarily inhabited. The percentage of people in NC that have that kind of perspective is probably less than 1:1000, but with online access it is going to be at or above 1:10.
In addition to really skewing the percentage of madcap psychos in the world, even when everyone acts accordingly, it is still immersion breaking because the game mode literally changes. It doesn't matter what your objective was, what you were doing, now you've got this little minigame you have to play because ignoring it would be out of character. It is disruptive and adds very little in the best of cases, in the worst of cases it completely exposes the nature of the game destroying any sense of immersion the player had.
Multiplayer is just a burden to the single player game. Better to do them separately (if there’s absolute demand for both) so that both can be done as well as they can for their own good.
Actually nothing is defined about the Dragonborn himself, only the events which happens to him are mostly the same for every players, while V is defined: her job, her friend, where she live, the fact that she uses drugs and drinks, the fact that she speaks like a punk (and NO, not everyone in C2020 speak like a punk), and I may have missed some other things, and it was only a 48 minutes demo.
First is just minigame, second is immersion breaking unless LOTS of factors comes into play.
And none fix the Roleplay immersion problem.
There is nothing like "single player interactions", just "interractions".
If my "Cool" stat doesn't makes me able to intimidate other players into backing down like any other NPC would, then it is immersion breaking.
Everytime there is a difference between interracting with a NPC or a PC, or simply having the ability to saw a difference between the two, it breaks immersion.
You clearly didn't play it and I don't blame you, there really really clever players now, but it really works out and is very hard to master, that's what separated the good and the great hackers in Watch Dogs, once you start hacking his phone he can not just drive away or he will lose, (he loses like online exp which unlocks perks that only apply for multiplayer), sure the dude being hacked can start mowing the civilians down but that would get the police after them and he only has like 2 mins before the hack ends, if he shoot once in the air the NPCs will start running but the instigator can run aswell posing as one of those NPCs or hide inside a parked car, etc, what that game lacked was verticality but it is still very complex as you had to play your enviroment and copy NPC behavior, also, and you could always tune down the frequency of these invasions or even turn them off you got tired of them.
I encourage you to watch gameplay of it.
Post automatically merged:
NO dude, you literally have to choose a childhood hero (Silverhand and Arasaka for example which are complete opposite characters), a key life event and why V is in Night City, and that's only what CD has shown so far. V is just a nickname like in the P&P you also have to choose one.
Last edited:
I actually played a significant amount of Watchdogs 2, and have played a lot of these missions because of the few times that it felt like the experience you are describing. Maybe it is just my luck, but the times that it felt like we were both hackers in the world competing against each other were dwarfed by the times it felt like we were players competing in a metagame using our characters.
You are right about being able to tune, or disconnect the social aspect entirely, but I feel that a Watchdogs Online built around a persistent world of hackers teaming up and against each other would have been a far superior alternative to a mostly single player game that added on some online functionality.
Do you mean that this whole topic doesn't exist:
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/what-if-i-dont-want-play-for-a-punk.10981082/
Besides, the list I did is genuine.
A good MP feature and not something half arsed cost a lot of time and money, so i rather they use that on making great SP content for Cyberpunk 2077, we have enough MP games out there, too many imo. And no i do not think a SP game needs to have a MP aspect no matter how small like EA does.
As long as it doesn't interfere with the sense of realism. For example, optional coop would be fine. If it were realistic, though, the player who was visiting the other's world would be able to take sidequests and establish their own rep. It could honestly be an interesting NG+ option if there was some story reason that your character had seen it all before--maybe with extra dialogue options. You could even hijack the "world" from the other player, maybe. It would have to be at the discretion of the host/original player to include multiplayer in their gaming experience like that. I don't think time travel is in the CP universe, though, although I could be mistaken.
Maybe there could be a story reason that the "visiting" player couldn't establish a rep. Sidequests being conditional on your rep already, this sort of thing could maybe interfere with the visiting player's ability to steal quests. The only other issues would be looting, secondary player('s/s') ability to interact with V in-game (so that they were real, in-game characters like V), and the same's ability to interact with the game's NPCs, story, etc..
Basically, as long as it doesn't interfere with the quality of the single-player experience, it's fine. Whatever integration or separation needs to be implemented to do that should be.
Maybe there could be a story reason that the "visiting" player couldn't establish a rep. Sidequests being conditional on your rep already, this sort of thing could maybe interfere with the visiting player's ability to steal quests. The only other issues would be looting, secondary player('s/s') ability to interact with V in-game (so that they were real, in-game characters like V), and the same's ability to interact with the game's NPCs, story, etc..
Basically, as long as it doesn't interfere with the quality of the single-player experience, it's fine. Whatever integration or separation needs to be implemented to do that should be.