Cyberpunk 2077 to Have Multiplayer Support

[moproblems99]

TW1 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.

 

[Flogger23m]

Not a fan, I can't imagine it being good. But obviously they're going after the GTA model. Wish they could make it a pure, 100% SP game. I don't want dozens of pop ups in game on the cluttered map only to find out it is some online activity.

For an MP game, IMO, it should be a separate title. Charge $10 for it or something.

 

[rtwjunkie]

That’s an interesting way to brand games that a lot of people love. You don’t even bother to color it as your opinion, which sends a very negative message out that you have invalidated the opinions of millions of others who enjoyed them.

 

[moproblems99]

I enjoyed all three games quite well so I don't think that is what it said at all.

I would watch 100 hours of Witcher cut scenes from any of the three games than plan play any battlefront, battlefield later than 2 or cod after 4. This comment and the fact you can't grasp AC Odyssey tells me all I need.

 

[Flogger23m]

I enjoyed all three games quite well so I don't think that is what it said at all.

I would watch 100 hours of Witcher cut scenes from any of the three games than plan play any battlefront, battlefield later than 2 or cod after 4. This comment and the fact you can't grasp AC Odyssey tells me all I need.

This is a very typical fanboy "he doesn't like my game" (even though I assume you have no involvement in it) response. If a game isn't very good, claim the person is bad at it. I don't think you even realize how childish that sounds. Name a game you didn't like and I'll just say you were bad at it, therefore your criticisms are invalid. I've played and finished Odyssey and have a firmer grasp of all the gameplay mechanics than you as you've yet to articulate any mechanics of Odyssey which makes you opinion on the matter irrelevant. If you can't articulate your points they don't hold any water.

As for Witcher, number 2 was a sub par game. Technical issues, animation glitches, repetitive animations, horrific LOD pop in, mouse issues, stuttering issues, bad GUI, bad movement such as pressing mouse 1 to climb down a 2 foot drop, you name it. From all accounts, the first game was even worse. Witcher 3 was a step up, but suffered from a thin plot, repetitive quest design (walk here, enable eagle eyes, run here), under-developed combat, some bad camera angles during conversations and some other short comings. But it was an okay game. Sadly, nothing important decision wise from Witcher 2 carried over. And the ending was terrible, utter gibberish, as well. After 70-80 hours of gameplay I was expecting more than a 10-12 minute closure to the main story, not that there was much of one anyways. Seeing how underwhelming ME1 to ME2 decisions were and how the ending of ME3 was underwhelming I was amazed to see Witcher 3 praised so much when it had the same shortcomings.

Last thing I want is for them to focus on an MP mode for Cyberpunk, because they need to focus on things like quest diversity and plot for the SP game. They have a lot of improvements to make to jump from mediocre to excellent. Color me skeptical, but I'd rather have them finish one thing before jumping onto the next given their previous releases.

That’s an interesting way to brand games that a lot of people love. You don’t even bother to color it as your opinion, which sends a very negative message out that you have invalidated the opinions of millions of others who enjoyed them.

I don't care much for others opinions on games, I make my own after I experience them. If profit margins and random opinions were anything to go off of, Fortnite would be the apex of video game design. And a few years ago, the cut/paste CoD games from 2010-2013 or so would be. But it is 2019 and I suppose some people just need to have their opinions and critical thinking done by others.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I don't care much for others opinions on games, I make my own after I experience them. If profit margins and random opinions were anything to go off of, Fortnite would be the apex of video game design. And a few years ago, the cut/paste CoD games from 2010-2013 or so would be. But it is 2019 and I suppose some people just need to have their opinions and critical thinking done by others.

You can have your own opinions all you want, but that’s all they are. Opinions. My point is you couched your statement in no such opinion terms. And you continue to do that in your response to @moproblems99 acting as if only your experience is fact. “Game is bad because I say so, and that is fact” summarizes your hubris in which you put down games and other’s opinions on them.

I notice a trend though. You finished TW3 and AC Odyssey in 80 or so hours. That is the exemplification of someone who has rushed through each of those games that really are 120 to 150 hour games to fully experience them.

As for gaming in general, stop being so jaded. Learn how to let go and enjoy what each and every game has to offer. Try it, and you’ll find that nearly all games offer fun and enjoyment. Positivity is contagious.

At this point, I’m convinced you are trolling, but you are just not very good at it. You end up just being belligerant and “screw what anyone else thinks,” while derailing this thread and others with topics that are not under discussion.

 

[95Viper]

Stick to the topic.
Quit calling people names... it is childish and instigates off topic BS/arguing.
Quit arguing about others opinions... you don't like them, state your own; and, move on.

Thank You.

 

[Flogger23m]

You can have your own opinions all you want, but that’s all they are. Opinions. My point is you couched your statement in no such opinion terms. And you continue to do that in your response to @moproblems99 acting as if only your experience is fact. “Game is bad because I say so, and that is fact” summarizes your hubris in which you put down games and other’s opinions on them.

Please read what you're writing. Clearly you have an axe to grind and I'm not even sure what has gotten you so angry. You can't say "respect peoples opinions" and then disregard someone's you don't agree with while insulting them. Likewise, technical shortcomings aren't opinions but rather facts. EX) Witcher 2 had issues with mouse input, and playing around with various settings and editing files would fix some issues but create more. I know you're not a fan of links, but here are two examples that took seconds for me to find:

Example
Example 2

The problem with the fixes is they will introduce horrific stuttering in menus. And it persisted even after a GPU/CPU upgrade (I replayed the game recently, close to 3 years after my initial run). GTX 970 and GTX 1070, 4670K and Ryzen 2700X, many years post release and the game still had technical issues that made the game less than a smooth experience.

Please note the differences between opinion and facts because there is a difference.

I notice a trend though. You finished TW3 and AC Odyssey in 80 or so hours. That is the exemplification of someone who has rushed through each of those games that really are 120 to 150 hour games to fully experience them.

This is also wrong. A good website to check is How Long to Beat. Witcher 3:
Average - 51 hours main story, 105 hours for everything.

~80 hours gave me around 30 hours of extra side content. That is exactly the opposite of rushing. That is doing practically every real side quest in the game not counting the DLC. Obviously you're using the DLC to inflate the hours in yet another attempt to say "you're bad at the game if you don't like it". Its a really tired and childish point because it doesn't make any sense. The irony is if it takes you that long to finish the main campaign/side quests you're actually bad at the game; really, you'd be worse than the average of 2,800 other gamers polled.

Shall I do this for Assassin's Creed Odyssey as well?
Because the average is also 75 hours.

If you rush through the game you can finish it in around 40 hours. ~80 hours is doing practically every side quest in the game and visiting every single region of the map, including the empty ones with practically nothing to do. That is around a 100% increase in the time it takes over rushing it.

You can't add DLC to an average hour length of a game because not everyone owns the DLC and not buying the DLC isn't "rushing the game" or "being bad at the game". If you want to add DLC to length you should mention the game with all DLC = X amount of length. But you should probably ask that before accusing someone of not knowing how to play a game or rushing through it an an awkward attempt to insult them.

As for gaming in general, stop being so jaded. Learn how to let go and enjoy what each and every game has to offer. Try it, and you’ll find that nearly all games offer fun and enjoyment. Positivity is contagious.

This is ironic. You disagree with opinions and disregard facts (like games having technical issues) and then add more insults. Sorry, people will have differing opinions. Just because you think something is great doesn't mean others are going to agree with you. Enjoyment comes in varying degrees. Witcher 3 was a mediocre experience and you're not going to convince me otherwise because I already explored what the game had to offer. And I've done the same with Witcher 2 with two play throughs.

I'll praise a great game, but so far CD Projekt has yet to deliver one. Witcher 3 didn't push boundaries, relied too heavily on common and not so fun mechanics/quests (eagle vision, pressing E to view a clue). As such I am skeptical for them adding MP to Cyberpunk. I'd rather have a great SP experience first, then they can deliver an MP game down the road. As I mentioned, offer it for $10 after Cyberpunk & DLC is out. They shouldn't bite off more than they can chew. That way they can also minimize in game monetization with an small up front charge but cover the costs for the MP mode.

At this point, I’m convinced you are trolling, but you are just not very good at it. You end up just being belligerant and “screw what anyone else thinks,” while derailing this thread and others with topics that are not under discussion.

This is being intellectually dishonest. Read moproblems99 post and your own. I was discussing Cyberpunk and CD Projekt's previous titles and why I am not too thrilled with them taking on an online aspect (they only had one game that wasn't marred with technical issues and the 3rd needed some more development). His response is to add a personal insult and bring an off topic discussion (Assassin's creed Odyssey) because he is unable to articulate a response. Obviously, I am going to respond to these insults (which ironically would make you trolls).

Your supposed stance is to respect other people's opinion, but then turn around and insist that people must enjoy the things you like the way you do. And then add insults, assumptions, and numbers that are inconsistent with most players to support your point. Re-read your post, maybe check the links and you'll see how inconsistent and dishonest (hours length as the support for your "troll" insult argument) it was.

 

[moproblems99]

This is a very typical fanboy "he doesn't like my game" (even though I assume you have no involvement in it) response. If a game isn't very good, claim the person is bad at it. I don't think you even realize how childish that sounds. Name a game you didn't like and I'll just say you were bad at it, therefore your criticisms are invalid.

I didn't say you were bad at them. Where did I say that?

I enjoyed all three games quite well so I don't think that is what it said at all.

I would watch 100 hours of Witcher cut scenes from any of the three games than plan play any battlefront, battlefield later than 2 or cod after 4. This comment and the fact you can't grasp AC Odyssey tells me all I need.

Well, I did say that you were bad at AC:Odyssey (but in a different thread) because you can't seem to kill anyone a level or two higher than you (which is incredibly easy by the way).

What I meant was that you clearly don't understand the games or you seem to be doing the Cliff's Notes versions of them. If you don't put the time in, you aren't going to enjoy them. They are meant for exploring. I don't see how you can enjoy any game outside of CoD or Battlefield that are designed to have 5 minute life spans and then rinse and repeat judging by the path you seemingly took through these games.

CP2077 is going to no different. Exploration is going to be key.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Obviously you're using the DLC to inflate the hours in yet another attempt to say "you're bad at the game if you don't like it".

Nope. Base games.

The irony is if it takes you that long to finish the main campaign/side quests you're actually bad at the game; really, you'd be worse than the average of 2,800 other gamers polled.

Nope. Wrong again. Taking a long time in a game has nothing to do with being bad. It has to do with your mosconception of me because you don’t know me. I take my time and immerse myself in whatever gameworld of whatever game I am in at the time. For me it’s enjoyable to drink in the story, obseve people, explore when possible, and talk to random people (when a game allows me to). It’s not a race. The fun of a game for me is not the finish line, it is the race that I don’t like to end.

The funny thing is most serious gamers who aren’t in a race to finish have gone well over 100 hours in each of those games.

I think you’d find that if you immerse yourself in the worlds, put yourself in the story, that you’d find that the worlds created have much to see and find. As @moproblems99 said, exploration is the key, and will be in getting the most out of Cyberpunk 2077 as well.

You can't say "respect peoples opinions" and then disregard someone's you don't agree with while insulting them.

Except I didn’t disregard your opinions. You didn’t state any opinions. You made flat out statements that games were bad. As I said, you basically with your statements told everyone who regards them as classics and enjoys them “screw you, your opinions don’t matter because I, the high and mighty Flogger have spoken and pronounced them bad.”

You disagree with opinions and disregard facts (like games having technical issues) and then add more insults.

Again. I didn’t insult you. Grow up and get a thicker skin if you honestly felt you were insulted.

then turn around and insist that people must enjoy the things you like the way you do.

I never said enjoy anything the way I do. Those words never left my mouth. What I said was stop being so jaded and allow some of the playfullness and sense of wonder I am sure you had as a child return and you might find that way more games than you think have something fun and enjoyable to offer.

Right now, in this and in other threads you come off like a cranky person with an axe to grind. You throw out negative comments about games or pronounce them bad.

Here’s a clue: just because you say something is bad doesn’t make it so. It makes it your OPINION. You’d find that there would be a lot less sword crossing with people if you would portray your comments like that as opinion.

 

[moproblems99]

As @moproblems99 said, exploration is the key, and will be in getting the most out of Cyberpunk 2077 as well.

Honestly, what took the longest for me to adapt to was the r and p in rpg. The role playing part. The gaming part was easy. I didn't really enjoy the game until I learned how to step into the story. Once you can do that, games totally change and what I look for in a game totally changed.

Cyberpunk is absolutely going to depend on Role Playing, probably even more than TW3 given its roots as a table top. RPGs aren't for everyone. Some people get are meant for the rinse and repeat BF and COD. They used to be the only games I played. But once I learned to step into the stories, there was no going back.