What is your biggest fear regarding CP2077

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do they have to do it on Microsoft's stage?
Because there's an agreement between cdpr and Microsoft such as the one they had for TW3. All marketing will be done on xbox and probably xbox+cp2077 game bundle will be sold. Normal stuff, seen it billions of times. Most recent was metro exodus on xbox, for ps4 we had rdr2.

TLDR; Microsoft paid cdpr.
 
Because there's an agreement between cdpr and Microsoft such as the one they had for TW3. All marketing will be done on xbox and probably xbox+cp2077 game bundle will be sold. Normal stuff, seen it billions of times. Most recent was metro exodus on xbox, for ps4 we had rdr2.

TLDR; Microsoft paid cdpr.
Yeah, I know, I should have worded that differently.

I meant, why do they have to do it exclusively on Microsoft's stage?

They could have a booth at E3 where they show the demo off to passerby, or they could have hands-on demonstrations, or they could post a longer clip (with a voice walkthrough, like in the past) that goes into more detail on YouTube.
 
It depends on the agreement they have, but that's absolutely possible and likely to happen. I really hope they'll explain those aspects in depth since they're my only big concern about the game.
 
You seriously think they haven't done anything since last E3, almost 1 year time ? I highly doubt that. I bet they did a massive job improving mechanics according to peoples criticism.
The question is, which criticism did they listen to?

Tough to say. If I had to guess, I'd unfortunately say they probably listened to the people who wanted even more of an action feel, and want better gun handling and mechanics.

But I'd love to be proven wrong, and even if I'm not, as I stated more recently, I'm no longer as hardline about this stuff as I used to be. The game will undoubtedly be tremendous fun for me no matter what.
 
The question is, which criticism did they listen to?

CDPR stated numerous times, that quality comes first. Meaning none of game mechanics will be left overlooked. Simple as that. If i had a chance to take their place, i would consider every reasonable and valid opinion.
 
You seriously think they haven't done anything since last E3, almost 1 year time ? I highly doubt that. I bet they did a massive job improving mechanics according to peoples criticism.
What? Hell no, I think they've progressed a lot in development. But when it comes to criticism, in these months I tried to understand what we are criticizing.

The major feedback is that a lot of people want TPP and that's not going to happen because that would mean to rethink the game entirely (animations, motion capture, camera and dialogue system).

Other feedbacks are about loot, but 2 visions can be found: some people don't want a looter-style game (like diablo, looter shooters and TW3)(I'm one of them), other people want exactly that or even more junk for crafting in fallout/TES-style. Demo showed something weird: armor had levels, weapons only rarity. Every enemy killed dropped loot like in TW3. At least no level-gated gear was seen. Who are they trying to make happy? We don't know, it's not a clear one-direction feedback, but what they showed was already pointing in one direction, if 50% of the players are happy, CDPR is happy. They can't make everybody happy.

Some people asked for more contextual animations (i.e. me), but others say they don't want animations because they didn't like RDR2. Again, what CDPR understood? Demo was perfect or more animations are needed? Again, if 50% of the players are happy, CDPR is happy.

Another major complaint is about levels, the vast majority of people complained about them (both for CP2020 lore and fear for bullet sponge enemies like in TW3 and looter shooters), but a lot of people didn't say anything because they firmly believe that levels are fundamental in RPG and their progression system (which is not true). I'm pretty sure they're not gonna remove levels from the game, at all (unluckily for me).

Some think the game needs a more realistic approach when it comes to perks and cyberware (a subdermal grip that increases bullets' stopping power is pure magic), some may like that "because RPGs work that way".

Double jump was another main complaint, but they said it's justified somehow (some gas-propelling system I guess)

Other people are asking for impossible things like making the game an isometric turn based RPG and of course that's not gonna happen.

The point is that the general feedback is that the demo was great, but had some flaws which - unluckily - are extremely subjective. Therefore I believe CDPR has decided to continue for their path and minor changes will be made during beta testing for what concerns game's mechanics (like balancing weapons and HP bars, stuff like that). Probably they will add HUD color customization, FOV slider, head bobbing and other minor things which require zero development time, but nothing "serious".
Maybe, and I say maybe, they realized some things made no sense and changed them, but that stuff is so obvious that thinking they didn't know it from the beginning is offensive.

TLDR; the vast majority of feedbacks were in contrast to each other, so I think CDPR kept going on since the general opinion is that the demo looked great overall.
 
CDPR stated numerous times, that quality comes first. Meaning none of game mechanics will be left overlooked. Simple as that. If i had a chance to take their place, i would consider every reasonable and valid opinion.
That's unrelated to what I said.

What I, and some others on these forums, would really like to see is less shooty bang bang elements. I differ a bit in that I don't want to see none (some here want a turn-based mode, which I'm not a big fan of), but I would like your weapon stats to have a significant impact on the way guns handle, and the way you play the game.

If you really suck at shooting and specced into full-on netrunning and such, I'd like that to be reflected in the gameplay.

In other words, we want character skills to matter, and not just player skill. Not in terms of bullet damage (you have 50 Pistol skill, so now your pistols do +20% damage - heck no!), but in terms of recoil, reload speed, bullet spread, etc.

It's not a matter of not overlooking stuff, it's a matter of game design focus as a whole - and I don't think CDPR is looking to make quite the game I hope they will.

So, any "changes" they've made between the demo and now, I believe are more focused on improving the shooting for action gamers, not improving the RPG stuff (and no, I'm not making the argument that 2077 isn't an RPG).

...buuuuut, I'm not cynical or jaded about it, and I'm happy to be proven wrong. If I'm not proven wrong, oh well, I will probably still love the game as-is.
 
Other feedbacks are about loot, but 2 visions can be found: some people don't want a looter-style game (like diablo, looter shooters and TW3)(I'm one of them), other people want exactly that or even more junk for crafting in fallout/TES-style. Demo showed something weird: armor had levels, weapons only rarity. Every enemy killed dropped loot like in TW3. At least no level-gated gear was seen. Who are they trying to make happy? We don't know, it's not a clear one-direction feedback, but what they showed was already pointing in one direction, if 50% of the players are happy, CDPR is happy. They can't make everybody happy.

Even if jackets have stats, that doesn't mean you pick them up from corpses. This stuff could be simply bought from vendors of various sorts. Or have your friendly neighborhood techie build it.

Too much looting can easily become immersion breaking. I hope that CDPR avoids that.
 
What? Hell no, I think they've progressed a lot in development. But when it comes to criticism, in these months I tried to understand what we are criticizing.

The major feedback is that a lot of people want TPP and that's not going to happen because that would mean to rethink the game entirely (animations, motion capture, camera and dialogue system).

Other feedbacks are about loot, but 2 visions can be found: some people don't want a looter-style game (like diablo, looter shooters and TW3)(I'm one of them), other people want exactly that or even more junk for crafting in fallout/TES-style. Demo showed something weird: armor had levels, weapons only rarity. Every enemy killed dropped loot like in TW3. At least no level-gated gear was seen. Who are they trying to make happy? We don't know, it's not a clear one-direction feedback, but what they showed was already pointing in one direction, if 50% of the players are happy, CDPR is happy. They can't make everybody happy.

Some people asked for more contextual animations (i.e. me), but others say they don't want animations because they didn't like RDR2. Again, what CDPR understood? Demo was perfect or more animations are needed? Again, if 50% of the players are happy, CDPR is happy.

Another major complaint is about levels, the vast majority of people complained about them (both for CP2020 lore and fear for bullet sponge enemies like in TW3 and looter shooters), but a lot of people didn't say anything because they firmly believe that levels are fundamental in RPG and their progression system (which is not true). I'm pretty sure they're not gonna remove levels from the game, at all (unluckily for me).

Some think the game needs a more realistic approach when it comes to perks and cyberware (a subdermal grip that increases bullets' stopping power is pure magic), some may like that "because RPGs work that way".

Double jump was another main complaint, but they said it's justified somehow (some gas-propelling system I guess)

Other people are asking for impossible things like making the game an isometric turn based RPG and of course that's not gonna happen.

The point is that the general feedback is that the demo was great, but had some flaws which - unluckily - are extremely subjective. Therefore I believe CDPR has decided to continue for their path and minor changes will be made during beta testing for what concerns game's mechanics (like balancing weapons and HP bars, stuff like that). Probably they will add HUD color customization, FOV slider, head bobbing and other minor things which require zero development time, but nothing "serious".
Maybe, and I say maybe, they realized some things made no sense and changed them, but that stuff is so obvious that thinking they didn't know it from the beginning is offensive.

TLDR; the vast majority of feedbacks were in contrast to each other, so I think CDPR kept going on since the general opinion is that the demo looked great overall.

I get you, all of these are good points. Just apart of TPP, i've never thought of arguing about it. Game was build around FPP perspective and i'm sure they've made a right choice. It's the same as asking a cow to fly. It never intended to work that way.

Regarding the loot. They will try to maintain the balance between these 2 visions. A bit of that, a bit of this, but nothing really unnecessary. But who knows, they could've already removed some of those.

That's unrelated to what I said.

What I, and some others on these forums, would really like to see is less shooty bang bang elements. I differ a bit in that I don't want to see none (some here want a turn-based mode, which I'm not a big fan of), but I would like your weapon stats to have a significant impact on the way guns handle, and the way you play the game.

If you really suck at shooting and specced into full-on netrunning and such, I'd like that to be reflected in the gameplay.

In other words, we want character skills to matter, and not just player skill. Not in terms of bullet damage (you have 50 Pistol skill, so now your pistols do +20% damage - heck no!), but in terms of recoil, reload speed, bullet spread, etc.

It's not a matter of not overlooking stuff, it's a matter of game design focus as a whole - and I don't think CDPR is looking to make quite the game I hope they will.

So, any "changes" they've made between the demo and now, I believe are more focused on improving the shooting for action gamers, not improving the RPG stuff (and no, I'm not making the argument that 2077 isn't an RPG).

...buuuuut, I'm not cynical or jaded about it, and I'm happy to be proven wrong. If I'm not proven wrong, oh well, I will probably still love the game as-is.

I'm feeling you. I would like that too. In that case i really hope they meant what they said: "It's foremost an RPG"
 
If you really suck at shooting and specced into full-on netrunning and such, I'd like that to be reflected in the gameplay.
We don't know anything about techie and netrunning, too early to complain. I honestly think that they'll be just some advantages to normal shooting gameplay and not real full play-styles, but we'll see.
In other words, we want character skills to matter, and not just player skill. Not in terms of bullet damage (you have 50 Pistol skill, so now your pistols do +20% damage - heck no!), but in terms of recoil, reload speed, bullet spread, etc.
That's the way to make stats important in combat, but the demo showed the +20% DMG bullshit (exactly like in TW3). I feel you, bro. :cool:
So, any "changes" they've made between the demo and now, I believe are more focused on improving the shooting for action gamers, not improving the RPG stuff (and no, I'm not making the argument that 2077 isn't an RPG).
Well, shooting feeling needs some adjustment, not because of FPS players, but because recoil was completely absent.
Even if jackets have stats, that doesn't mean you pick them up from corpses.
In the demo is not clear, but every enemy drops some loot like in TW3. Probably weapons and some junk, but it's not shown directly. You need to pay attention to some "small pink indicator" close to their bodies. Easier to spot in the food factory. We'll see.
Too much looting can easily become immersion breaking. I hope that CDPR avoids that.
I totally agree. I personally would like to have very limited inventory in a realistic way (deus ex HR and MD)
I get you, all of these are good points. Just apart of TPP, i've never thought of arguing about it. Game was build around that perspective and i'm sure they've made a right choice. It's the same as asking a cow to fly. It never intended to work that way.
I totally agree, but I want FPP done right with animations and shit. Not a floating camera.
Regarding the loot. They will try to maintain the balance between these 2 visions. A bit of that, a bit of this, but nothing really unnecessary. But who knows, they could've already removed some of those.
I don't know, I noticed that when games try to make everybody happy, they don't make anyone happy. The best is when devs decide for an approach and go heads down in that direction.
Animations. If i was them, i would just add a 5-10 short
Yeah, just to pick items and interacting with computers/doors/touch screens. Something fast, half a second, like here:
 
I read all the posts here but i don`t have a strong view as some of the posters but what does become obvious is CDRP will find it hard to please all of us when we all seem to want different and some times opposite things .
 
I read all the posts here but i don`t have a strong view as some of the posters but what does become obvious is CDRP will find it hard to please all of us when we all seem to want different and some times opposite things .

Mmmm... nothing and no one is perfect, as long as this game satisfies 75% of our needs, i'll be happy to buy this game, spend all my holidays in it and forgive minor issues we mentioned here. A-goddamnit-MEN.
 
My fear is not understanding the concept or the story plus not getting see sarah dorcett,meredith stout,dexter Deshawn within the final game.
 
I meant, why do they have to do it exclusively on Microsoft's stage?

They could have a booth at E3 where they show the demo off to passerby, or they could have hands-on demonstrations, or they could post a longer clip (with a voice walkthrough, like in the past) that goes into more detail on YouTube.

I don't think CDPR is big enough to organize a separate conference such as those organized by Microsoft, Sony etc. Look at the amount of games these two giants publish per year and compare this to one AAA title released by CDPR per 4-5 years. It's hard to justify a separate conference in these circumstances. As for the smaller presentations, these have a limited reach and are good for smaller studios, not for companies that produce high-budget games.
 
I don't think CDPR is big enough to organize a separate conference such as those organized by Microsoft, Sony etc. Look at the amount of games these two giants publish per year and compare this to one AAA title released by CDPR per 4-5 years. It's hard to justify a separate conference in these circumstances. As for the smaller presentations, these have a limited reach and are good for smaller studios, not for companies that produce high-budget games.
Yeah, I wasn't saying they should do a separate conference. Just that they don't have to only show the game on Microsoft's stage.
 
Biggest fear:

- game not well optimized (like GTA IV)
- no 21:9 support
- huge CPU usage
- tough to play for FPS noobs like me
- game locked at 60 fps
 
Last edited:
What do you mean made no sense? In my opinion it makes perfectly fine sense. The grip is a connection between cybernetics of the gun-users body and electronics of the smartgun, providing improved aim. For example: the cyber-eye of the user looks at the target and the gun aims itself to it.

I believe smartguns come from Shadowrun RPG though, so I guess the devs are loaning some ideas? :)

Yes, but in Shadowrun (and, yeah, I got a massive Shadowrun vibe from the subdermal grip and smatgun, which is okay by me), the subdermal grip/link affects accuracy, not damage. I can see the logic in making the increase to damage as opposed to accuracy because aiming will be totally up to player skill.

It's a textbook opportunity for a Designer Note explaining why that route for the mechanic was taken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom