Third Person Cutscenes Removed from Cyberpunk 2077; All Cutscenes To Be First Person

The Cyberpunk 2077 FPP/TPP debate continues as CD Projekt Red replaces all third-person perspective cutscenes with first person.

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
-Foxtrot44d ago

So it features heavy customisation and now we won’t even see any of it?

The main defence of first person was “you’ll see your character in cutscenes don’t worry”

UnorthodoxAndCynical44d ago

I am still wondering how they will manage to pull off the sex scenes.

44d ago
bishup2544d ago (Edited 44d ago )

a lot of camera shaking i presume to emulate what we can not see on the other end.

Tech544d ago

this is a mess.
this game was announced back in 2012. their vision completely changed.
no class system. completely first person. plus downgraded visuals.

bluefox75544d ago

POV, there's a whole genre of it.

DillyDilly44d ago

They will be removed in due time

carcarias44d ago

They're apparently in 1st person too, something I've never seen in a mainstream game before. Mind you, I think you could go into 1st person in GTA when in the car with hookers, iirc.

killswitch8044d ago

you obviously have not discovered POV porn yet

killswitch8044d ago

@Tech5 A mess?? really this will definitely end up GOTY 2020 and maybe the best game of the decade...glad I didnt lose my mind over changes for the better...visual downgrades....hmmm not really....wait to the game comes out ...its definitely going to look way better on the next gen and PC.

CobraKai44d ago

In first person, all they need to render would be the butt, back, shoulders, and back of the head.

Vegamyster44d ago


You guys are being so melodramatic lol, the game was teased early but it didn't enter pre-production until the team finished the Blood and Wine expansion for The Witcher 3 in 2016:

"no class system"

Where did they say there was no class system? They said it was a fluid system meaning you can mix them and you're not locked into one specific class but not much more than that:

"completely first person."

Why is this such a massive issue? I can understand being disappointed you can't see your character in certain scenes but it's hardly a factor when it comes to the actual games quality, it's just their personal preference/vision.

"plus downgraded visuals."

They showed off a completely different area of the game that was run down rather than the main city, we can't make that judgement until the final product is out and it can be compared properly.

CrimsonWing6943d ago

They probably won’t have them now. With Sony’s whole #MeToo movement they’ll either fade to black and leave it up to your imagination or it won’t be in the game.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
ButtAnihilator44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

"The main defence of first person was “you’ll see your character in cutscenes don’t worry”"

The hell are you talking about? The defense (with an 'S') is that the game was designed in the first place to be in first person -- changing the camera would require a complete redesign of the levels (if they just slap the third person camera and call it a day it's gonna show), and it's an addition that costs money that could be better spent elsewhere.

UnorthodoxAndCynical44d ago

Photo mode, mirror, and moves is the defence now. Inb4 it gets removed xD

C4rnos44d ago

As shown in the recent gameplay you'll also be able to see your character in menus and on vehicles, like motorbikes, end of the day? it's an rpg and seeing 'yourself' doesn't happen unless you look at reflections of yourself.

bishup2544d ago (Edited 44d ago )

"it's an rpg and seeing 'yourself' doesn't happen unless you look at reflections of yourself."

that's the thing. ray traced reflections in Cyber Punk are exclusive to pc.

carcarias44d ago

Yeah, I was thinking the same. I feel sorry for those who really wanted TPP but no defence of 1st person should be necessary. It's their choice and if they had chosen 3rd person, then I wouldn't expect them to need to defend that either.

-Foxtrot44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Urm no

Everytime people on here talked about the customisation options and then being I first person people always came to defend them, specifically saying “you’ll see your character in cutscenes”

I’m not arsed about first or third but they could have given us the option. It’s not a preset character like Adam in Deus Ex, if we didn’t see him it wouldn’t have been a huge deal as there was no heavy customisation like there is in this but still you saw him during conversations and in cover

Hell even in Elder Scrolls you can switch between perspectives

ButtAnihilator44d ago

You can't change perspective in deus ex games and elder scrolls games aren't really known for excellence in level design, are they, foxyboi? You goddamn buttface, swear to god.

44d ago
C4rnos44d ago

I think the option for a 'vanity' view sort of thing would be nice, but if you compare it to Skyrim's 3rd person view; you've also gotta keep in mind the polish of the combat elements wasn't really high on Bethesda's list of priorities (let's be honest, the combat in Skyrim is shoddy at best)- and what would be necessary is more akin to the reverse of what R* did with GTAV when they added first person, i'll use Destiny and The Division as examples here, both similar kinds of game, but the viewpoints focused upon create a very different user experience.

Nothing wrong with adding choice, but if it's lacking in any way they're likely to get slammed more than praised for such a decision, i trust Pondsmith and CDPR's vision based on what i've seen so far- i just find it odd that people are trying to slam the game because it doesn't have a perspective they prefer, no one complains that CoD is first person; it might not be an rpg but the gameplay revolves around the fact it's first person. it's clear that this was a very conscious decision from the get-go for CP2077- along with the recent news of CDPR becoming a studio to alternate between Witcher and Cyberpunk? it makes sense they're focused on one viewpoint for each.

Are consoles not getting more basic baked-in reflections?
I remember the days when i'd go 'wow' whenever i saw a reflection of my character in a game world look better and better over time- well, when they had them anyway.

rainslacker44d ago

Moving a camera to another perspective for a cutscene doesn't cost more money. It's literally just changing the location of the camera. They'll already be doing any kind of cinematic stuff to make it interesting I assume, or maybe it'll be like all the other FPS open world games where it's just some people walking around, a bunch of taking, and no action.

About the only cost would be any animation they have to put onto the character, which I assume would be done on the NPC's anyways.

neutralgamer199244d ago


No it wasn't you are 110% wrong it was designed to be both until they decided just to do FPS

It's their choice but 3rd person camera angle will come via a patch later most likely

L7CHAPEL44d ago

it isn't going to cost a penny, obviously you don't know anything about game design.
third person perspective is there within the tools of designing the game to begin with.
so they can pull back look at the characters, and be able to measure distance between objects, level and environment geometry, object placement, all sorts of things.
"Compromise our vision", it's a horseshit argument, and it was from the beginning.
Lots of people that suffer from motion sickness that can't play games in first person, and this didn't wind up coming up in The Witcher because it was third person of course.
now they're asking simply to have the other perspective, and anybody that hears anything about it,
wants to make all these ridiculous claims of vision compromise, and they shouldn't have to do this/that to appease whiners.
well, you don't know what you're talkin about.
people have the right to ASK for whatever they want, and they also have the rights to not like it if they're not willing to offer the option to play in third person, BECAUSE IT MEANS THEY CAN'T PLAY IT.
it's not this huge debate without reason.
there are people that simply cannot play in first person.
In an age where everyone wants to talk about controllers for the disabled, and accessibility, their "vision" argument is weak...
"the money could be better spent elsewhere"?
other than enabling more people to enjoy the game?
there's a better place to spend money than that?
where would that be?

ButtAnihilator43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

@L7CHAPEL Mofo, I have been making games before you knew how to spell your name.
Of course putting another camera in the back of the character doesn't cost money, but in first person you don't have to animate walk/run cycles and complex animation blending and IK handling on the character because you can't see it -- it's not even being rendered, except for the arms -- so most devs of first person games don't even bother and when they do bother the animations are half-assed. When you add a third person camera it means that the devs have to make a shitload of animations for the character and maybe add softbody cloth, and it has to look good and slick, because that's what people expect from AAA games.

Add to all that the level design implications of a third person camera and you have a shitload more work to do.

If you get motion sick easily you can just increase the FoV. Adding an FoV slider is a much cheaper option.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
gamer780444d ago

exactly right foxtrot they told us we would see our character in cutscenes... they need to honor that. I want to see my character sometimes, not all just fp... I may wait on this game a bit and see how it comes out now.

rainslacker44d ago

Seems to be the trend with a lot of first person open world games. More often than not, the story is fairly simple, and the character doesn't even have any real purpose to the entire plot going on. Bioshock is about the only game that got the balance of story and player agency right.

Dunno what CP2077 will be like, but just think about all those FPS open world games, and think about how the story progressed. Didn't it just seem like you were going on a series of errands for the NPC's who made it a point that what you were doing was important for reasons that were important to them, even though they really had no bearing on the player themselves.

neutralgamer199244d ago

My onoy question is can we drive the car or motor cycle in 3rd person? Ubi games have on forts person in farcry games and that just makes tne game difficult and I can't play for long so I hope CD project red allows different camera angles while on mode of transportation

Tiqila44d ago (Edited 44d ago )


Deal with it, ffs.

Moe-Gunz43d ago

The tap dancing that people are doing here to defend CDPR is what I been talking about in regards to this game. I’m excited for it but the blind fandom that gamers are displaying is ridiculous.

-Foxtrot43d ago

It’s the issue when a studio does well and does good thing like free dlc, no MTs etc because people will go blind and you’ll never be able to criticise them

Rockstar, NaughtyDog, Nintendo, Kojima and at one time Bethesda

UnHoly_One43d ago

This is a huge plus for me.

Nothing is better than when a first person game never leaves first person.

Dying Light is a great example of this. It makes everything far more immersive and “real”

Enigma_209943d ago

Kinda defeats the purpose of customization, doesn't it?

Tototot43d ago

Hey man, they don't owe you anything, let the devs make any kinds of game they wanted to make

I dont get why so many people upvoted, this is gaming community at its worst

UnHoly_One43d ago

People are whiny crybabies about everything nowadays.

They’ve been crying ever since it was first announced to be in first person for some reason.

harmny43d ago

Foxtrot please delete your account. You are not only useless to this forum but you spread hate on every article.
That was not their main defence. Their main decent was there fps was important because you have to see the world through the character eyes (reason? augmentations, hallucinations, hacking, glitches, etc).

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
Eamon44d ago

Tbh, I actually support this decision.

I was hoping this game would originally be 3rd person and I still think it was a huge missed opporunity not to go with that. But I've always felt that 3rd person cutscenes in an FPS games breaks the immersion. If you are going to do third person cutscenes then at least make them few and short. But this game is an RPG so of course it will be cutscene heavy.

The only odd thing about this decision is now it makes the customization of your character pretty pointless as you'll never be able to see them.

SickSinceSix44d ago

Maybe in the reflection of a puddle or off glass windows and mirrors.

BLizardXD44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Jonny silver hand - "you really think anyone gives a rats dick how you look?"
we get it. no one cares.

FishTank44d ago

C4rnos - "seeing 'yourself' doesn't happen unless you look at reflections of yourself."

Nvidia sure to cash in on that. $900 upfront to see yourself in a reflection.

DevilOgreFish44d ago

"Third Person Cutscenes Removed from Cyberpunk 2077"

this is indeed very big news. especially for gamers that intended on gloating their custom characters.
it's very upsetting that features are being removed from this.

L7CHAPEL44d ago

Not seeing my character breaks immersion and all of the effort that I'm putting into customizing it.
Mass effect the original trilogy, and God knows how many other games that are RPGs( including their previous work) discounts the entire argument,
and I personally believe they're removing third person cutscenes to double down on their previous statement, so that it won't look as weak...

Eamon43d ago

Mass Effect is not an FPS which is the basis of my point.

rainslacker41d ago

A gun and disembodied hand floating in front of you, just slightly off center of the screen is much more immersive. Plus, it's great when running around in first person, getting stuck in the environment because you didn't see the slight half wall there, so you get dead because you were running away from the enemy. Good times.

ClayRules201244d ago

Yes, it most certainly sucks. I wasn’t thrilled about the first person view, but accepted it. But hearing somewhat makes me not want to bother with the game. Damn it lol. Pardon my language. I mean, I don’t think that’ll ruin the game, but what’s the point of customizing our characters & all that if we can’t even see them in the cutscenes now?

Smokehouse44d ago

It’s not going to stop me from buying it but it’s just an odd decision. It’s most likely a technical decision where they just couldn’t figure out how to make it look good.

ClayRules201244d ago

That’s good. Regardless of this decision, I’m still interested in the game & still want to explore this beautiful/intriguing world that CDPR has crafted & play through the story.

sushimama44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

WHAT ?!?

Then what's the point of customizing your own character's hair, tatts, clothing or bionic machine bodyparts? We won't get to see anything. I was ok with the first person view, but come on? Man this sucks in so many ways. This is really disappointing. I'm still going to buy the game, but I'm kind of bummed here. Shit.

UnorthodoxAndCynical44d ago

Well, you get the mirror, a few moves, and Photo Mode. That's it.

sushimama44d ago

* wipes single tear away *
Well there is photomode I guess. That's if they even put it in. Surely they would have it. Wouldn't they?

harmny43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

What's the point of customization in real life if you only see yourself in the mirror? Clothes don't even give you stats like in cyberpunk and people still spend lots of energy dressing up

sushimama43d ago

Are you really that stupid? You're embarrasing yourself

Orionsangel44d ago

Is Cyberpunk 2077 coming to Ultimate Game Pass?

UnorthodoxAndCynical44d ago

I guess not, since only Xbox Game Studios titles make it the game pass, with a few exceptions. A high budget AAA going on 3rd party game pass doesn't sound probable, but who knows.