Please no battle Royal, please.

Would be fun in co-op.

If this means co-op play? Brilliant. That could be really cool. If this means some story-less jumble of "roam around doing a bunch of grind 'missions' in the same world as the main game to earn in-game currency and buy useless stuff", then please, CDPR, don't waste your damn development resources on garbage like that. Focus on making a good game, not one that facilitates 1000+ hours of nonsensical and repetitive gameplay, even if the latter is what will sell all the 14-year-olds on getting this. You've already got a semi-captive audience due to TW3, you don't need to go for the lowest common denominator now.

I suspect the kind of multiplayer we'll see for this game is going to be something quite special, remember the creator of the pen and paper RPG is heavily involved, and apparently CDPR people have been fans of the RPG for a long time. It might just be a multiplayer mode that allows for proper roleplaying in the CP2077 setting. I also think this is hinted in here.

MedallishI suspect the kind of multiplayer we'll see for this game is going to be something quite special, remember the creator of the pen and paper RPG is heavily involved, and apparently CDPR people have been fans of the RPG for a long time. It might just be a multiplayer mode that allows for proper roleplaying in the CP2077 setting. I also think this is hinted in here.

To me, the language used there evokes GAAS mumbo-jumbo ("“live”, playable in real-time, cities of great scale based on the principles of artificial intelligence and automation ", "unique gameplay for many players, taking into account the search of opponents, session management, replication facilities, and support of a variety of game modes "), which is largely antithetical to well-structured play experiences with meaningful progression and rewarding content. This certainly doesn't sound like anything P&P RPG-like (either with a GM or pre-scripted GM bots), but rather an iterative evolution on current GAAS games (think Fortnite) but possibly with increased dynamism and some other form of incentive for continued play beyond skins and in-game items. It might be that they're trying to create some sort of "live" MMO experience where players can role-play within an AI-powered, semi-dynamic version of the 2077 universe, but that doesn't seem to add up with "search [for] opponents" or "session management" - which sounds like matchmaking infrastructure to me. It would be very cool if they could create an actual dynamic-world MMO, but that sounds far too large of a project for a "multiplayer mode" tacked onto an existing game.

Actually, they haven’t had MP plans for the game since the beginning. They had a handful of people assigned to try to determine if it could be done in a worthwhile way, as they wanted the focus on SP role-playing.

I notice the announcement does not say upon release. In order to not compromise on what is CDPR’s bread and butter, sungle player gaming, I would not be surprised to find that Co-Op or MP is released between 1 and 6 months afterward.

Multiplayer will come post-launch as it is not their main focus for the game. A very small amount of people are working on it so it's not like it will hamper the main game development.

eh I have a feeling I won't like cyberpunk, i really enjoy 3rd person games more, for some reason it makes me feel more immersed than first person games

SN2716057Would be fun in co-op.

I was thinking the same thing. Not like an MMORPG but a multiplayer rpg with small parties.

Have to say I’m sad CDPR has finally caved to the Multiplayer beast. I really hope it’s not a high priority. I don’t want another GTA or RDR where single player gets left behind to constant MP content. I mean I’ve already bought it on GoG so they have my support regardless but I don’t really support MP. To early for any speculation. I would love a co+op story mode so...

INSTG8RHave to say I’m sad CDPR has finally caved to the Multiplayer beast. I really hope it’s not a high priority. I don’t want another GTA or RDR where single player gets left behind to constant MP content. I mean I’ve already bought it on GoG so they have my support regardless but I don’t really support MP. To early for any speculation. I would love a co+op story mode so...

I can't speak for RDR, but GTA has always had a robust single player mode. Even without the DLC releases a person could play this game for weeks and be satisfied. That doesn't feel "left behind" to me.

I worry when multiplayer modes are compared to GTA Online. It started out decent, but it quickly devolved into a P2W mess. Rockstar also focused on it rather than more single player content.

I have no problems with a coop mode. I hope CDPR knows better than to do something like GTA Online.

I have full faith in CDPR because they have yet to make me feel like I can't.

INSTG8RHave to say I’m sad CDPR has finally caved to the Multiplayer beast. I really hope it’s not a high priority. I don’t want another GTA or RDR where single player gets left behind to constant MP content. I mean I’ve already bought it on GoG so they have my support regardless but I don’t really support MP. To early for any speculation. I would love a co+op story mode so...

How can you not support multiplayer but would love a co-op? Is coop not considered multiplayer anymore?

TW3 would have been awesome if someone could have spawned in as Zoltan and roamed around kicking ass with you.

HotobuI can't speak for RDR, but GTA has always had a robust single player mode. Even without the DLC releases a person could play this game for weeks and be satisfied. That doesn't feel "left behind" to me.

My point is it hasn’t got one single byte of SP content in the years and GBs of updates. Heck Episodes from Liberty City were arguably the best parts of GTA 4. RDRD2 is looking to suffer the same fate. This is new territory for CDPR as well I’d hate to get song wonky attempt at the expense their amazing SP experience.

moproblems99I have full faith in CDPR because they have yet to make me feel like I can't.



How can you not support multiplayer but would love a co-op? Is coop not considered multiplayer anymore?

TW3 would have been awesome if someone could have spawned in as Zoltan and roamed around kicking ass with you.

Well I don’t consider co-op what typically passes as MP. TDM, today’s Battle Royale trend that nonsense is MP for me.

HotobuI can't speak for RDR, but GTA has always had a robust single player mode. Even without the DLC releases a person could play this game for weeks and be satisfied. That doesn't feel "left behind" to me.

Quantity =/= quality, which GTA V is a perfect illustration of. Sure, it has a lot of SP content, but it's also quite boring. They try to toe a rather difficult line of self-deprecating humor and B-movie references while still being good, but sadly they fail at both, neither managing to mock themselves enough (or in the right way) to be funny nor make the characters interesting or the storyline anything more than flimsy excuses to showcase various (often poorly implemented) mechanics. In the end the result is an impressive world filled with utterly boring and clichéd characters and plot lines that have been chewed and spat out by the film industry, coupled with trademark GTA mediocre mechanics where everything generally works, but nothing feels really good (shooting mechanics are lifeless and dull, driving is... okay, but gets boring even for arcadey racing, etc.). But of course things look cool, and there are cars and explosions in a setting that hews close to a real-world location. Which seems to be enough for quite a few people.

But I'm getting way off topic here. Still, to sum up, CDPR really shouldn't be looking to Rockstar for inspiration. That would be lunacy.

Hm, I wonder about surprise mechanics. Hope it wont come to that.

Multi or co-op might be cool.

ValantarQuantity =/= quality, which GTA V is a perfect illustration of. Sure, it has a lot of SP content, but it's also quite boring. They try to toe a rather difficult line of self-deprecating humor and B-movie references while still being good, but sadly they fail at both, neither managing to mock themselves enough (or in the right way) to be funny nor make the characters interesting or the storyline anything more than flimsy excuses to showcase various (often poorly implemented) mechanics. In the end the result is an impressive world filled with utterly boring and clichéd characters and plot lines that have been chewed and spat out by the film industry, coupled with trademark GTA mediocre mechanics where everything generally works, but nothing feels really good (shooting mechanics are lifeless and dull, driving is... okay, but gets boring even for arcadey racing, etc.). But of course things look cool, and there are cars and explosions in a setting that hews close to a real-world location. Which seems to be enough for quite a few people.

But I'm getting way off topic here. Still, to sum up, CDPR really shouldn't be looking to Rockstar for inspiration. That would be lunacy.

CDPR cant look anywhere for inspiration (ok maybe Larian). CDPR atm is pretty close to the top in their own thing. Well, for quite a few years actually, havent seen anything that would beat W3 so far.

MescalambaHm, I wonder about surprise mechanics. Hope it wont come to that.

It won't.

MescalambaHm, I wonder about surprise mechanics. Hope it wont come to that.

Is "surprise mechanics" now the socially accepted euphemism for the concept formerly known as loot boxes, or have I missed something?

MescalambaCDPR cant look anywhere for inspiration (ok maybe Larian). CDPR atm is pretty close to the top in their own thing. Well, for quite a few years actually, havent seen anything that would beat W3 so far.

That's the entire point. They can of course look elsewhere for inspiration, it's just a rather terrible idea, and would inevitably lead them away from making the type of game they're good at. I wasn't really a massive fan of TW3 myself (it was pretty good, but not great IMO), but I'll take a high production value RPG with decent gameplay but mediocre characters and plotlines over a high production value grindfest with loot boxes and multi-player focus any day of the week.

ValantarIs "surprise mechanics" now the socially accepted euphemism for the concept formerly known as loot boxes, or have I missed something?

It’s just a sarcastic jab at what EA is calling loot boxes now.

ValantarI wasn't really a massive fan of TW3 myself

The Witcher wasn't just TW3. It was the journey from 1 to 3. Not only was the entire story intertwined and layered game after game, but you could watch the studio grow. There difference between game 1 and 3 was massive.

Really, anyone who didn't play 1 and 2 missed out just as much as people who didn't play 3.

rtwjunkieIt’s just a sarcastic jab at what EA is calling loot boxes now.

Ah, that explains it. Sarcastic use of a two-word phrase inside of an otherwise entirely earnest statement doesn't work very well - it just makes the use of the phrase come off as earnest as well.

moproblems99The Witcher wasn't just TW3. It was the journey from 1 to 3. Not only was the entire story intertwined and layered game after game, but you could watch the studio grow. There difference between game 1 and 3 was massive.

Really, anyone who didn't play 1 and 2 missed out just as much as people who didn't play 3.

Guess that makes sense. I have both 1 and 2, but got them far too late to actually play (got them from some bundle or other) - my list of yet-to-play games has a lot of stuff above TW1 and TW2.

I played TW3 first, then TW2, and lastly TW1.. it is a challenge to control Geralt :D

SN2716057I played TW3 first, then TW2, and lastly TW1.. it is a challenge to control Geralt :D

TW1 controls definitely took getting used to. The story made it worth bearing the frustration, though.

Honestly though, at this point, after having played through them as they came out and seeing the control scheme improve from 1 to 2 and then 3, I don’t think I could go back and do The Witcher again.

My hat is off to you for going backwards and not rage-quitting! :laugh:

rtwjunkieTW1 controls definitely took getting used to. The story made it worth bearing the frustration, though.

Honestly though, at this point, after having played through them as they came out and seeing the control scheme improve from 1 to 2 and then 3, I don’t think I could go back and do The Witcher again.

My hat is off to you for going backwards and not rage-quitting! :laugh:

Well, sometimes..

.. I just had to make coffee.

rtwjunkieTW1 controls definitely took getting used to. The story made it worth bearing the frustration, though.

I honestly did not mind it at the time. Dunno how I'd feel now though. I sorta liked it.