I love that they kept the translation thing. First person sex cutscenes sound kind of weird but I guess I got over first person execution cutscenes which were kind of weird and violent too when I first saw them.
+1
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited November 2019
re: syndicate multiplyer
syndicate had a story written by the uk science fiction author richard morgan. i have never had an opportunity to share this conspiracy theory but it is very important to me - in the multiplayer there are 4 characters:
im almost certain the photo used for the guy at the far left is richard morgan doing a yelling face.
updates as my investigation continues. it is also eternally hysterical to me that they commissioned dubstep remixes of the original syndicate theme including what has to be one of the most disgraceful things skrillex has ever done (and to this day the way this track is dropped int he first boss fight is one of my top 10 moments in any game ever for sheer wat) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2vhoxmRPAQ
My biggest concern for the multiplayer game is that we'll have some unfocused, loose missions crap that Rockstar did for GTAO and RDO. When both those multiplayer aspects came out, they were just shells of what the main game was and then Rockstar has spent 5+ years making stuff for GTAO and 1+ year for RDO, and both are still unfocused messes (GTAO more so than RDO, tbh). If we get multiplayer, I want it to have stories like the single player with my decisions effecting my next missions, a faction rating system so I can have my own NPC friends and enemies which might make me friends or enemies with other players automatically, and any cool minigame stuff we could do in the single player, we can do it the multiplayer. I want the game to feel as alive in the multiplayer as it does in the single player, not some cheap she'll that they will finally get content made for a year down the road when everyone has moved on.
0
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
i'd hate a GTAO style thing in Cyberpunk because GTAO killed any chance of getting any GTA expansions ever again forever. And those were great.
They did originally say that the multiplayer would be after they were done expansions. I don't know if they changed that but it seems like the focus is to fully finish the work at least on all the story related stuff before the MP.
anybody remember nu-dmc commissioning fucking noisia? what a decision
+4
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
edited November 2019
Nu dmc was great and the soundtrack was perfect for the game and I will fight anyone over this.
Fisticuffs at dawn.
DemonStacey on
+2
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
It had Combichrist, they knew exactly what they were doing.
+2
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
The only thing from the interview up there that would be a negative (for me) is it maybe being shorter than W3. If it's just a little bit shorter than that's no big deal. But I hope that it isn't too much shorter in exchange for replay-ability.
Because for folks that don't replay stuff the extra time added through replay-ability is exactly 0. So I would be a bit saddened to have the experience over too much quicker. But that's a big if. As long as doing all the side quests I can find still clocks me over 100 hours in one playthrough I will be a very happy boy.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
The only thing from the interview up there that would be a negative (for me) is it maybe being shorter than W3. If it's just a little bit shorter than that's no big deal. But I hope that it isn't too much shorter in exchange for replay-ability.
Because for folks that don't replay stuff the extra time added through replay-ability is exactly 0. So I would be a bit saddened to have the experience over too much quicker. But that's a big if. As long as doing all the side quests I can find still clocks me over 100 hours in one playthrough I will be a very happy boy.
Yeah but
The Witcher 3 is a very very long game
+16
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
The only thing from the interview up there that would be a negative (for me) is it maybe being shorter than W3. If it's just a little bit shorter than that's no big deal. But I hope that it isn't too much shorter in exchange for replay-ability.
Because for folks that don't replay stuff the extra time added through replay-ability is exactly 0. So I would be a bit saddened to have the experience over too much quicker. But that's a big if. As long as doing all the side quests I can find still clocks me over 100 hours in one playthrough I will be a very happy boy.
Yeah but
The Witcher 3 is a very very long game
I know! But it's also a very very good game. So for non replay folks a very very good game that lasts a very very long time is a very very great thing!
There are plenty of shorter great games. Let us folks have these ones!
I never finished Witcher 3.
I got distracted a lot and the main story was not all that gripping.
A short main story, and shit ton of side content would be a way to go i think.
Less time spend wandering in a mostly empty world should also help i think.
+6
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2019
I didn't find W3's open world to be empty at all. I'd even go so far as to say impressively full.
jungleroomx on
+14
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
W3's world had more interesting and meaningful stuff to find than any other open world game I have played. Heck, all of the side content that you can stumble upon was one of the most lauded things about the game.
+9
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
W3's world had more interesting and meaningful stuff to find than any other open world game I have played. Heck, all of the side content that you can stumble upon was one of the most lauded things about the game.
I would get lost on treasure hunts, sidequest chains, etc. You were no more than a couple hundred meters from something at any given time, even when rowing on the ocean
I'm not saying the world did not have lot of stuff in it.
But lot of the time i was spending quite a lot of time just riding on a horse from one end of the open map to another, most of it empty, because i had already killed everything in there.
Largely the problem was that i was getting distracted and not acting in anything approaching methodical fashion.
And the story not really gripping me.
The only thing from the interview up there that would be a negative (for me) is it maybe being shorter than W3. If it's just a little bit shorter than that's no big deal. But I hope that it isn't too much shorter in exchange for replay-ability.
Because for folks that don't replay stuff the extra time added through replay-ability is exactly 0. So I would be a bit saddened to have the experience over too much quicker. But that's a big if. As long as doing all the side quests I can find still clocks me over 100 hours in one playthrough I will be a very happy boy.
Yeah but
The Witcher 3 is a very very long game
Yeah... I didn't 100% the game, but did most quests, and ignored gwent totally.. And still ended up at 131 hours over all extensions.
I mean, I feel like I could've continued witcherin' forever, but that was not a short game, and "shorter" than this is okay by me
I didn't find W3's open world to be empty at all. I'd even go so far as to say impressively full.
I loved it- But it's easy to get sidetracked from the main quest line. At some point, I just concentrated on the main quest line and left the side quests for later
And when the game is over
you can just do those quests as some kind of witcher just doing his job, and it's fun
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I didn't find W3's open world to be empty at all. I'd even go so far as to say impressively full.
I loved it- But it's easy to get sidetracked from the main quest line. At some point, I just concentrated on the main quest line and left the side quests for later
And when the game is over
you can just do those quests as some kind of witcher just doing his job, and it's fun
Indeed. Plus the expansions were legitimately good. Hearts of Stone had an okay quest but great characters, Blood and Wine was just great from top to bottom.
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
What is this I don't even.
+3
Options
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
Devs usually shoot for the moon first and then try to figure out how to make it run.
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
The Witcher 3 itself was a game loudly accused of that very transgression - it was probably the poster child, along with the first Watch Dogs.
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
The Witcher 3 itself was a game loudly accused of that very transgression - it was probably the poster child, along with the first Watch Dogs.
Yup.
And I don't think it's an unreasonable, treasonous move like a lot of people did.
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
The Witcher 3 itself was a game loudly accused of that very transgression - it was probably the poster child, along with the first Watch Dogs.
Yup.
And I don't think it's an unreasonable, treasonous move like a lot of people did.
Especially since witcher 3 was still a gorgeous game
Look, if you show a puddle on the ground in a trailer, that puddle had better be there when you release the game, no matter how many quests or features you have to cut to make it happen.
Replacing it with a smaller puddle just to maintain a framerate is a betrayal of your loyal players.
The post mortem on W3 was that it barely shipped they packed so much into it. They know this and I doubt they'll ever go a game as scope creeped again. The interviews make it clear they were committed but realized it was kind of a mistake. One that worked, but learn from mistakes.
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
Devs usually shoot for the moon first and then try to figure out how to make it run.
"So, good news and bad news... Good news, we implemented that feature!"
"Awesome! Wait, what's the bad news?"
"How attached were you to that double-digit frame rate...?"
I think CDPR got so much love from all the free updates and giant expansions in W3 that hopefully they get the formula now. Make a stand alone game that's polished and provides a great experience, don't worry about making it obnoxiously long or stuffing it with everything you want, and then slowly add everything else into the game that you wanted while you're patching the main game.
CDPR really did perfect that with W3, I cannot tell you how much time I spent grinding for the armor sets and learning gwent, and then playing it again on a harder difficulty to play Blood & Wine and give my armor pretty colors. Think I clocked like 300 hours on the game, and eventually sold it because I couldn't concentrate on any other games.
If CDPR sticks to that formula, I cannot see people having a problem with that. Multiplayer is nice, but I'm sure they took a look at GTAO and RDO as warnings that it shouldn't be all you care about.
Posts
syndicate had a story written by the uk science fiction author richard morgan. i have never had an opportunity to share this conspiracy theory but it is very important to me - in the multiplayer there are 4 characters:
im almost certain the photo used for the guy at the far left is richard morgan doing a yelling face.
updates as my investigation continues. it is also eternally hysterical to me that they commissioned dubstep remixes of the original syndicate theme including what has to be one of the most disgraceful things skrillex has ever done (and to this day the way this track is dropped int he first boss fight is one of my top 10 moments in any game ever for sheer wat)
huh
themoreyouknow.jpg
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/02/24/syndicate-review-pc/
They did originally say that the multiplayer would be after they were done expansions. I don't know if they changed that but it seems like the focus is to fully finish the work at least on all the story related stuff before the MP.
Yeah, that game fucking ripped.
bendy bullets! undercuts! dubstep!
Cable?
i do not understand this question and i will not respond to it
bring back games getting dubstep people for the soundtracks
anybody remember nu-dmc commissioning fucking noisia? what a decision
Fisticuffs at dawn.
Because for folks that don't replay stuff the extra time added through replay-ability is exactly 0. So I would be a bit saddened to have the experience over too much quicker. But that's a big if. As long as doing all the side quests I can find still clocks me over 100 hours in one playthrough I will be a very happy boy.
Yeah but
The Witcher 3 is a very very long game
I know! But it's also a very very good game. So for non replay folks a very very good game that lasts a very very long time is a very very great thing!
There are plenty of shorter great games. Let us folks have these ones!
I got distracted a lot and the main story was not all that gripping.
A short main story, and shit ton of side content would be a way to go i think.
Less time spend wandering in a mostly empty world should also help i think.
I would get lost on treasure hunts, sidequest chains, etc. You were no more than a couple hundred meters from something at any given time, even when rowing on the ocean
But lot of the time i was spending quite a lot of time just riding on a horse from one end of the open map to another, most of it empty, because i had already killed everything in there.
Largely the problem was that i was getting distracted and not acting in anything approaching methodical fashion.
And the story not really gripping me.
Yeah... I didn't 100% the game, but did most quests, and ignored gwent totally.. And still ended up at 131 hours over all extensions.
I mean, I feel like I could've continued witcherin' forever, but that was not a short game, and "shorter" than this is okay by me
I loved it- But it's easy to get sidetracked from the main quest line. At some point, I just concentrated on the main quest line and left the side quests for later
And when the game is over
Indeed. Plus the expansions were legitimately good. Hearts of Stone had an okay quest but great characters, Blood and Wine was just great from top to bottom.
If some other dev made only those and sold them as a game, full price wouldn't have been a strange asking price.
I actually loved HoS a bit more, but I'm a sucker for stories about (Heart of Stone ending spoiler)
I don’t think they learned the lesson. :razz:
Thst latetest CP77 interview has them talking about how they’re unsure if they can meet memory constraints and may have to scale some things back a tad.
I don't think this is uncommon in development. It's why people always complain about graphics being "scaled back" from E3 showings.
Devs usually shoot for the moon first and then try to figure out how to make it run.
The Witcher 3 itself was a game loudly accused of that very transgression - it was probably the poster child, along with the first Watch Dogs.
Steam | XBL
Yup.
And I don't think it's an unreasonable, treasonous move like a lot of people did.
Especially since witcher 3 was still a gorgeous game
Replacing it with a smaller puddle just to maintain a framerate is a betrayal of your loyal players.
"So, good news and bad news... Good news, we implemented that feature!"
"Awesome! Wait, what's the bad news?"
"How attached were you to that double-digit frame rate...?"
And were not even recognized. I applied to a scholarship and the form asked what minority I was. Gamer wasn't even on the list.
Steam | XBL
CDPR really did perfect that with W3, I cannot tell you how much time I spent grinding for the armor sets and learning gwent, and then playing it again on a harder difficulty to play Blood & Wine and give my armor pretty colors. Think I clocked like 300 hours on the game, and eventually sold it because I couldn't concentrate on any other games.
If CDPR sticks to that formula, I cannot see people having a problem with that. Multiplayer is nice, but I'm sure they took a look at GTAO and RDO as warnings that it shouldn't be all you care about.