Your Fears For the Game - Combined Thread

[Suhiira]

Well ... tho CDPR hasn't said a word Mike pretty much confirmed the CP2020 roles.
It'd be pretty difficult to have a fixed protagonist and multiple roles in the same game.

 

[CTPhipps]

I'm pretty sure we're going to have a set protagonist and character with the option of getting into roles IN the game. You might become a Rocker Boy or a Corporate but you won't start that way.

Also, Fallout 4's voiced protagonist was a good thing.

It's just the male voice had the acting inflection of a department store dummy. Courtney Taylor did much better.

 

[Snowflakez]

Im not so sure about that, we had plenty of developers in the past promise the public no micro transaction free dlc but in the end there still a company that needs to make a profit, somehow. in other words there's always a catch, but i truly hope im wrong about this.

I'll bet you $100 CDPR doesn't put ANY form of microtransactions in CP2077. That's how sure I am that they aren't outright lying on Twitter.

Seriously, dude, they're going to make plenty of profit with game sales and DLC sales alone. This isn't a huge multiplayer title that needs ongoing server costs and such. CDPR will be just fine financially.

 

[Lisbeth_Salander]

It'd be pretty difficult to have a fixed protagonist and multiple roles in the same game.

I hope we can get a custom MC. What was the last time there was a game based on PNP with a set protagonist?

 

[Rawls]

Courtney Taylor did much better.

She was definitely the better of the two. On topic: that's a pretty awesome response.

 

[icthulu]

My purchase of Cyberpunk 2077 just got confirmed then.

Like you, mine as well. I can not praise CDPR enough for being a developer first or only. So thank you guys.

 

[Snowflakez]

I'm pretty sure we're going to have a set protagonist and character with the option of getting into roles IN the game. You might become a Rocker Boy or a Corporate but you won't start that way.

Also, Fallout 4's voiced protagonist was a good thing.

It's just the male voice had the acting inflection of a department store dummy. Courtney Taylor did much better.

I disagree. I hated Fallout 4's voiced protagonists. They did not at all match the image I had for my character, and broke my immersion. I understand having it for something like Cyberpunk, though.

I also don't think we'll have a set protagonist.

 

[CTPhipps]

I disagree. I hated Fallout 4's voiced protagonists. They did not at all match the image I had for my character, and broke my immersion. I understand having it for something like Cyberpunk, though.

I also don't think we'll have a set protagonist.

Well that's one of the things which people had difficulty with. The Sole Survivor is a very specifically created character with a backstory and motivation.

You also cannot do meaningful stories in a video game without a character having a set backstory, personality, and friends/associates.

Empty Backgroundless PCs are fundamentally just ciphers that have no storytelling potential.

IMHO, at least.

 

[Balloers100]

I'll bet you $100 CDPR doesn't put ANY form of microtransactions in CP2077. That's how sure I am that they aren't outright lying on Twitter.

Seriously, dude, they're going to make plenty of profit with game sales and DLC sales alone. This isn't a huge multiplayer title that needs ongoing server costs and such. CDPR will be just fine financially.

Here's to hoping Cyberpunk 2077 sells 20+ million copies.

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim sold over 30+ million copies so far.

People have been waiting for a open world RPG cyberpunk RPG for years if not more than over a decade now. I know I been wanting one since the early 2000's.

 

[justsomedrunk]

the comment they made about micro transactions is why i signed up and plan to buy this game. just to support the company who refuses to be like ea. glad there is atleast 1 fair company left

 

[Dr. LaBrat]

a huge immersive cyberpunk world, deep single player quests and story, likeable characters

is it really happening guys? it sounds too good to be true

 

[Shavod]

I'm pretty sure we're going to have a set protagonist and character with the option of getting into roles IN the game. You might become a Rocker Boy or a Corporate but you won't start that way.

Based on the certain informations provided by Pondsmith and that one leak (assuming it wasn't fabricated), which was revealed a few months ago and seemed to be more in line with what Mike said then YongYea source, I'm inclined to agree with your assessment regarding the way roles will be implemented in the game (though probability of introducing set protagonist remains an open matter to me). I envision it like that: you don't choose your role when creating/customizing (even if CDPR decides to implement set protagonist, most likely it won't be already established character like Geralt, which would indicate that certain level of player involvement in character creation may still remain) character, instead your PC starts as a social outcast (someone rising from the gutters, as early previews claimed), maybe former braindance addict, tabula rasa, who finally receives from fate a chance to do something with his own life, rather then "live" as someone else. At first all the doors are opened for you, but as you make more choices and close other doors, your character starts growing into one of the specific roles, until making an ultimate choice that puts you on singular path, completely unique for this particular role, by thus also unlocking all role related benefits, like for example unique ability. But that's just my guess.

 

[CTPhipps]

Maybe it'll be a bit like the Elder Scrolls and Skyrim only not allowing you to be everything and everyone.

 

[UhuruNUru]

I'm going to "invade" in on this conversation, Haha, Get it? Dark Souls? Yes, the design of how multiplayer can be implemented would drastically change how much time and resources used to develop them. But not much in the case of a game like Dark Souls, all the resources for Level design and MP is built for both the core single player game, and also used for multiplayer. In the case of a game like GTA or most multiplayer arena shooters, its all built completely separately which would split resources which is why you see games with heavy MP modes have short campaigns if any at all.

CDPR approach to multiplayer is described as seamless so that pretty much throws the comparisons to Grand Theft Auto out of the window. I don't know for sure but i'd say it is akin to a Dark Souls or Destiny ish style of seamless online elements. SO the inclusion of these seamless online elements wouldn't be the traditional style of Call of duty GTA multiplayer therefore probably wouldn't impact any single player experience they intend to make. Online is coming, but I wouldn't worry.

You miss my point, which doesn't imply that Dark Souls is a bad game. My point is that any game where resources (Dev time is most valuable) are split between Single Player, and Multi-player modes has the potential to be even better if those resources are instead used to make the main focus better.

No matter how good the end result may be, it still diverts the resources used from that main focus, and that means the main focus could be even better.
If the game has a main focus, I want want it to be the sole focus, in Cyberpunk's case that's single player.

Though I've given up on all multi-player games, and microtransactions are only a part of the reason, the inability to stop cheating is another one.
MMO's are an example of the "seamless" additions reversed, MMO campaigns are single player campaigns, just with integrated multi-player modes, e.g. Dungeons/Raids, and PvP zones.

I'm a Single Player focused gamer now, and the games I play, will always be focused on that, and I have no interest in any mixture of the two.
I never play any multi-player elements, no matter how seamless they may be. I can switch them off, and ignore them, because they are surplus to the requirements of that single player game.
As such that single player game has been deprived of the resources, that may have made it an even better single player game.
Only potentially better, resources can be wasted, but even if they're just used for polishing, and bug fixing, it still can make a good game, an even better game.

My point remains the same, any time, and effort spent on these sort of additional game modes, is time, and effort that would be much better spent on the only core game.
Whether you think the additional modes add anything to the game, or not, the indisputable fact, is that the core game was deprived of the resources those modes received.

 

[Snowflakez]

You miss my point, which doesn't imply that Dark Souls is a bad game. My point is that any game where resources (Dev time is most valuable) are split between Single Player, and Multi-player modes has the potential to be even better if those resources are instead used to make the main focus better.

No matter how good the end result may be, it still diverts the resources used from that main focus, and that means the main focus could be even better.
If the game has a main focus, I want want it to be the sole focus, in Cyberpunk's case that's single player.

Though I've given up on all multi-player games, and microtransactions are only a part of the reason, the inability to stop cheating is another one.
MMO's are an example of the "seamless" additions reversed, MMO campaigns are single player campaigns, just with integrated multi-player modes, e.g. Dungeons/Raids, and PvP zones.

I'm a Single Player focused gamer now, and the games I play, will always be focused on that, and I have no interest in any mixture of the two.
I never play any multi-player elements, no matter how seamless they may be. I can switch them off, and ignore them, because they are surplus to the requirements of that single player game.
As such that single player game has been deprived of the resources, that may have made it an even better single player game.
Only potentially better, resources can be wasted, but even if they're just used for polishing, and bug fixing, it still can make a good game, an even better game.

My point remains the same, any time, and effort spent on these sort of additional game modes, is time, and effort that would be much better spent on the only core game.
Whether you think the additional modes add anything to the game, or not, the indisputable fact, is that the core game was deprived of the resources those modes received.

I agree entirely. I'm glad someone else made these arguments so I don't have to.

I also agree about the travesty that was GTA V's abandoned single player mode... I actually bought the game on release, in fact. I have never bought a GTA (or RDR) game for its multiplayer components, I play for the single player story and sandbox. When R* started implementing epic new features (Brand new heists, anyone?) into the multiplayer portion of the game while us singleplayer fans got jack shit... That's when I swore off their games. I'm sure the new Red Dead Redemption will be fantastic, but I won't be buying it. Rockstar cannot be trusted to keep their focus on their singleplayer audience.

To be clear, I have nothing against fans of multiplayer titles. There's nothing wrong with that. The only time I have a problem with it is when you promise one thing (ongoing support, updates and DLC for singleplayer GTA V, for example) and completely change your mind after people have already bought the game...

Additionally, I'm still going to play CP2077 regardless of whether or not it has multiplayer, because I trust CDPR to make it work. Sure, resources will be diverted, but hopefully not on a significant enough scale to make a difference.

 

[Balloers100]

Now the French government might consider loot boxes gambling or illegal, a French senator has sent a letter regarding loot boxes and microtransactions in video games.

Slowly the world is starting to rise up against this.

Now I know CD Projekt RED has said there will be no microtransactions sold in Cyberpunk 2077, but I'm very happy to see more and more governments of this planet start to take actions.

I guess we will see ten years from now what happens.

 

[Gun_Show]

It sort of pissed me off that Pretty Good Gaming was so sloppy with this particular video. I have no problem with people uncovering actual info on potentially unsavory practices from CDPR (I loved YongYea's video on 'em, for example), but so many polish people have looked at the same interview and come to a wildly different conclusion. When referencing "games as a service", CPDR was only talking about Gwent - there was no mention of CP2077 in that context, only that they thought it would "make more money than the witcher 3" (duh).

It's just poor journalism and a lack of fact checking. It absolutely damages their credibility in my eyes, and I liked them quite a bit prior to this.

Actually, it was very good journalism. When a CEO talks about things like games as a service, there's an implication there that the company is implementing a new change in its overall strategy of doing business. Add that to the statement where the CEO says that CDPR is using Gwent to learn the games as a service model, that's cause for legitimate concern. Nothing in the statement said they weren't going to incorporate games as a service into future releases. Nor did the CEO's remarks mention that they were going to limit games as a service, either.

Based on CDPR's responses to PGG's video, I'm reassured, for now, that they have no plans to bring in microtransactions, but it should also serve as a lesson to the CEO that language matters and that when making remarks he needs to be much more specific.

 

[Gun_Show]

Levels would be alien concept in Cyberpunk. A small dependence on player's chosen combat skills development reflecting on enemy's AI and equipment is good already. Before any of you will squeal about multiplayer - the grandfather of MMOs Ultima Online was skillbased and it was million times more convenient than what is now considered a normal thing.

EVE Online takes this approach. No character levels, only character skills, the purpose of which is to unlock new equipment/make your character use equipment better. But how your character performs in any situation is much more dependent on player ability. A character with lower skill levels played by a skilled player will often beat a character with higher levels played by a less-experienced player. The way CCP does skills is you buy the skill book from an NPC, have your character learn the skill and then start training, which takes a variable amount of time depending on the skill and the level being trained to. You can only train one skill at a time, but you can queue skills.

 

[Snowflakez]

Actually, it was very good journalism. When a CEO talks about things like games as a service, there's an implication there that the company is implementing a new change in its overall strategy of doing business. Add that to the statement where the CEO says that CDPR is using Gwent to learn the games as a service model, that's cause for legitimate concern. Nothing in the statement said they weren't going to incorporate games as a service into future releases. Nor did the CEO's remarks mention that they were going to limit games as a service, either.

Based on CDPR's responses to PGG's video, I'm reassured, for now, that they have no plans to bring in microtransactions, but it should also serve as a lesson to the CEO that language matters and that when making remarks he needs to be much more specific.

My point is that they didn't bother getting a correct translation before tossing up a video on the subject. It was alarmist. If that's good journalism to you, more power to ya - but I prefer to get all the facts before coming to conclusions, and it's something I wish they did here.

That said, you are absolutely right that it will make the CEO choose his words more carefully from here on out, and think long and hard about future business practices down the line - which can only be a good thing. I just don't like the way it was handled on the part of PGG.

 

[Guest 4149880]

You miss my point, which doesn't imply that Dark Souls is a bad game. My point is that any game where resources (Dev time is most valuable) are split between Single Player, and Multi-player modes has the potential to be even better if those resources are instead used to make the main focus better

No matter how good the end result may be, it still diverts the resources used from that main focus, and that means the main focus could be even better.
If the game has a main focus, I want want it to be the sole focus, in Cyberpunk's case that's single player.

Though I've given up on all multi-player games, and microtransactions are only a part of the reason, the inability to stop cheating is another one.
MMO's are an example of the "seamless" additions reversed, MMO campaigns are single player campaigns, just with integrated multi-player modes, e.g. Dungeons/Raids, and PvP zones.

I'm a Single Player focused gamer now, and the games I play, will always be focused on that, and I have no interest in any mixture of the two.
I never play any multi-player elements, no matter how seamless they may be. I can switch them off, and ignore them, because they are surplus to the requirements of that single player game.
As such that single player game has been deprived of the resources, that may have made it an even better single player game.
Only potentially better, resources can be wasted, but even if they're just used for polishing, and bug fixing, it still can make a good game, an even better game.

My point remains the same, any time, and effort spent on these sort of additional game modes, is time, and effort that would be much better spent on the only core game.
Whether you think the additional modes add anything to the game, or not, the indisputable fact, is that the core game was deprived of the resources those modes received.

The main focus of Cyberpunk is single player with seamless multiplayer, so its clearly not the game for you.

In the case of cyberpunk seamless element, like I said its more akin to a seamless load in/load out of specific areas without it being a consistent server based game, not an MMO.

Of course I'm sure multiplayer will be optional.

If the game is clearly lacking in single player content, maybe true but if all goals are set and made, its not an issue.

I certainly think a MP element adds to the whole experience if its weaved into the single player Dark Souls style, and if the single player isn't lacking any content. And if the single player mode is vast and very deep, and still includes and multiplayer element, whos to know what would have been missing in the end anyway.