That voice. That godly, chocolaty voice.
That voice. That godly, chocolaty voice.
This really is a teaser... I love the soundtrack as well as characters. Couldn't just understand the gameplay but this surely is worth a try when released.
I hope this will be turn-based,somehow cna't see this game working in third person as rpg.
I like the teaser a lot. It has a wonderful style to it. It's also interesting to see how they've redesigned retractable blade cyberwear after all these years, yet kept the guns nice and chunky. Shows that they're not afraid of modernising the stranger elements.
(Retractable blades in 2020 were commonly "wolvers" and, well, yeah. Snikt McBub.)
But that interview wiht Pondsmith is weird as fuck. Cyberpunk v3 was the one where he had the most input and that literally used pictures of action figures for the art. It also gave up on a lot of the Cyberpunk-ish tropes in favour of the crazy, like a self-regenerating city actively stuck in a loop (instead of it being a mere element of the *punk genre) and un-trenched wifi everywhere.
But goddamn if I'm not excited to have another good and good looking title in the genre.
Uggh that Pondsmith video does worry me. I really don't think that CD Projekt should be adhering to any canonical ideas from the P&P RPG in truth Vs using the name, paying the man his royalties and doing their own thing. Most people aren't going to give a damn about the '4th Corporate war' let alone the first three. From the Cyberpunk V3 entry: -
The 4th Corporate War
Is all such daft nonsensical horseshit. It's like Pondsmith has no real perception as to what a corporation is in the literal sense. Envisaging them as private concerns with no accountability to anyone and a willingness to seemingly commit genocide, Vs do what corporations do in reality ..namely chase profit for shareholders and minimize overheads. Standing armies? Whose paying for this shit? Shit can his ass.Quote:
In the 1980’s, British Petroleum may have been the first to see the advantage in establishing a military arm of its corporate power; in this case, by subcontracting the protection of its South American oil holdings to the local right wing paramilitaries, but it wouldn't be the last. As more and more Megacorps grew to immense sizes and worldwide operations, many of them soon became equal to small nations in their own right; establishing their own military forces and the will to use them. And use them they did:
• The First Corporate War (2004-06), took place when electronics giant Eurobusiness Machines and rival spaceplane manufacturer Orbital Air went to the mats over floundering Transworld Air. Most of conflict took place via stock manipulation and boardroom maneuvers, with only occasional m i l i t a ry strikes against each other’s holdings.
• The Second Corporate War (2007-08) p i t t e d bio-fuel manufacturer PetroChem against its massive Russian rival SovOil. Fighting over drilling rights in the South China Sea, this corpwar was far more deadly, since with the collapse of the Soviet
Union a decade earlier, SovOil had gained military technology previously only accessible to major nations. From the destruction of a PetroChem oil platform to the bitter end in the Spratley Archipelago, this conflict was as savage as any national war, ending with PetroChem driven out of Asia and the idea of open corporate warfare firmly established.
• While The Third Corp War was primarily fought via computer attacks in the Net, most Megacorps soon chose to protect operations with their own p a r a m i l i t a ry forces, or to subcontract security to specialized corporations. One such corporation
was Arasaka Security , a multinat founded by a megalomanical genius with the goal of restoring Japan to its pre-WWII glory. With legions of blackclad bodyguards, security troops and covert ops teams, Arasaka soon was the most potent paramili
t a ry group in the world. Its counterpart was U.S.- based Militech, specializing in military hardware and “armies for hire.” There was no love lost between these two corporations—all they lacked was an excuse—and by 2021, they had it.
• The 4th Corporate War started as a hostile takeover squabble between aquatech company OTEC and submarine transport firm CINO. To acquire the assets of bankrupt shipping firm I H A G , both corps brought in their security contractors (Militech and Arasaka respectively). At first, conflict was limited to attacks on sea-based facilities, but soon Arasaka and Militech, sensing a chance to get rid of a long-hated rival, raised the stakes. Attacks on sea farms and sub bases gave way to attacks and sabotage of onshore facilities; by the summer of 2022, it was open war in the streets with tanks, troops, aircraft and orbital artillery all in play. Pitched battles raged around the world until the final blow in late 2022, when Arasaka detonated a nuke in the center of the first Night City, killing over 500,000 people. To end the fighting, U.S. President Elizabeth Kress nationalized Militech
under the command of the U.S. Joint Military Command, and the EU Government followed suit on both sides throughout the European Union. Withdrawing back to Japan, Arasaka staged a coup to overthrow the government. With nuclear missiles supplied from ally North Korea, Arasaka held Japan (and the rest of the world) hostage until the Japanese Self Defense Fleet finally crushed the Arasaka “shoganate” and delivered Saburo Arasaka’s head to a vengeful United States. The Fourth Corporate War was finally over, at a cost of millions of lives and immense destruction. The survivors have sworn never to let the Megacorps rebuild their private armies again. But without the threat of a powerful national military to hold them in check, it’s only going to be a matter of time till the corporate warlords are back to their old tricks.
Where's the futuristic version of Michael Clayton where in some suit knows too much and another suit arranges for them to be bumped off via hired third parties, and another suit cottons on to the whole thing?
It's so depressing to read stuff like this and realise that the future caught up with it. I remember that Neuromancer was always like "Holy shit! He has a 3MB RAM Hitachi chip!" and that's just so outdated and lame right now... I think that specific item was a contraband item too. It's better to overshoot when you write futuristic stories.
Hopefully the Cyberpunk lore will keep the Soviets. I really like alternate history.
All the same, what Neuromancer predicted was possible hasn't been reached yet, so I'd say that Neuromancer certainly overshot in a lot of ways--it just had some incorrect figures thrown in as well. It's more grounded than a lot of sci-fi. We're alarmingly close to some of the stuff in Neuromancer.
I understand them using the general feel of 2020's Cyberpunk. A decidedly 1980s Cyberpunk with all of the requisite trappings. They could make a fine game with a great story that still relied on the "Style over Substance, Attitude is Everything, and Take it to the Edge" shtick (please, please leave out the 'There are no rules" part). But I'm with you hoping they'll steer clear of his actual writing and world-building. The bits I've read aren't all that good either, and the above section doesn't improve my impression.
But as for it being realistic, I feel like psycho isn't quite right. This is about people who are all augmented-up going crazy and murdering every human they can find. All you've got is psycho? If someone said their ex boyfriend was a psycho, I'd think they were bad news and probably violent, but not quite genocidal.
At the very least it feels like there would be two words. Like going Wire Crazy or catching the Aug Madness or something. It doesn't necessarily need to be zestier. Just needs to contain more information even if it's still fairly vanilla sounding. I threw out Terminator because it's a pop-culture reference to a killer robot which seems like it would have a decent chance of catching on--2020 is only a few years away and people are still talking about Terminator but I suppose that would have been hard to predict in 1984 and part of that is because of the franchising over time.
It's not like we have to agree or anything, I just don't think it's very evocative given how specific it is.Anyone who wanders around going kill crazy could be called a Psycho. It's just not very thematic or colorful or creative (or realistic, but I don't care too much about that). So it doesn't jive for me.
Edit: I realize none of that explains why I use it as an example of what I view to be bad writing. A lot of fiction writers make what is, in my view, the mistake of using too much terminology. Dune had a fancy foreign name for things that weren't fancy foreign concepts. A lot of books do this. Sure, use a name in a made-up language if it makes sense, but be sparing. Save it for the things that would require qualification and translation even if the name was given in plain English because it just doesn't fit into the world anything like the closest English word does. The same applies to unnecessary jargon or unnecessary slang. Sometimes it's a missed opportunity to provide character to an individual or a group of people through their speech patterns, instead relying on unnecessary nomenclature that everyone uses indiscriminately.
There are some exceptions. Elvish in Tolkien's universe is a relatively robust language, so having a translatable song thrown in here and there (sung by characters intimate with the language) makes sense. Other than the songs, non-English is used quite sparingly in Tolkien. A Clockwork Orange used slang to evoke a sense of strangeness and distance with the reader even when it wasn't genuinely using it for new or foreign concepts.
My I ask you a personal question? Have you ever retired human by mistake?
PS. I don't like this teaser at all. I think it's rather bland and uninteresing, but maybe because I'm not huge fan of cyberpunk themes.
In other news, as it's appeared on the front page now, I should probably mention what I thought of the Mike Pondsmith trailer thing (shamelessly copy-pasted and more-shamelessly edited afterwards):
I’m not as into Cyberpunk 2020. It doesn’t really grab me … but hearing him talk about his relationship with CD Projekt--their perspective on the RPG and his perspective on the game--makes me really excited that I’ll love this anyway.
I especially like the bit about trans-humanism–as much as I loved Deus Ex: HR, I’ve never felt like augmentation and cyberpunk-style implants would fundamentally re-write what it is to be human. It makes a damn good sci-fi story and an even better modern heroic epic, but it doesn’t represent a credible future to me. That’s what makes Gibson’s brand cyberpunk so awesome to me, and what makes this video excite me most: it’s not about technology changing people. It’s about technology allowing us to do things we couldn’t do before and the things people do with the technology they are given.
Where I would disagree with Pondsmith is that it IS about the technology, too. It’s about what tech we look into, what paths we follow and what we ignore. Where does progress wind, how much does it cost, and who gets left in the dust? Where is it headed next, and what is the future’s Transhumanism? What are they afraid of and excited about? What do they have, and what do they wish they had? How far are we willing to go to keep that edge either over each other or over some abstract concept of necessary progress? That is about technology, to me, as much as it is about the people using it.