Why there will be at least 7-8 side activities in Cyberpunk 2077

+
CDPR's games emphasize story, and try to immerse you using that and good characters. Not so much the other things.

Cannot agree more, that's the reason why I'm still getting the game despite being disappointed about almost everything else.

Just hope they'll never pull a failure like Mass Effect 3 (speaking about the writing).
 
I don't expect the quest design to be radically different from W3. You'll have quests, sidequests, an equivalent to the contracts, and some small stuff that pops up now and then.

Activities will likely be similar to W3 too. Horse racing = car racing, boxing = boxing, qwent = some hacking game?
Maybe we get 2-3 more, but I don't expect them to put too much of that stuff in. It's still a story-driven singleplayer game. I think you'll get to your 100+ hours with story and quest content and not with Sims-like activities. That stuff would be more for something like whatever multiplayer they have planned down the line.
 
Cannot agree more, that's the reason why I'm still getting the game despite being disappointed about almost everything else.

Meh, if I cared about the story that much... if I held it above gameplay, like CDPR and their core fans seem to, I probably wouldn’t have posted anything in the past 6 years.
 
Meh, if I cared about the story that much... if I held it above gameplay, like CDPR and their core fans seem to, I probably wouldn’t have posted anything in the past 6 years.

Well, good gameplay is always a great plus, and may depending of the game style and personal preference be my main focus on some games (like for example X-com).

And yes, I would love to love C2077 gameplay, but I know my tastes and know that when it comes to gameplay that game having checked most of my "boring" box on my list.

And considering the direction CD projekt seems to be taking, I actually have more hopes that one day I'll be able to play a character defined by me in one of their game (but won't be C2077) than having fun because of the gameplay (cause my definition of fun doesn't seem to match their, even when it comes to action games).
 
Why the hell are people still comparing this game with what CDPR did in Witcher 3 when this game already is shaping up to be NOTHING like it.
"Witcher 3 had almost no activities so Cyberpunk will be the same" give me a break...
I bet you 100% theres a lot they haven't shown yet, side activities especially are usually finished last in a game like this and will be presented once CDPR deems it so.
 
Well, good gameplay is always a great plus

...

I get your point, but I can’t get over how wrong that particular sentence sounds to my ear.

Gameplay really should be the main focus of a product if it is indeed called a ”game”. And optimally, if your game has a narrative element, it is incorporated as part of the gameplay, as a supporting and complementing element. If the story element is good to boot, that’s the ”plus”, but there’s no getting around that the main dish of ”a game” is, or should be, the gameplay.

I can’t see even a good story working well if the experience of getting into it is marred by uninteresting mechanical trappings.
 
I get your point, but I can’t get over how wrong that particular sentence sounds to my ear.

Gameplay really should be the main focus of a product if it is indeed called a ”game”. And optimally, if your game has a narrative element, it is incorporated as part of the gameplay, as a supporting and complementing element. If the story element is good to boot, that’s the ”plus”, but there’s no getting around that the main dish of ”a game” is, or should be, the gameplay.

I can’t see even a good story working well if the experience of getting into it is marred by uninteresting mechanical trappings.

Your point would erase whole game type from existence.
Besides, there have been studies about how video games are more immersive than other media (because the brain react that way to interractivity), making it an ideal way to tell stories.
 
Your point would erase whole game type from existence.
Besides, there have been studies about how video games are more immersive than other media (because the brain react that way to interractivity), making it an ideal way to tell stories.

Nah, it’s not that radical.

The core point I’m driving is, that in a game you should be immersing yourself (or be immersed in, you can’t always choose that) in what you do, whether or not a narrative is part of that, not so much what you see or are being told (like in cinema). Interactivity, and thusly game mechanics, are at the very core of that. And in an optimal case, like I said, the narrative itself works as a game mechanic (not as an isolated story the wannabe writer in the studio churned up).
 
I think you'll get to your 100+ hours with story and quest content and not with Sims-like activities.

I don't think it's so much Sims-like activities as it is creating the feeling of an actual city. You can fill the place to the brim with crowds of NPC's, toss in day/night or weather "procedures" and give them behaviors. It means very little if it still feels like there is nothing to do in the city beyond hopping from quest to quest. Various posts in this thread regarding other "open world" games aren't off the mark. It's not uncommon for the world itself to eventually feel empty and repetitive once the fresh car smell wears off the game.

Why the hell are people still comparing this game with what CDPR did in Witcher 3 when this game already is shaping up to be NOTHING like it.
"Witcher 3 had almost no activities so Cyberpunk will be the same" give me a break...
I bet you 100% theres a lot they haven't shown yet, side activities especially are usually finished last in a game like this and will be presented once CDPR deems it so.

I mean... the same company is making both games. I'd agree this does not mean CP2077 will be like TW3. The game being in a different setting doesn't necessarily mean it won't be though. It's not exactly surprising or unexpected for people to draw parallels across games created by the same developer. Much in the same way as you might avoid or flock to a certain brand of product based on past experience with it. Again, I'm not claiming CP2077 will or will not be TW3 2.0 in a different setting. Just tossing it out there....

Gameplay really should be the main focus of a product if it is indeed called a ”game”. And optimally, if your game has a narrative element, it is incorporated as part of the gameplay, as a supporting and complementing element. If the story element is good to boot, that’s the ”plus”, but there’s no getting around that the main dish of ”a game” is, or should be, the gameplay.

I can’t see even a good story working well if the experience of getting into it is marred by uninteresting mechanical trappings.

I wouldn't agree with saying the game play mechanics or the narrative are more important. The whole nine yards is important in this game type. It would be true to say a strong narrative is unable to carry sub-par game play mechanics. It's equally true to say strong game play mechanics are unable to carry a poor narrative, however. A game can try to pull it off by cutting corners. The game might be... successful, in spite of any weaknesses. The fact remains if any one area of the game is lacking the overall product is going to be worse off because of it.
 
You can fill the place to the brim with crowds of NPC's, toss in day/night or weather "procedures" and give them behaviors. It means very little if it still feels like there is nothing to do in the city beyond hopping from quest to quest.

An empty room full of purple air is still empty.
 
I don't think it's so much Sims-like activities as it is creating the feeling of an actual city. You can fill the place to the brim with crowds of NPC's, toss in day/night or weather "procedures" and give them behaviors. It means very little if it still feels like there is nothing to do in the city beyond hopping from quest to quest. Various posts in this thread regarding other "open world" games aren't off the mark. It's not uncommon for the world itself to eventually feel empty and repetitive once the fresh car smell wears off the game.

I don't know about you but the world in Witcher 3 felt alive enough for me. And that game only had that horse racing, boxing and gwent for side activities.

The world felt alive due to weather changes, seeing the people go about, and the little side quests that sometimes popped up even you were just casually strolling.
Like when you are riding along the road and come upon some villagers that want to hang a man. Or coming upon a house in the woods where you find an old couple that lives there alone, only to discover that they are cannibals that eat the people that get lost in the area.
Even the bandit camps you found often had some small story behind them, if one bothered to read about it. That is what i mean, little tibits of info, going about the city and finding new sidequests in form of little events that just happen where you are going through. That is what made the W3 world feel so great. Not endlessly repetitive ativities.
 
I wouldn't agree with saying the game play mechanics or the narrative are more important.

But one is ”more important”. Personal preferences aside the gameplay is the game.


The whole nine yards is important in this game type.

Yes, if there is to be a feature, it needs the sort of level of importance that its existence is warranted and that it supports the experience as a whole in unison with the other features.


It would be true to say a strong narrative is unable to carry sub-par game play mechanics.

This I agree with (and I’ve been saying this for years here).


It's equally true to say strong game play mechanics are unable to carry a poor narrative, however.

This, however, I cannot. Not theoretically, nor based on experience.

It just doesn’t compute to me.

Narrative in a game - in its bare basics - is about collecting bits and pieces of the story here and there in what ever way they are ordered and paced, following a linear thread or being scattered and branching in a nonlinear way.

Gameplay (and the mechanics therein), on the other hand, are your minute to minute experience throughout the entire game. The very key to the experience. From the very start to the final moments when credits start to roll.

(Cutscenes notwithstanding.)

If you have fun playing the game, you can willfully ignore everything the (bad or good) narrative has to offer and still keep enjoying your experience. That experience might be relatively poorer for the lack of ”good narrative” jolt, but that’s ultimately of little consequence if you’re having a good time nonetheless.

Bad gameplay, though, is - as said - with you throughout the entirety of the experience. Even the best of narratives can’t help the situation, if you’re not having fun getting to those narrative bits you’re collecting, if you have to suffer through a chore of bad and/or uninteresting gameplay.

Narrative of some sort must exist, of course. But at the end of it all, a good narrative is but a bonus, an icing over the gameplay cake, and if your cake took salt for sugar, your delicious creme coating won’t save it.
 
Even the bandit camps you found often had some small story behind them, if one bothered to read about it. That is what i mean, little tibits of info, going about the city and finding new sidequests in form of little events that just happen where you are going through. That is what made the W3 world feel so great. Not endlessly repetitive ativities.

Fighting bandits in their camp is the most repetitive thing I can imagine. It's something that you've been doing the whole game and the whole main story, but less fun or interesting. Espacially since fighting lesser ennemies is something CDPR have you do all the time and in almost every quest, since they were afraid the players wouldn't feel engaged enough, I guess.



Having more variety and some laid back activites does make the game feel more alive and substancial in the slower moments, I feel. Sometimes you're just going to want to chill out in Night City. And it would be good to accompany that with some little activities.


Also, To bring my point of view on the narrative/gameplay argument; Branching narrative is something that only games can do comfortably , as a medium.
And i don't see this as any lesser than the moment to moment gameplay. In fact I'm glad that there are some games out there that make that choice in priority.
 
Sorry, I didn't realize we had mind readers on these forums. Would anyone care to inform me of all the other activities that have been confirmed, that I'm not aware of?

If, when asked repeatedly, what activities are in the game and they give the same answers, and those answers strongly resemble TW3, yeah, I'm going to assume that's all there is until stated otherwise. It makes sense. It's the same developer. 2077 will be leaps and bounds ahead of TW3 in many ways, including gameplay freedom and story choices, and yes even RPG mechanics.

Doesn't mean every aspect is going to be overhauled. People seemed fine with the activities they had in TW3, and CDPR doesn't seem keen to reinvent the wheel here. Maybe they will, but until proven otherwise, I'm going to go with the information they've provided so far and not attempt to use my nonexistent psychic powers.

Just because I'd be happy with more does not mean I think the game is going to be garbage.
 
I don't know about you but the world in Witcher 3 felt alive enough for me. And that game only had that horse racing, boxing and gwent for side activities.

The world felt alive due to weather changes, seeing the people go about, and the little side quests that sometimes popped up even you were just casually strolling.
Like when you are riding along the road and come upon some villagers that want to hang a man. Or coming upon a house in the woods where you find an old couple that lives there alone, only to discover that they are cannibals that eat the people that get lost in the area.
Even the bandit camps you found often had some small story behind them, if one bothered to read about it. That is what i mean, little tibits of info, going about the city and finding new sidequests in form of little events that just happen where you are going through. That is what made the W3 world feel so great. Not endlessly repetitive ativities.

It did initially, yes. At around my 3rd play through it stopped feeling quite so alive.

People casually strolling about loses a lot of it's meaning when it's all they really do in the game world. This is what I meant with filling the city to the brim with crowds of NPC's. Yes, graphically they make the area appear active. Functionally they don't if you cannot interact with them. Functionally they're a herd of sheep roaming around aimlessly, so to speak. Just think of how many individuals in the herd you will never interact with for any reason whatsoever. Best case they're a collection of pixels on the screen. Worst case they're a door jam.

A good counter-example of "empty world syndrome" would be a game like KCD, in my opinion. At every turn there was stuff to do in the game. Stuff outside of the main or side quest content. Hunting, archery contests, tournaments, dice at virtually every tavern (Farkle I believe it was called), fist fights, a horse race, random encounters on the road, being taught to fight properly by Bernard. Hell, you could talk directly to virtually every NPC in the game world. The dialogue might be somewhat generic Q and A but you could at least interact with the NPC's. They were not just there. Furthermore, the generic Q and A was at least pertinent to current events in the game world.

The underlying point is the world felt alive because there were a plethora of activities, many of which could be experienced almost everywhere, and NPC's actually responded to the player. Herds of non-interactive NPC's roaming about, bandit camps and hidden treasure sprinkled around in predictable locations, etc. doesn't create the same feeling. It only creates the illusion of it. Once you get a handle on the game and play it long enough you begin to see right through the illusion.

I'm not at all saying these type of activities need to be intricate, massive in quantity or a focal point. I'm saying it greatly improves the game play when they exist and are implemented well. For two reasons. The first is they make it feel like stuff is routinely happening in the world. Instead of a herd of zombie NPC's creating the illusion of it. The second is they provide quick, periodic distractions from whatever else may be happening at the time.

Since we're on the topic of TW3..... I think TW3 is an example of what I mentioned earlier. The narrative and characters flat out carried that game. The character progression was lackluster and unbalanced (straight up broken in some areas), combat was merely okay (with the possible exception of Quen cheese), and only if you bothered to read the bestiary and approached it properly (didn't blindly spam the attack button), the gear progression was terrible because Witcher sets trumped 99.99% of everything else, crafting was sub-par, side activities weren't much to go on about outside of horse racing, possibly Gwent and the fist fights with Smokey the Bear and the Rock Troll, the list goes on. If those writers, character designers and quest designers weren't absolutely brilliant, and they were, the game would not have been anywhere near as successful. It was an absolute carry by them.

Hopefully CDPR has learned from their past games. Hopefully they make a concerted effort to improve on some of the shortcomings in them. It's unreasonable to expect the previously mentioned parts of the team to carry the load again. If they keep going that route eventually it's not going to work, and the company is going to get burned. Side activities are no exception.

But one is ”more important”. Personal preferences aside the gameplay is the game.

I do not think you can isolate the narrative in this type of game and classify it as "non game play". The narrative is part of the game play. Experiencing it, meeting various characters along the way, reaching it's conclusion. All of these things involve game play. Strictly speaking, the narrative is separate from the game play mechanics. Yet, presumably both the narrative and game play mechanics are built hand and hand.

If anything this is likely why the development takes so long. It's not a matter of building mechanics, textures, animations, lighting, player progression, story arcs and characters as independent objects. These areas have interplay between them. The individual aspects have to play off of and with each other to deliver the complete, overall product. The story line and arcs aren't an exception.

This, however, I cannot. Not theoretically, nor based on experience.

It just doesn’t compute to me.

Narrative in a game - in its bare basics - is about collecting bits and pieces of the story here and there in what ever way they are ordered and paced, following a linear thread or being scattered and branching in a nonlinear way.

Gameplay (and the mechanics therein), on the other hand, are your minute to minute experience throughout the entire game. The very key to the experience. From the very start to the final moments when credits start to roll.

You're welcome to this opinion. From my perspective the game play mechanics could be outstanding. If the narrative is hot garbage I am going to notice it. I'd dock the game points over it too. I might lose interest in it completely if it's so bad the entire game consists of arbitrarily engaging in the mechanics, with no real goals in mind. For this game type the narrative, quest content, whatever you want to call it, is critical. I'd look at it the same way as a movie or tv show. The acting could be outstanding. The theme could be great. If the script sucks, the camera is shaking all over the place or the director is bad at their job it's going to get noticed. Quality entertainment delivers on all fronts.
 

Sild

Ex-moderator
I hope there will be, but i doubt it. At least i have my boxing/martial arts side activity. I hope they expand it into proper tournaments even something like a quest to reach the top in it (kinda like the Arena Guild from ES Oblivion).

There should also be some sort of collection minigame, how Gwent was for the Witcher 3 or Pazaak for KotOR or Dice for KC: D etc.. Personally i enjoy them and i think the experience was better for having them.
 
Top Bottom