-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
CDPR: Cyberpunk 2077 will still have "some very occasional" 3rd person cutscenes
- Thread starter Son of Sparda
- Start date
- Status
Facts.
CDPR have plastered all over their trailers that the game is still a work in progress and everything is subject to change yet have been transparent enough about the process that we have a decent insight into their motivations and reasoning as to why certain things won't make it into the final game yet people still wanna complain. The funny thing is that this is exactly what they feared yet went ahead and showed the game off anyways.
I've seen some outrageous takes on this site, but some of your takes in this thread might take the cake. And that's saying something.
Playing a Bethesda RPG in first-person is pretty terrible as well cause they're barely RPGs to begin with. They're sandbox games. There is no "role" that you assume as you play them. You're just a god in waiting, ready to take on -everything- as you play. In Skyrim you can become a werewolf of the warrior companions, the principal of the magical college, the super thief of the (really shitty) thieves guild, the master assassin of the brotherhood, all on the same character.
That's not roleplaying. That's a sandbox.
It's why I loved FO:NV over FO3/4, cause in that game I chose a role and I had to play around said role. Role playing.
It seems the sequence is getting less and less representative of the final game as days go by. Not to mention the choice weren't that diverse and seems incredibly scripted for presentation.
I was hoping for some way the character customization would be relevant other than choosing your starting point/branches and gameplay, but this is a little disappointing.
Either way I am with CDPR on marketing as less as possible that way we don't have crazy expectations for this game.
Facts.
CDPR have plastered all over their trailers that the game is still a work in progress and everything is subject to change yet have been transparent enough about the process that we have a decent insight into their motivations and reasoning as to why certain things won't make it into the final game yet people still wanna complain. The funny thing is that this is exactly what they feared yet went ahead and showed the game off anyways.
Of course, at some point you need to lock shit down. The idea that a developer should be able to just cut shit throughout the entirety of development and have players go in with zero expectations is unfair. Either market your game with shit that's actually in it or don't show it until it's absolutely ready.
If we're going to play the "it's actually not a role playing game" game then let's be sure to include the fact that most of the third person JRPGs aren't really role playing games either because you're just going along a very linear scripted story.
But now we're just getting off topic.
People keep implying this when they literally chose a system that requires more work than traditional cutscenes. 🤦♂️
It IS a mixed perspective game.Yea it was never planned, never hinted at, us TPP fans were just idiots for expecting a tpp option (especially since that's how their previous game was played):
You realize that entire game objects are designed around perspective right? A game world designed with first person in mind can look incredibly off in third person just like a third person game can look incredibly off when you switch to 3rd person.
You realize that animations are designed with the perspective in mind right? Like, did you not notice that your animation set completely changes in GTA when you switch to FP right down to the idle stance? And no, npcs in first person games tend to have remarkably different and much more detailed animations than the player because the player behind the camera looks like this:
Yes because this is like, totes a simple thing. And cutscenes are like,. totes not made with a specific perspective in mind either.
Game development sure is ez.
Yet a TON of people play them that way (including me). I've played all bethesda games in tpp unless I'm using range/magic, then switch, or if I'm inside and need to see something up close, otherwise it's tpp.
Why do you think there's so many mods and things that are focused on your character models, visual looks, armor packs, etc? All of these are because there are a ton of people that like to visually see these things while they play and gladly use Bethesda's third person view, warts and all, because that's what they like to see when playing.
It seems the sequence is getting less and less representative of the final game as days go by. Not to mention the choice weren't that diverse and seems incredibly scripted for presentation.
I was hoping for some way the character customization would be relevant other than choosing your starting point or branches, but this is a little disappointing.
Compared to "dialogue" in pretty much every other rpg? Yeah it was way more complicated and complex. Normally dialogue is your character and the npc standing fixed in place while taking turns playing voicelines.
And there's not really anything to suggest that the dialogue system in 2077 is getting simplified
Do you want to stare at your character's hat all of the time to be reminded that you are wearing your hat?
Just because you wear a helmet in Dark Souls, do you not care about what your actual character looks like?
Some of the takes on how much "effort" first person cutscenes take are weird and kind of ignorant. Are people really going down the "ugh lazy devs" road again?
People don't realise how hard game development is, this has been a constant since the dawn of videogame forums
Fairly sure the entire game wasn't gonna be one long cutscenes
Yes. It's a LOT of work to make sequences like that work. There's a reason CDPR specifically highlighted that tech when it was used for the witcher 3 and consistently brought it up as a big focus for cyberpunk.
That's basically what it is and it's a shame that it's allowed.
These are the most baffling takes here. I can understand having a preference and being disappointed. I do not get thinking it's some desperate attempt to save time cut costs and hurry to release a product.
No part of changing the camera work and staging for every cutscene already made sounds quick and easy to me.
Facts.
CDPR have plastered all over their trailers that the game is still a work in progress and everything is subject to change yet have been transparent enough about the process that we have a decent insight into their motivations and reasoning as to why certain things won't make it into the final game yet people still wanna complain. The funny thing is that this is exactly what they feared yet went ahead and showed the game off anyways.
I feel like you are being disingenuous here. The third person cut scene feature was confirmed in an interview before the gameplay demo was released to the public. When a developer announces a feature that makes people excited and then they say they have removed the feature are those people not allowed to feel disappointed?
ITT: People confused that an RPG let's you customize your character. Like, Elder Scrolls and Ultima Underworld are first-person too and they let you customize your character, it's not some strange feature.
It seems the sequence is getting less and less representative of the final game as days go by. Not to mention the choice weren't that diverse and seems incredibly scripted for presentation.
I was hoping for some way the character customization would be relevant other than choosing your starting point/branches and gameplay, but this is a little disappointing.
Either way I am with CDPR on marketing as less as possible that way we don't have crazy expectations for this game.
I wouldn't be shocked if most of the complexities of the - again, extremely scripted - 2018 footage were axed. They failed to present the open world in the recent 8 minute gameplay footage (cut down from 50 minutes), which is telling in my book.
That video wasn't focused on the open world, it was focused specifically on the character builds and RPG aspects. People have already seen the full demo and it was heavily praised. Speculation like this might as well be considered concern trolling.
Some of my favorite games experiences in RPGs like Skyrim, Deus Ex, and VTMB and immersive sims or fringe games like Dishonored/Prey are first-person, so I personally see this news and I'm like "makes sense".
Edit: I understand that Bethesda titles and VTMB can be both. Just self-reflecting that I've always generally thought of them as first-person games without hesitation.
I read through threads like this and I wonder if I'm in more of a minority than I realize. Bloodlines 2 is in a similar place where they've stated it will have some third-person moments.
I guess I don't see the logic that 'RPG' and first-person perspective are somehow inherently incompatible.
Edit: I also didn't even think of blobbers or games like Bards Tale IV.
Edit: I understand that Bethesda titles and VTMB can be both. Just self-reflecting that I've always generally thought of them as first-person games without hesitation.
I read through threads like this and I wonder if I'm in more of a minority than I realize. Bloodlines 2 is in a similar place where they've stated it will have some third-person moments.
I guess I don't see the logic that 'RPG' and first-person perspective are somehow inherently incompatible.
Edit: I also didn't even think of blobbers or games like Bards Tale IV.
Last edited:
Totally fine by this.
Smells like VR too in the near future
What's the point of wearing nice clothes in real life,if you can't see them
Smells like VR too in the near future
What's the point of wearing nice clothes in real life,if you can't see them
From Morrowind onward, yes, but the series didn't originally have that feature.
I mean, nothing else really needs to be said. If this truly is their vision, funding/time cutbacks or not, I hope they prove us wrong. But they won't.
I wouldsend this kind of responses to CD themselves, but I'm afraid nothing will be done about it if this is true
It not only is a very rare example of games that let you do that but it also feels very off as a result.
Some people prefer to see their characters to be able to empathize with them and some people prefer playing characters that actually emote and react to the world around them instead of floating cameras with the occasional "look you have hands" moment.
I know I personally don't give one remote fraction of a shit about a character I can't see. I am not the protagonist, I will never be the protagonist, and any protagonist in an action RPG would not act the way I would in any situation they find themselves in so I would much prefer to just play as an actual character with thoughts and feelings and desires and a distinctive look. Combine that with the fact I get massive migraines from these so-called "immersive" first person cameras and these games become almost completely unplayable if they're first person only.
I'm not getting Bloodlines 2 because of this nonsense, and that sucks. It's so hard to get good RPGs period nowadays, and having so many of the potential options go first person-only is intensely depressing.
People keep implying this when they literally chose a system that requires more work than traditional cutscenes. 🤦♂️
It IS a mixed perspective game.
You realize that entire game objects are designed around perspective right? A game world designed with first person in mind can look incredibly off in third person just like a third person game can look incredibly off when you switch to 3rd person.
You realize that animations are designed with the perspective in mind right? Like, did you not notice that your animation set completely changes in GTA when you switch to FP right down to the idle stance? And no, npcs in first person games tend to have remarkably different and much more detailed animations than the player because the player behind the camera looks like this:
Yes because this is like, totes a simple thing. And cutscenes are like,. totes not made with a specific perspective in mind either.
Game development sure is ez.
You realize that the Dead Island gif the player is purposely doing melee combat animations to show that weird animation right? The melee animation is made for fpp, not third.
Also you mention cutscenes, where the hell did I mention that? I literally said while you're just walking/running around exploring the world and then it could auto-switch into fpp when you enter dialogue/cutscenes/combat or whatever. So literally, a walk and run animation for the player is all that's needed to offer a simple tpp option outside of those instances, which would help a lot of players.
Here's a quick video showing how you can take animations from one character in maya and transferring those animations to another character:
Npc's and player characters tend to share the same animation rig in games, which makes this something that is a lot easier to do because you aren't dealing with anything super drastic in terms of different skeletal shapes or body designs, etc.
I really think it's just the audience on this site. There are a lot of people on era who grew up playing 3rd person JRPGs. They're just not used to playing immersive sim games. This is pretty evident by the "what's even the point of customizing my character?" comments. It's kind of funny, but also pretty understandable when you think about the way this audience leans.
I just take issue with how so many people are incapable of accepting that this game isn't third person. I feel like so many cyberpunk threads contain a lot of whining for a third person mode.
Yes, I know. Last year's 50 minute demo was just their vision of the world, quests and the visual design. This years 8 minute footage was supposed to present complex character system and the branched storyline. Consider it whatever you like. At the very least it was extremely underwhelming display, which is represented by the substantially lower view count of their deep dive video, compared to what they've shown last year. I'll remain concerned about the game.
Last edited:
When there are basically no other major RPG options on the horizon, people tend to get pretty frustrated when a developer known for making one of the best third person RPGs of all time decides to completely abandon that in favor of first person-only.
I mean that's how you play with mods, if we're talking a vanilla barebones experience, Bethesda games are dogshit in third person and I cannot imagine playing them that way for the entire game. It is that horrible.
I can't imagine trying to convey this:
In third person.
This doesn't actually make sense, because the amount of classic JRPGs that actually have character customization is vanishingly small.
1st person gameplay, I have no problem with, Deus Ex games are some of my favorite games ever.
1st person cutscenes, yeah not too sure about that.
they used customization as one of the games selling points tho, it's just a weird left turn
Pillars of eternity, tyranny, greedfall, path of exile, disco Elysium, torment.
You're spoiled for choice
Dead Island looks like shit regardless in third person because the game was never meant to be shown that way. Animating in first person requires a lot of different things to keep in mind.
You're literally talking about this as if it's an easy thing to implement in a world that's designed with FP in mind.
🤦♂️
Like i said, a ton of things are designed with perspective in mind, that even includes locomotion. It's not as ez as "just slap an npc animation on the player lololol" Even forcing a camera perspective during specific moments can lead to issues.
You're being an armchair dev atm and it's bad.
Zero interest in zoomed-out isometric PC games. This isn't 1995, and I don't have a working gaming computer even if it was.
Part of what makes cyberpunk so exciting though is how different it is from the Witcher. Being different isn't a bad thing. It's ok to not like certain types of games, but it isn't ok to demand that a game be exactly to your liking. Not every RPG has to be for you.
- Status