Rumours and Speculations

[Snowflakez]

I would be very surprised if it was only FPP mode. Yes, it makes some things easier ( animations) and for many, more immersive. But the negatives are not few. No view of your cool character. Melee combat much harder to do right. Driving, ahahahah are you kidding. Motion-sickness is an issue. Disappointing the audience you built with Witcher games. Contradicting original plans and having to explain that.

So really, given those reasons, FPP only seems very very unlikely. TPP only maybe, but I still bet on a TPP/FPP switch.

Overriding reason for TPP only, only one I can think of? It just worked way better for players in a modern city setting, FOR THIS GAME USING THIS ENGINE, to go FPP only. Not sure why, but if that's what testing showed, that's what CDPR would do.

This, and I have no idea what Animal is referring to when he says you can't make shooting work well in third person.You absolutely can.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Sard, but wasn't cover kind of sort of actually a big deal in 2020? Like, if you just stand out in the open like you would in Halo you're going to be riddled with bullets? Surely being behind cover is better than not being behind cover with realistic combat.

 

[Sardukhar]

This, and I have no idea what Animal is referring to when he says you can't make shooting work well in third person.You absolutely can.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Sard, but wasn't cover kind of sort of actually a big deal in 2020? Like, if you just stand out in the open like you would in Halo you're going to be riddled with bullets? Surely being behind cover is better than not being behind cover with realistic combat.

You can make shooting work okay in TPP. There really isn't any competitive ( i e high-skill-level) shooter in TPP that I can think of. Not one that is shooter-focussed. Shooting in TPP, whether it's Watch Dogs (one of my favourites), GTA, The Division....always at least a little bit clumsy. And really, if you want crisp responsiveness and that looking-over-the-gunsights feeling, then FPP is your meat.

I have shot a fair bit and although video game shooting isn't a whole lot like real shooting (real world combat shooters do use video-game like sims to train, by the way) Third Person is waaaaaay away from it.

Even the tunnel vision you get when shooting for real ( anyone trained to combat shot has been told to keep both eyes open a lot unless long-range shooting) is incidentally repeated in First Person shooting. That's about as far as it goes, though. Few people would like a game that tried to simulate real-world under-pressure accuracy, stamina and movement issues. Har har ugh. Heck, if some game starts including failures to feed and receiver jams, great. When's the last time a game made you do tap-and-rack or clear, rack-rack-rack and fire? Like, never.

Cover is sort-of a big deal in Cpunk PnP. See, PnP aims at simulating the real world. Which is to say, you can't dodge bullets. It also means that a hit or two and it's over. So if you are in cover, great. And if they miss and you get to cover, great.

Otherwise, if they shootsest firstest and bestest, you dead. Cover not helpful in that case. "Diving for cover" has lots less leeway in the era of smartguns, targetting-capable cyber-eyes and boosted reflexes.

In the PnP rules, this comes down to initiative checks and skill rolls. If they make theirs before you do yours, splat.

 

[Suhiira]

You can make shooting work okay in TPP. <clip> if you want crisp responsiveness and that looking-over-the-gunsights feeling, then FPP is your meat.

I'll be surprised if CP2077 doesn't use FPP for combat.
As pointed out many times, it really does work best (mechanically) for firearms ... not so good for melee tho.
That said, I hope to hell it's not "twitch" combat.

Cover is sort-of a big deal in Cpunk PnP. See, PnP aims at simulating the real world. Which is to say, you can't dodge bullets. It also means that a hit or two and it's over. So if you are in cover, great. And if they miss and you get to cover, great.

Otherwise, if they shootsest firstest and bestest, you dead. Cover not helpful in that case. "Diving for cover" has lots less leeway in the era of smartguns, targetting-capable cyber-eyes and boosted reflexes.

In the PnP rules, this comes down to initiative checks and skill rolls. If they make theirs before you do yours, splat.

Also taking things slow whenever possible, be observant, listen, do everything possible to avoid combat ... but ... if you have no other choice ... ambush the suckers !

Many years ago a wise Vet told me something I've always remembered - If you're in a fair fight you're doing something wrong.
If it comes down to your initiative roll being the only thing between you and dead in Cyberpunk you screwed up long before you made the roll.

 

[atomowyturysta]

Many years ago a wise Vet told me something I've always remembered - If you're in a fair fight you're doing something wrong.

You did something really wrong if you're in a fire fight and you brought a knife...

 

[animalfather]

can FPS be RPG based? stalker was a horrible RPG, broken the bullets never hit where they were suppose to. FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together.
i know in borderlands you leveled up and then u were able to kill enemies the same level as you so it didnt really matter than you leveled up because the enemies leveled up with you so the whole thing was pointless. how do you fix that?

 

[sv3672]

can FPS be RPG based? stalker was a horrible RPG, broken the bullets never hit where they were suppose to. FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together.

STALKER is not really an RPG, there are no character stats, so accuracy is only a matter of what weapons you have (the starting ones are not of good quality) and how you use them. With a decent weapon and in the ideal case, it is possible to shoot reasonably accurately. But there are accuracy penalties for hip fire, standing (as opposed to crouching), movement (the faster you move, the worse it is), and recoil. Bullets move at finite speed and drop at long distance. Even moving the crosshair results in temporarily reduced accuracy, your aim needs time to settle. So, with a "run and gun" style, it is indeed difficult to hit targets. Also, headshots make a huge difference. In an RPG, most of the above mentioned factors can be made dependent on the character's skills.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

can FPS be RPG based? ... FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together.

If the aim is to be as good at both as possible, the genres clash and it will do both badly (see Fallout 3).
If one wants just a shooter with a bit of RPG flavor stats, then he designs the game as a shooter first and RPG second (like almost all "RPGs" with guns these days, semi acceptable shooters, terrible RPG's... FPS-wise).
If one wants an RPG with first person shooting, he designs the game boldly to rely on the characters aptitude and designs the core gameplay to support this mechanism instead of just slapping the mechanic over a normal FPS presentation (there's a number of ways to achieve this).

Yay for amateur couch developing.

Anyway, it's really a matter of what's considered to be important for the game. If CDPR wants slick and responsive FPS experience, they say "fuck that" to the stats that govern shooting; and what a shame it will be.

stalker was a horrible RPG

I don't think it was one. Similiarly to how Bioshock wasn't one (even though some people for some odd reason touted it as one).
I thought the bullet spread was awesome even if there was no character progression to mitigate it. Added a lot of tension to an already atmospheric game.

 

[SigilFey]

I break the rules so often, I wonder why I still wasn't banned?

Because you're always whispering.

can FPS be RPG based? stalker was a horrible RPG, broken the bullets never hit where they were suppose to. FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together. i know in borderlands you leveled up and then u were able to kill enemies the same level as you so it didnt really matter than you leveled up because the enemies leveled up with you so the whole thing was pointless. how do you fix that?

Agreed, largely. I found it super annoying to have an enemy clearly sighted at point-blank range in Stalker, only to pull the trigger and miss. Any sort of "character-skill-based aiming" just feels terrible in FPP. Whereas, in TPP it creates a sense of reward as I "watch" my character progress over time. That's the psychological trick, I think. Fallout 4's method of artificially increasing damage was better...but still pretty head-shakey.

In my opinion, leveling has little place in a FPP, action-oriented system. In that situation, combat should always be based exclusively on the gear I'm using. I'd do no "enemy scaling" at all. Every enemy has its own difficulty rating, set in stone. Combat against certain enemies is simply impossible early on in the game. Doesn't mean I can't interact with them, avoid them, or defeat them...it means I can't fight them at that point. (<--- Look! Roleplaying opportunity!)

 

[Rawls]

In my opinion, leveling has little place in a FPP, action-oriented system. In that situation, combat should always be based exclusively on the gear I'm using. I'd do no "enemy scaling" at all. Every enemy has its own difficulty rating, set in stone. Combat against certain enemies is simply impossible early on in the game. Doesn't mean I can't interact with them, avoid them, or defeat them...it means I can't fight them at that point. (<--- Look! Roleplaying opportunity!)

Agree I hope they stay away from levels and keep it at gear, attributes and skill points like the PnP.

 

[sv3672]

Agreed, largely. I found it super annoying to have an enemy clearly sighted at point-blank range in Stalker, only to pull the trigger and miss. Any sort of "character-skill-based aiming" just feels terrible in FPP. Whereas, in TPP it creates a sense of reward as I "watch" my character progress over time. That's the psychological trick, I think. Fallout 4's method of artificially increasing damage was better...but still pretty head-shakey.

It could be seen as an abstraction of hit chance: 50% damage (vs. maximum skill) is statistically like 50% chance to hit, but with the RNG element removed. Anyway, I would not mind STALKER style combat in first person, and with character skills affecting the various "dynamic" accuracy penalties. I do not remember for sure if that game actually has Morrowind-like random hit chance for the player's character (I think at least enemy attacks do have that, and the chance is modified to 100% at very short range), but I do agree that such system is generally not ideal in an action-ish game.

 

[Shavod]

can FPS be RPG based? stalker was a horrible RPG, broken the bullets never hit where they were suppose to. FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together.
i know in borderlands you leveled up and then u were able to kill enemies the same level as you so it didnt really matter than you leveled up because the enemies leveled up with you so the whole thing was pointless. how do you fix that?

Already talked about it, but first Deus Ex in my opinion did it pretty well. Skills related to firearms improve mostly your accuracy, which in the game depends on how long you have to aim at the enemy to be sure you will hit him. As you increase those skills, the time required for the aiming gets shorter, so eventually, when you reach the peak with your abilities in using that particular type of weapon, you are able to hit your target almost immediately. Another example of FPP RPG is Fallout New Vegas, but I didn't play it long enough yet (because it looked too similar to the Fallout 3, which I was sick and tired of already, so I had to take some break from NV for now) to figure out how exactly was it done.

STALKER wasn't really an RPG, though it did had some inspirations taken from this genre. The weapons being vastly inaccurate was not connected to RPG mechanics, it was a simple design choice to make combat feel more realistic and make the experience harsher for the player, which helps in building this game excellent atmosphere.

Now I wonder was there ever any third person shooter RPG where the RPG mechanics affected the gameplay in other ways then by increasing the damage output? The only thing that comes to my mind regarding that is probably Alpha Protocol, but when I played it I mostly relied on stealth and hand-to-hand combat, so I don't remember how the shooting mechanics worked there in correlation to it's RPG mechanics.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Now I wonder was there ever any third person shooter RPG where the RPG mechanics affected the gameplay in other ways then by increasing the damage output? The only thing that comes to my mind regarding that is probably Alpha Protocol, but when I played it I mostly relied on stealth and hand-to-hand combat, so I don't remember how the shooting mechanics worked there in correlation to it's RPG mechanics.

I played it through once with a pistols wielding Thornton and the amount of spread for low skill was really significant (I've heard it was the same with other weapons too). And of course the action crowd shat all over it for that.

It was an interesting case, though. The game was loathed in the US for the mechanical workings (like the spread values), but in Europe it got a lot better reception (not one for Obsidian to write home about, but comapred to the US reception) and the aspects that were hated in US, like that spread, were mostly considered as just part of the game, something to deal with, the real criticism was mostly elsewhere. EU peeps were much more tolerant and accepting of RPG mechanics, even the relative clumsiness of them, of it.

 

[Rawls]

Now I wonder was there ever any third person shooter RPG where the RPG mechanics affected the gameplay in other ways then by increasing the damage output?

It's not an RPG since there were no choices/consequencs, but the Last of Us had a weapon sway skill that effected shooting pretty significantly, had no damage output increases and is a TPP perspective game.

EDIT: I think weapon sway, reload speed, fire rate (for semi-auto guns and bows) & recoil could all be ranged weapon skills that effect gameplay without damage output increases.

 

[Snowflakez]

I played it through once with a pistols wielding Thornton and the amount of spread for low skill was really significant (I've heard it was the same with other weapons too). And of course the action crowd shat all over it for that.

It was an interesting case, though. The game was loathed in the US for the mechanical workings (like the spread values), but in Europe it got a lot better reception (not one for Obsidian to write home about, but comapred to the US reception) and the aspects that were hated in US, like that spread, were mostly considered as just part of the game, something to deal with, the real criticism was mostly elsewhere. EU peeps were much more tolerant and accepting of RPG mechanics, even the relative clumsiness of them, of it.

I loved Alpha Protocol. I honestly wish it had gotten more attention, we probably could have gotten a fantastic sequel with more polish, improved animations and deeper RPG systems.

It was a solid-enough example of an actual stealth-action RPG, it managed to balance both sides of the equation (action and RPG) reasonably well. But, as you said, the action crowd hated it because they see "RPG" and assume it only means "dialogue choices." Frustrating, but that's where the gaming industry is right now.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I loved Alpha Protocol. I honestly wish it had gotten more attention, we probably could have gotten a fantastic sequel with more polish, improved animations and deeper RPG systems.

It was a solid-enough example of an actual stealth-action RPG, it managed to balance both sides of the equation (action and RPG) reasonably well. But, as you said, the action crowd hated it because they see "RPG" and assume it only means "dialogue choices." Frustrating, but that's where the gaming industry is right now.

It was a troubled game with a lot of problems. But it also had a lot of good ideas and the narrative reactivity was excellent. I've heard it also has a really satisfying content for an "asshole" playthrough, which is something I'm considering to reinstall it for at some point, but not just now.

 

[SigilFey]

I do not remember for sure if that game actually has Morrowind-like random hit chance for the player's character (I think at least enemy attacks do have that, and the chance is modified to 100% at very short range), but I do agree that such system is generally not ideal in an action-ish game.

For Stalker (and I kid you not, since I modded it to get rid of this), the game did operate exclusively off of gear, but "lower tier" guns would not only have ridiculous bullet spread and exaggerated damage drop-off over distance, but the game would intentionally fail to actually generate a "bullet" XX% of the time. So, e.g., even though I fired 5 times...only 3 bullets would actually exist in-game for purposes of determining hits and damage...and only 1 of those would fly anywhere near where the weapon was sighted. (Fairly early-on in the game, you could grab weapons that worked much better, so it didn't feel like such an overwhelming issue after the first ~5 hours.) But when you realize that these penalties do not apply to NPCs (who can pinpoint your character instantaneously and never "drop" bullets)...and that you're almost always outnumbered and out-gunned...and that ammo is both rare and expensive...

Well, you can see where this is going. Artificially impeding player skill creates nothing but needless frustration. Especially if players MUST pass a section in order to move on -- what in the world is the point putting the player directly in the action (1st-person)...giving them total, real-time control...then forcing them to fail when they so obviously have the real-life skills to succeed?

Already talked about it, but first Deus Ex in my opinion did it pretty well. Skills related to firearms improve mostly your accuracy, which in the game depends on how long you have to aim at the enemy to be sure you will hit him. As you increase those skills, the time required for the aiming gets shorter, so eventually, when you reach the peak with your abilities in using that particular type of weapon, you are able to hit your target almost immediately.

Fair! And this was a game in which it didn't bother me at all. That was actually a great way to handle it...especially since there were clear indications on the screen of how much "better" you had become. Still, those mechanics made for very stilted shooting mechanics. Great game -- one of my favorites! -- but it will never be remembered for how awesome the combat was.

Now I wonder was there ever any third person shooter RPG where the RPG mechanics affected the gameplay in other ways then by increasing the damage output?

Hmmm...not a "shooter", per say...but there have been plenty of 3rd-person RPGs (or at least games with RPG elements) that have mixed up the standard "increase damage output" thing. I must once again praise Kingdoms of Amalur. Let's look at their take on overall combat (including ranged):

• You have four major factors that affect "shooting": weapon choice, specific damage type, weapon skill, and attack type.
• Weapon choice is bow, sceptre, staff, or chakrams. Each of these has its own range, move set, and skill synergy.
• Various weapons will contain various elemental damages, armor piercing, additional damage vs. specific enemies, the ability to stun, etc.
• You also have spells and skills that can create a range of various effects, and these work in tandem with attacks.

Here's where the major difference lies. Unlike Diablo-esque style ARPGs, you have a dynamic, improvisational fighting system. Every weapon has a move-set ala fighting games like Street Fighter, Dead or Alive, etc. Plus, you can work in spells, skills, and/or a second weapon during combo attacks. This means that your passive stats are nowhere near as important as your mastery over your active selection of weapons, spells, and skills.

That's the way I think 3rd-person "shooting" should go in RPGs. It's not so much about the amount of damage I cause, nor about just my accuracy, but rather a range of skills and abilities unique to my character that lats me control the field and ensures I'll get a clean shot on my target. No real "aiming" needed!

(Heh-heh-heh...I just read back over this. I did a terrible job making this clear. I don't have time right now, but I'll try to pick it up again later. )

 

[animalfather]

the bullet spread of Stalker didint follow any logic whatsoever i hope this game doesnt have that feature. if you hit a target and missed by 2 meters to the left then going 2 meters to the right should get you a hit. but not in STALKER i was completetly random and i remember the defenders said it was because of the wind LOL ya like wind effect a 7.62mm projectile over a 40meter distance. oh man those stalker fans were real mofos. anyways i think we should stop talking about stalker and dirtying up the atmosphere here, Cyberpunk 2077 should not even be in the same sentence.

 

[Geralt_of_bsas]

can FPS be RPG based? stalker was a horrible RPG, broken the bullets never hit where they were suppose to. FPS are more skill based than stat based how do you merge these things together.
i know in borderlands you leveled up and then u were able to kill enemies the same level as you so it didnt really matter than you leveled up because the enemies leveled up with you so the whole thing was pointless. how do you fix that?

You can have several different combinations of action/player mechanics with RPG mechanics, thats no problem, it depends on target audience for the game and their expectations, but imo it depends more on what functions are simply more appropriate to simulate with stats or mechanics. Some things such as aiming a gun can be done more or less ok so that the player has to take care of it, but managing the weight of the gun, its recoil, reloading speed, etc? those aren't simulated as well, so instead stats can come in and represent the PC's handling of that, since the player can't.

Stalker wasn't an RPG, what do you mean exactly? the game just had your manual aim, and a statistics of accuracy and range for the guns, but there was no "chance to hit", aside from penalties for running, crouching, etc. If the bullets weren't hitting its because of the gun, not any stat simulated PC aiming skill.

 

[animalfather]

EUREKA!!!!

What if the FPS mechanics is only in the Cyberspace sections of the game?

 

[Proxty]

Now I wonder was there ever any third person shooter RPG where the RPG mechanics affected the gameplay in other ways then by increasing the damage output? The only thing that comes to my mind regarding that is probably Alpha Protocol, but when I played it I mostly relied on stealth and hand-to-hand combat, so I don't remember how the shooting mechanics worked there in correlation to it's RPG mechanics.

In Mass Effect you can increase the accuracy with skills(the target assist becomes smaller), you can put mods in the guns to lower weight, rate of fire, etc.