Only when it comes to setting, and even then it only pertains to stuff that simply does not belong. And we rarely agree.
Don't make me kill you...
That's true.
wiiiiiiiilderspace.......doo eee doo eee dooooo eeeeee...
I'm personally a big fan of short lived characters with quick and bloody stories, or quick and brutal defeats. One of the reasons I'm so adamant about a randomly generated story element (see other post "No Story"). Really the most painful thing about losing in games is realizing your going to have to go through all the boring early story (tutorial stuff, noob zones, etc.) . Or in the case of PnP, have to spend hours rerolling a new character (which is no big thing in a pc game).
Also, what is more Alien then humans themselves, especially in a cyberpunk universe hehe
Also, what is more Alien then humans themselves, especially in a cyberpunk universe hehe
I would like to have an option in a game where you can, by using your skills, ingenuity etc., reach the "boss" guy right away. How do you like them apples? I would prefer as much non-linearity in level design as possible.
Why do we need "boss encounter"? The CEO of a major megacorp or a leader of a streetgang, is just flesh and bones, just like you and me. Deep down we are all just humans. Why the desire for the final fight so big?
Spoiler alert!!
Final fight of Uncharted 2 is a tree or a bridge, it all depends on how you want to look at it. I know I felt pumped and excited when I was running around shooting trees in the end boss encounter in Uncharted. " MWUAHAHA, inanimate objects (trees, with leaves and roots and everything)! I shoot you! I am a god among men". Come on, let's think about it for a second, it's ridiculous.
The boss fight is epitome of the level/game. It's made challenging to make you feel like you have achieved something great once you overcome it. I strongly believe it is a relic of ancient times from beginning of gaming, when there was nothing but gameplay. But games have outgrown it and have become much more than just the actions we do. I feel that narrative is the driving force behind games especially when it comes to role playing games. What we are trying to achieve from the boss fight is satisfactory conclusion to the narrative.
Cyberpunk, in my opinion, is the game which is in its essense about people and stories of their struggle with unfair, unjust and uncontrollable world. A story where they try and get something done right for once, mostly for themselves or those close to them like Strange Days, Judge Dredd, Robcop or Appleseed. And like it was said before, Cyberpunk is a world of "Bosses" set in equilibrium and a new guy would be torn to pieces, the other side of the coin is that none of the bosses are safe from each other and all the player character need to do is expose the weakness and watch as other bosses stream to it like sharks to blood. In such a scenario sending an email or making a phone call is as much of resolution as anything else. Bullet to the head might as well be mercy killing at that point.
There is a place for strong opponents and difficult combat situation but they shouldn't be the "Boss fights" at the end of the level.
Spoiler alert!!
Final fight of Uncharted 2 is a tree or a bridge, it all depends on how you want to look at it. I know I felt pumped and excited when I was running around shooting trees in the end boss encounter in Uncharted. " MWUAHAHA, inanimate objects (trees, with leaves and roots and everything)! I shoot you! I am a god among men". Come on, let's think about it for a second, it's ridiculous.
The boss fight is epitome of the level/game. It's made challenging to make you feel like you have achieved something great once you overcome it. I strongly believe it is a relic of ancient times from beginning of gaming, when there was nothing but gameplay. But games have outgrown it and have become much more than just the actions we do. I feel that narrative is the driving force behind games especially when it comes to role playing games. What we are trying to achieve from the boss fight is satisfactory conclusion to the narrative.
Cyberpunk, in my opinion, is the game which is in its essense about people and stories of their struggle with unfair, unjust and uncontrollable world. A story where they try and get something done right for once, mostly for themselves or those close to them like Strange Days, Judge Dredd, Robcop or Appleseed. And like it was said before, Cyberpunk is a world of "Bosses" set in equilibrium and a new guy would be torn to pieces, the other side of the coin is that none of the bosses are safe from each other and all the player character need to do is expose the weakness and watch as other bosses stream to it like sharks to blood. In such a scenario sending an email or making a phone call is as much of resolution as anything else. Bullet to the head might as well be mercy killing at that point.
There is a place for strong opponents and difficult combat situation but they shouldn't be the "Boss fights" at the end of the level.
wouldn't call it a desire as much as your avarage game. To sum up a whole game in a couple of sentences...you got a pack of meatbags to take down without much effort but it's an impossible battle since these meatbags are higher on number, while bosses only look impossible to beat while they leave a lot of choices to players. And devs make a theme out of this, like, setting a small group of enemies half of which needs to be taken down in a stealth way to get gear and ammos, while the other half can be shot down to death with their own stuff. Then full stealth or run and gun variations take place in some sections of the game, and boss encounters are there to test what players learnt after each level.
The point you can make out of avoiding boss encounters is that because of the multiple approach design players can progress at their own pace, but the multiple approach thing isn't really meant to teach you how to fight, so boss encounters may be easy as games themselves or never take place to begin with (see deus ex, human revolution, dishonoured).
Exactly my point, let me quote your partially "and boss encounters are there to test what players learned after each level." Why do we need to be tested on that we learned how to dodge roll and circle strafe? It's not the 80's or the 90's anymore, and this is not bland action/shooter (I hope). It's about Storytelling, ME3 was a "decent" shooter but the ending ruined for majority of people. It's the lack of narrative recognition and not lack of end boss fight which tested their mettle.
i think many story driven rpg endings suck because they are meant to get things done avoiding the multiple universe endings. A prequel like Human Revolution was something borderline since none of the endings meant anything at all, 'cause they couldn't prevent Deus Ex from happening. It's just how story driven stuff is, they follow a story and don't go simulating worlds.
About the action stuff, i personally think a weaker stealth approach can spice other ones up and i also think that will be C77's take compared to Deus Ex games stealth selling point. The multiple approach thing is just too conflicting with itself, making games easy or either stealth or action oriented, so time will tell about bosses and everything
About the action stuff, i personally think a weaker stealth approach can spice other ones up and i also think that will be C77's take compared to Deus Ex games stealth selling point. The multiple approach thing is just too conflicting with itself, making games easy or either stealth or action oriented, so time will tell about bosses and everything
Good question. I am about to show you how you answered your own question though:
I believe you are partly right, 'Boss Fights' are incorporated into many forms of media, (video games, book, movies and TV series among them,) to provide a sense of satisfacton and closure. They provide a 'claimax' or sorts. I for one do not think the concept is outdated at all.
Heres why...
Strange Days - the Hotel scene towards the end is an unorthodox 'Boss' encounter.
Judge Dredd - (1995) Dredd fights Rico. (2012) Ma-Ma's apartment. Both classic 'Boss' material.
RoboCop - Boddicker get's arrested and ED-209 gets shot up. Classic 'Boss' encounters again.
Appleseed - (1988) A. J. Sebastian & Calon - classic stuff right there. (2004) Save the D-Tank by stoping the mobile fortresses - unorthodox, but still a 'Boss' enounter. (2007) Kestner is a bit of an odd one, but Halcon is blatantly 'Boss' material.
Yes, Cyberpunk 2020 is chock full of 'bosses', from lowly Gang Leaders and Corrupt Officials to Mega Corp CEO's and Heads of Secret Societies. I would not use the word equilibrium, because the powerbases of 2020 are always in a state of flux. New guys rise and the old guard fall all the time. Trusted Executives often orchestrate their rise by 'eliminating the competion' and 'freeing some space at the top'. Cyberpunk is THE Dog-eat-Dog World.
The means used by various groups and organisation to achieve this sort of goal varies wildly. However, for the player to be a part of it, they need to be taking some form of action. This could be an execution, (which could take many forms and is a hot topic in and of itself,) an economic, (such as depriving someone of their assets or otherwise bankrupting them,) or perhaps a more intellectual approach, (such as blackmailing the target or framing them for something.) These are just some of the possibilities I would like to see for dealing with situations.
All in all this comes down to a very simple, though often overlooked, proverb:
"Use the right tool for the right job."
There shouldn't be any 'levels' in 2077, but missions, (or whatever other name you wish to use for the tasks the player should be seeking to complete,) do need an objective. I am certainly not advocating the use of a pitched battle between the player and some 'super bad guy' at the end of every task, but this sort of conflict does have it's place, as you said, and I believe it does have a place in Cyberpunk.
It shouldn't always be the "crescendo" of a mission. I admit that element of the 'Boss' encounter is outdated. Perhaps taking out a 'Boss' could be the first step of a fight, then the player would have to fight their way through irrate thugs to get away. How about a 'Hitman' style approch where the player must infiltrate a location and plant a device or some 'evidence' to kill or incriminate the target?
TL;DR
Bosses are not the problem, how they are dealt with is.
I can not argue with that, nor do I want to as it perfectly represent my point of view. Nothing wrong with the mission being "to take down crime lord" as long as it doesn't mean that you slug through the minions followed by 5 minutes of shooting the guy in the head with sniper rifle until he goes down.
"Right tool for the job" That's what Deus Ex: HR tried to say yet somehow it always ended up with locking you in a room with a boss with no other way out but killing him. Nothing wrong with bosses or fighting them as long as we are not trying to do God of War.
TL;DR
Fighting bosses is fine, we can have climax without fighting bosses.
That particular element of Ye olde boss fight was covered aptly by Sard and others in the 'player death' thread.
FNFF, (Friday Night Fire Fight,) which is the combat system CP2020 is based on effectively males the bullet sponge boss all but impossible. The only real means of getting the required level of protection and toughness would be to combat fit a full body conversion or powered armour. Even then, there are quite a few weapons that will kill the target on 1 or 2 shots. If nothing else, AP ammo in just about any assault rifle or even heavy SMGs will shred the target pretty quickly, especially with the armour degradation rules.
FNFF, (Friday Night Fire Fight,) which is the combat system CP2020 is based on effectively males the bullet sponge boss all but impossible. The only real means of getting the required level of protection and toughness would be to combat fit a full body conversion or powered armour. Even then, there are quite a few weapons that will kill the target on 1 or 2 shots. If nothing else, AP ammo in just about any assault rifle or even heavy SMGs will shred the target pretty quickly, especially with the armour degradation rules.
On top of my head I can think of several ways to make it hell of a firefight. The final boss is inside the tank, make sure you shoot out links in the track to remove mobility, then expose the week points by shooting the mounted cannon, then climb on it and throw a grenade down the hatch. What I've described is pretty cool and I'd enjoy a scene like that but I don't want CP to corner itself that it would be demanded every-time.
Can you suggest one that doesn't involve a piece of military grade hardware worth tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Euro...
I honestly cannot stress enough how much I hate that pixel bitchy bullshit... shoot this thing here, now shoot this thing... bolocks to that... it never feels realistic, it never feels satisfying, it always just feel like nonsense.
I think that you are missing the point, tanks sure do vary in prices but if you look at starter private jet and m1 Abrams tank they cost anywhere from 4 to 7 millions $ . Can't think of any corporation that can't afford that.
I dislike the term "Military grade hardware" when it used as equivalent to "top of the line" I served from several years in artillery core and can say that private sector has much better equipment available (maybe rivaled by special forces groups that do get the fancy toys).
Why can't an organization that has multiple billion profit spend a few mills on security? Especially that maintenance cost is much smaller after initial purchase.
I'll grant you that I can not think of none militarized equipment to present but that's because in reality only military does the fighting. Apart from that, Apache attack helicopters cost about 18- 20 mill a pop. What about the walkers we saw in concept art the big brother of ED 209 (Robocop)? And if I let my imagination fly (or borrow already used ideas), gundams, Iron man suit, Fully cybered out ninjas, a new cocktail of drugs combined with brain-dancing that turn man into fearless killing tool with pin point precession and quickened reaction that feels not pain. I doubt that you need me to go over every main villian from the action movies in the 80s-90s
I dislike the term "Military grade hardware" when it used as equivalent to "top of the line" I served from several years in artillery core and can say that private sector has much better equipment available (maybe rivaled by special forces groups that do get the fancy toys).
Why can't an organization that has multiple billion profit spend a few mills on security? Especially that maintenance cost is much smaller after initial purchase.
I'll grant you that I can not think of none militarized equipment to present but that's because in reality only military does the fighting. Apart from that, Apache attack helicopters cost about 18- 20 mill a pop. What about the walkers we saw in concept art the big brother of ED 209 (Robocop)? And if I let my imagination fly (or borrow already used ideas), gundams, Iron man suit, Fully cybered out ninjas, a new cocktail of drugs combined with brain-dancing that turn man into fearless killing tool with pin point precession and quickened reaction that feels not pain. I doubt that you need me to go over every main villian from the action movies in the 80s-90s
I would like to see the ability to fail a boss fight. He gets away, you end up retreating or getting picked up by a trauma team. The game does not end, no asking to load last save/checkpoint. you lost he won, the game keeps going and the consequences of your loss effect the game world if not the story. Now he is harder to find, hires better security, invests in better tech, gets cybered up. He may leave you alone, he may hunt you down personally, or his faction will be more aggressive to you, or any number of other things. So many times in a game a "boss" fight is a win or reload affair.