Cyberpunk 2077 Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Jeru]

Cyberpunk having multiplayer was known YEARS ago. This info was on RPGCodex too. Get a grip drama queens.

 

[Saerain]

It's always funny when it's highlighted how such a fundamentally multiplayer genre as role-playing games spawned such a vehemently single-player genre as role-playing video games.

Yes, because the best way to improve your newest single-player RPG is to spend time, money and effort better used elsewhere on a multiplayer component that nobody will be playing a month from launch.

Eh, different team. Increasing the likelihood it'll be awful in my opinion, but also making it more likely money was introduced for it, rather than siphoned off for it.

 

[AwesomeButton]

For actual worries, I fear that as a shooter player first and foremost, this game will be a complete mechanical and gameplay disappointment to me. If the world, sights and quests are not the most amazing thing, I might end up not liking the whole package.

On the most recent official video (the Deep Dive Video) I was disappointed by how unsatisfying some of the gunplay was (on the Solo section)

https://youtu.be/FknHjl7eQ6o?t=502

That massive machine gun you rip off the turret doesn't feel like it has much weight to it

The Witcher 3 combat is not good either so I can live with bad gunplay in Cyberpunk 2077. My biggest concern is bad first person camera movement. It doesn't represent someone walking or running on foot. Too on rail.

Remember configurable head bob in Deus Ex? :D Not that it was great, but it was there.

Watching the video again, the human shield is a pretty unrealistic idea with regards to how bullet penetration works. Both the shield and the player would have been pierced by the machine gun from that distance. You wouldn't use a shield to close in, you'd use it to back away.

 

[just]

That massive machine gun you rip off the turret doesn't feel like it has much weight to it

it's made from advanced super light materials.

 

[ScrotumBroth]

The Witcher 3 combat is not good either so I can live with bad gunplay in Cyberpunk 2077. My biggest concern is bad first person camera movement. It doesn't represent someone walking or running on foot. Too on rail.

Shooting that turret gun looks shit too. No kickback, it just feels like waving a weightless skin of a gun from an early 2000s shooster.

Boss soaking damage also looks unsatisfying, it's like he's sprayed with a water gun.

It doesn't feel organic.
I don't know if it's consolitis byproduct, but as a shooter it looks shit.

Also, bullet sponge based combat is fucking retarded.

 

[Curratum]

unrealistic idea

I mean, the Sasquatch boss did take ~50 rounds of high-caliber LMG fire at almost point-blank range and kept fighting... :D

 

[toro]

My biggest worry about the game is the open world. As far as I know, the game's combat happens mostly indoors, the combat itself is basically a prettier version of Nu Deus Ex' combat. I do believe that this will be fun in the final product but what do players do in the city itself?

In the video, the narrator says that you shouldn't casually walkaround Pacifica which makes me wonder is there anything to do there. Or is the Open World just a filler for the building hubs in which the game itself takes places. In The Witcher 3, the world was also just a large filler for the story and side quest but I don't think players will accept that in a game that obviously wants to be a Cyberpunk GTA RPG.
And finally, I wonder if they will be the first ones who can make a financially successful modern immersive sim, since all the other games that went that road sold extremely poorly sadly.

what AI !? are u stoned?

 

[AwesomeButton]

unrealistic idea

I mean, the Sasquatch boss did take ~50 rounds of high-caliber LMG fire at almost point-blank range and kept fighting... :D

Also true.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

I'm pretty sure the gun didn't have any recoil because of the enhanced strength built they were playing. Seems like an obvious thing to implement.

 

[AwesomeButton]

I decided to check if people are commenting/disappointed by the bullet sponge combat. The official forums don't even seem to mention it. There is a number of threads on reddit though.


This is something actually asked on reddit: "I get what you mean, but let's say you use a level 2 pistol on a level 20 enemy, what's supposed to happen?"
https://www.reddit.com/r/cyberpunkgame/comments/bzv6x4/my_only_fear_is_bullet_sponges/eqxflbj/

Some guy also says "People need to read the cyberpunk 2020 PNP rules, so they can realize how tough people can be in this setting. A bullet sponge in Cyberpunk 2020 is very possible." -- can someone bring up citations?

 

[ScrotumBroth]

I'm pretty sure the gun didn't have any recoil because of the enhanced strength built they were playing. Seems like an obvious thing to implement.

Honk honk excuse. Which could be viable if player can also root into the ground like a siege tank in StarCraft. But even then, parts of the weapon would still move around and kick some.
In the video, player was moving and shooting like it's a toy gun. It's opposite of immersive, which I thought was the whole point of going FPS.

 

[Dodo1610]

I decided to check if people are commenting/disappointed by the bullet sponge combat. The official forums don't even seem to mention it. There is a number of threads on reddit though.


This is something actually asked on reddit: "I get what you mean, but let's say you use a level 2 pistol on a level 20 enemy, what's supposed to happen?"
https://www.reddit.com/r/cyberpunkgame/comments/bzv6x4/my_only_fear_is_bullet_sponges/eqxflbj/

Some guy also says "People need to read the cyberpunk 2020 PNP rules, so they can realize how tough people can be in this setting. A bullet sponge in Cyberpunk 2020 is very possible." -- can someone bring up citations?

Shooters with RPG elements are pretty much expected to have bullet sponge enemies these days. Somehow there is a demand for this or else Division, Destiny and Borderlands wouldn't be successful.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Shooters with RPG elements are pretty much expected to have bullet sponge enemies these days. Somehow there is a demand for this or else Division, Destiny and Borderlands wouldn't be successful.

I thought CP2077 was an RPG with shooter elements? Also, I wouldn't say it's expected. I wouldn't say the only options are "bullet sponges" or "one shot kills them". To be fair, there were animations based on the hit location in the new video.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

I'm pretty sure the gun didn't have any recoil because of the enhanced strength built they were playing. Seems like an obvious thing to implement.

Honk honk excuse. Which could be viable if player can also root into the ground like a siege tank in StarCraft. But even then, parts of the weapon would still move around and kick some.
In the video, player was moving and shooting like it's a toy gun. It's opposite of immersive, which I thought was the whole point of going FPS.

I still think that's the ability they implemented, I'm not arguing for how realistically valid it is.

 

[racofer]

DOA

 

[gerey]

DOA

Maybe they luck out and achieve something akin to the ME3 multiplayer, but I genuinely doubt this will be the case.

I can't even understand the logic in spending so many resources on something like this (while they've been cutting features from the main game for years now) when the multiplayer market is so overcrowded MP communities die within a few months of game's release, and here we're talking about purpose-built games with mutliplayer in mind, not some bastardized MP rendition of gameplay that is already janky and unappealing in single-player, from a studio that has yet to actually make a game that is engaging to play from a gameplay perspective.

 

[Whipped Cream]

Marcin Iwinski (CDPR's CEO) has said in several interviews that Rockstar, Bethesda and Blizzard are the three video game companies that he admires the most in terms of business strategy. In particular how a new video game from those three companies are seen as a "major event" by everyone interested in video games. The Witcher 3 was basically Skyrim meets Red Dead Redemption with a bastardized version of Dark Soul's combat and Gwent is basically a Heartstone clone. Its pretty clear that Cyberpunk 2077 is CDPR's attempt at drawing in both GTA fans and The Witcher 3 fans with a GTA-style game that appeals to both casual and hardcore gamers (in contrast to GTA, which is targeted towards casuals and causes hardcore gamers like codexers to die of boredom). Cyberpunk Online is their attempt at emulating the massive commercial success of GTA Online.

Of course, even Rockstar themselves failed to replicate the success of GTA Online with RDR 2 Online (which has been much less popular than GTA Online, despite RDR 2 itself being a massive comercial success) and I think that the same will be true of Cyberpunk Online.

Edit: Its obvious that the single-player version of Cyberpunk 2077 will be a massive commercial success however, given how enormous the hype is after The Witcher 3. I expect the game to outsell The Witcher 3 and probably be the best-selling game of the year. However, although I think the general public reception of the game will probably be very positive (the Codex will shit on it of course, like it shits on everything), its unlikely that it will be as well-received critically as The Witcher 3 in the long run. The hype among many gamers is just too unrealistically high.

 

[unfairlight]

Of course, even Rockstar themselves failed to replicate the success of GTA Online with RDR 2 Online (which has been much less popular than GTA Online, despite RDR 2 itself being a massive comercial success)

To be fair, RDR2 Online is still in beta and GTA Online wasn't too big right out of the gate either. Maybe it will take a year or two until it gets popular, or maybe I will be totally wrong and it truly will continue to be a flop.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

Marcin Iwinski (CDPR's CEO) has said in several interviews that Rockstar, Bethesda and Blizzard are the three video game companies that he admires the most in terms of business strategy.

I'm pretty sure that invoking an unholy trinity summons the anti-Christ.
Wait... isn't the anti-Christ supposed to be androgynous and bisexual?

Spoiler

 

[jf8350143]

People are actually using Rockstar as a example of “you can go multi-player without sacrificing your single player quality”.

Yet they are the ones cut all the single player DLC for GTA 5, and pretty much stopped making games at all. They use to launch at least one game a year, after GTA 5 they only had one game in the next 6 years. So how many project they just straight up murdered since a game takes more than one year to develop and there was suppose to have game in development already when GTA 5 launch.

I can't even think of one company that starts as a single player game developer and gather a large fanbase, then decided to go multi-player and didn't ended awful for those who wants single player games.

Oh, and people actually believe that the multiplayer won't have micro transactions.

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

People are actually using Rockstar as a example of “you can go multi-player without sacrificing your single player quality”.

Yet they are the ones cut all the single player DLC for GTA 5, and pretty much stopped making games at all. They use to launch at least one game a year, after GTA 5 they only had one game in the next 6 years. So how many project they just straight up murdered since a game takes more than one year to develop and there was suppose to have game in development already when GTA 5 launch.

I can't even think of one company that starts as a single player game developer and gather a large fanbase, then decided to go multi-player and didn't ended awful for those who wants single player games.

Oh, and people actually believe that the multiplayer won't have micro transactions.

Huh? Again, it’s not about quality, it’s about making money. Of course Rockstar is the model! These things you’re citing as negatives are huge positives from a business perspective. They’re doing less work and generating way more revenue.

What can I say? Gamers have terrible taste and market forces are a real bitch. Once you’re a public company like CDPR (or Take-Two Interactive) you have a fiduciary duty to your shareholders to maximize profits. This is the number one cause of decline across all genres. And decline from these big studios is inexorable. We live in an age of iron and rust.

That said, CP2077 is a storyfag game that will live or die based on the quality of its narrative and I doubt that will be damaged by this second studio working on multiplayer. Will there be more dropped features and worse gameplay because of it? Probably, but anyone playing a CDPR title hoping for great gameplay is in for a world of disappointment, multiplayer or no multiplayer.

 

[jf8350143]

People are actually using Rockstar as a example of “you can go multi-player without sacrificing your single player quality”.

Yet they are the ones cut all the single player DLC for GTA 5, and pretty much stopped making games at all. They use to launch at least one game a year, after GTA 5 they only had one game in the next 6 years. So how many project they just straight up murdered since a game takes more than one year to develop and there was suppose to have game in development already when GTA 5 launch.

I can't even think of one company that starts as a single player game developer and gather a large fanbase, then decided to go multi-player and didn't ended awful for those who wants single player games.

Oh, and people actually believe that the multiplayer won't have micro transactions.

Huh? Again, it’s not about quality, it’s about making money. Of course Rockstar is the model! These things you’re citing as negatives are huge positives from a business perspective. They’re doing less work and generating way more revenue.

What can I say? Gamers have terrible taste and market forces are a real bitch. Once you’re a public company like CDPR (or Take-Two Interactive) you have a fiduciary duty to your shareholders to maximize profits. This is the number one cause of decline across all genres. And decline from these big studios is inexorable. We live in an age of iron and rust.

That said, CP2077 is a storyfag game that will live or die based on the quality of its narrative and I doubt that will be damaged by this second studio working on multiplayer. Will there be more dropped features and worse gameplay because of it? Probably, but anyone playing a CDPR title hoping for great gameplay is in for a world of disappointment, multiplayer or no multiplayer.

Of course it's all about money for CDPR. But those people I mentioned are not workers from CDPR, they are gamers. They should know better, it's not like this is the first time this kind of shit happens.

 

[AwesomeButton]

(in contrast to GTA, which is targeted towards casuals and causes hardcore gamers like codexers to die of boredom)

That's not true. If someone is stupid enough to approach GTA as something that the game is not, that doesn't make him a hardcore gamer. GTA V is fun. The same applies for Witcher 3 BTW.

Of course, even Rockstar themselves failed to replicate the success of GTA Online with RDR 2 Online

That's not true either. "Red Dead Online is performing better than GTA Online did at this point in its lifecycle":
https://youtu.be/fY-hSMUEacI

 

[Quillon]

I expect they'll still make expansions to show that their way of doing multiplayer won't mean abandoning SP like R*, but the expansions will come later than expected cos of divided resources, and if multiplayer is a success everything SP will be few and far between; which is partly natural cos of game development time is always rising with time, especially for big detailed games and that SP games won't be their only focus.

 

[orcinator]

Yet they are the ones cut all the single player DLC for GTA 5, and pretty much stopped making games at all.

People also complained about the total lack of interiors and most of the side activities being boring garbage like yoga.

Also the actual campaign was hot garbage but I don't think it was that worse than the already bad GTA4 campaign.

They use to launch at least one game a year, after GTA 5 they only had one game in the next 6 years. So how many project they just straight up murdered since a game takes more than one year to develop and there was suppose to have game in development already when GTA 5 launch.

Last I checked there was a fair amount of GTA Online content so I guess they put all their efforts into that since a real game wouldn't let them charge like $10-20 worth of virtual money to stream snipe someone with an orbital cannon.