Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
"Cyberpunk 2077's Apartment Will Be Important But Not Customizable"
From Screenrant 2019.
Nothing I have read since has changed this.
Of course we have seen that things in CP2077 have changed since 2019 but I have looked and found nothing to say that the housing stance has changed.
anyways I second this, this would be interesting.
Yup
Nope. Just that one appartment and garage. Maybe they add new stuff like that in expansions or as smol free dlc
But, there is a big garage in the building you can store all your cars in.
And no, this is NOT GTA VI.
If you buy Cyberpunk 2077 looking for the next GTA experience you are going to be sorely disappointed.
Not all RPG's need to have houses or multiple houses to buy, a trunk or two to store gear is really all that's needed.
That said, examples of highly acclaimed RPGs that don't give us multiple player homes:
Most relevantly for CDPR... Witcher 3 (until the Blood and Wine expansion, that is - then we get... one additional home.)
Just about every Bioware RPG of note (Diablo, NWN, KOTOR, etc.)
More JRPGs than I can possibly list.
And since GTA keeps being mentioned (despite it having virtually no resemblance to 2077 from a game design and conceptual standpoint,) even GTA V's player houses outside of Online (which isn't what we're discussing - we're discussing a story-based RPG game in the case of 2077, not its online mode) are limited solely to the homes owned by the three player characters. We wouldn't even have three there if not for the character switching the game's story mode employs.
So I think it just depends on how crucial multiple player homes, or player home customization, are to your having a positive experience with a game. Clearly compelling, satisfying RPGs can and do exist without those features.
As much as I may love the variety and options games like TES offer, especially post-Hearthfire Skyrim, Beth style open worlds are more about "be anyone, go anywhere, and do anything" within the "operating system" of the world. (Remember that Beth often describes TES as "an RPG operating system" more than a game, at times.) Whereas in this case CDPR seeks to create a smaller but more dense, fully realized, immersive city with lots of visual and atmospheric storytelling, and with customization and roleplaying being less about "go anywhere and do anything," and more about, "what kind of systems and builds are you going to utilize to affect your playstyle?"
It may seem like an overly nuanced distinction, but it's an important one from a design philosophy standpoint. One is trying to be all things to all people to the extent possible in a fantasy world, using generalized quest and character systems that are shared across pretty much every playthrough. The other is trying to be very specifically one thing in an extremely believable and detailed setting, but then creating replay value not from total freedom, but from what build you choose and the narrative choices you make, with CDPR's typical storytelling acumen.
So it makes sense imo that certain parts of the world, including the player home, are more static and less "anything goes." The flexibility comes from build, mechanical playstyle, and storytelling choice and consequence. The structure is less global and generic, and more focused and localized.