x

You have decided to merge your account with the GOG.com.

You can now start participating in the community discussions.

x

You chose to opt out from the merge process.
Please note that you will not be able to access your account until you opt in.

We strongly encourage you to merge your RED account with the GOG.com one.
If you want to do it later please try logging in again.

  • Register

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Combat system

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by kofeiiniturpa View Post

    Indeed.

    I've been trying to push a system that's somewhere in the middle -- and I mean actually in the middle, not just action-shooting with some negligable stats for show. 3rd person or 1st person, you'd move and maneuver as usual, you'd choose whom to shoot and where to shoot him, you'd pull the trigger when you choose to... but what you wouldn't have to do is manually pinpoint the shots via a crosshair or ironsights, nor would you need to follow the target with what ever cursor there'd be to indicate facing (hip-firing with an adequate accuracy penalty aside, and that penalty going down as your related skill goes up), that'd be up to the character you've built and the situation at hand. And you could (optionally) pause the game to observe the situation and possibly choose to use some active cybernetics, which would double as the "tactical mode" (kind of a phase-based system where you queu up 1 or 2 actions from a list of options depending on how much effort they take to perform and then see how your character manages them -- succeeds or fails -- kind of like that VATS thing, but far more indepth mechanically and options-wise) if the player would want to use it.

    Plenty of hectic action-action-action there for those wanting for it, even if it'd not work like your ordinary shooter, but still highly character driven and with those pausing options for messy situations calling for it.

    Additionally, there could be difficulty options that determine how much the character system influences the hands-on gameplay (which would mean all gameplay, not just combat). Like "normal" for intended experience where stats pack a punch but are not all that crucial; "action" for stats being helpful but not really necessary in the big picture (play like a storydriven shooter with some very light character systems); and "RPG" for when stats are an absolutely crucial consideration in all manners of gameplay.

    Couple that with a normal difficulty setup (item prices and availabilities, enemy AI, skill levels, amounts, etc) and you could basically tailor your experience.

    It'd not make for a perfect RPG nor a perfect action game, and there'd definitely be people on both sides who'd hate it to no end, but it'd be an actual mid-ground that tries to cater to both sides whilst sacrificing elements from both. I could live with it.
    That would be a disaster...like someone trying to sit on two chairs at the same time. Ignoring how much work would be needed for this ( along with CDPR's still having a lot to improve in gameplay design), it has been proven again and again that rules of one system have to take precedence over the other. When devs tried to directly mix both, result was poor on both ends.

    There is nothing here for CDPR to innovate in theory...games like Souls series ( to lesser extent) and Mount and Blade, already accomplished this by conveying character stat building when directly controlling character in real time.
    But this also makes FPS combat a no-go.
    Last edited by Zagor-Te-Nay; 11-01-17, 18:15.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Zagor-Te-Nay View Post
      That would be a disaster...like someone trying to sit on two chairs at the same time.
      Yeah, I mentioned there'd be people who'd hate the idea of such a thing.

      Me being more general and less specific (I'm not designing a game here) probably leads to you not thinking what I'm thinking with this. There'd be only one chair to sit on whose height and angle is adjusted. No two systems aside from the "tactical mode" which also would use the same set of rules (though with additional features that come with the picture) as the core gameplay.

      But yeah sure, Souls series and Mount and Blade (pfft) already... and so on.
      Last edited by kofeiiniturpa; 11-01-17, 19:32.
      "Human being in his last extremity is a bag of shit."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by kofeiiniturpa View Post


        But yeah sure, Souls series and Mount and Blade (pfft) already... and so on.
        No, I'd still go with a Deus Ex/Fallout shooter/sneaker/melee setup as system A and an overlaid tactical DAO/Jagged Alliance map for System B. Build and install both systems.

        I wouldn't mind seeing something new, but what you described there doesn't sound like a lot of fun to me.
        All posts are typically and brilliantly my own, unless you see my Moderator Voice. | We have Rules! Read 'em! | Visit the Forlorn Hope! |For OFF TOPIC, our Community Section is here to service you!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sardukhar View Post

          I wouldn't mind seeing something new, but what you described there doesn't sound like a lot of fun to me.
          Dunno. It's basically (generally, with tweaks, obviously) just Witcher 1 with an active target lock, deeper systems and extended "VATS". Or... something like that was what I was after.

          I'd take almost anything "new" over a commonplace shooter/stabber if it meant the game had more robust charactersystems-gameplay relationship than what we're used to in the past decade.
          Last edited by kofeiiniturpa; 11-01-17, 21:38.
          "Human being in his last extremity is a bag of shit."

          Comment


          • Why I keep pushing for a dual mode system; one pure FPS (player skills) and one pure PRG (character skills).
            "When you talk you are only repeating what you already know. But if you listen you may learn something new." - Dalai Lama

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Suhiira View Post
              Why I keep pushing for a dual mode system; one pure FPS (player skills) and one pure PRG (character skills).
              That would be the sort of "sitting on two chairs" that Zagor was talking about. Requiring two sets of mechanics, two teams to playtest and tweak both systems and two rounds of balancing the whole game. A lot of hard work... although that's a not really an issue, it shouldn't be a "peace of cake" weekend job anyway, designing cRPG gameplay and systems.

              I'm not opposing two systems, though. I think it can be done. Done well even. And I'd Iaud it loud if CDPR took the bull by the horns pulled it off. But I also think one unified but flexible system that can be bent to work a bit differently with different setups (even if it sacrifices something from both sides --- better to sacrifice equally from both sides than 75% from the RPG side and 25% from the action game side like it usually is), is a more.... what's the right word? "realistic?" ... request.
              "Human being in his last extremity is a bag of shit."

              Comment


              • No matter what they do someone is going to be disappointed and they will let us know on these very forums.

                While there are certain elements that I hope make it in, I'd rather see what they do and judge for what they are trying to do, rather than what I want it to be.

                Which is difficult, I'm only human, I can't make my preferences and hopes go away.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by kofeiiniturpa View Post

                  That would be the sort of "sitting on two chairs" that Zagor was talking about. Requiring two sets of mechanics, two teams to playtest and tweak both systems and two rounds of balancing the whole game. A lot of hard work... although that's a not really an issue, it shouldn't be a "peace of cake" weekend job anyway, designing cRPG gameplay and systems.

                  I'm not opposing two systems, though. I think it can be done. Done well even. And I'd Iaud it loud if CDPR took the bull by the horns pulled it off. But I also think one unified but flexible system that can be bent to work a bit differently with different setups (even if it sacrifices something from both sides --- better to sacrifice equally from both sides than 75% from the RPG side and 25% from the action game side like it usually is), is a more.... what's the right word? "realistic?" ... request.
                  Yep you're totally correct, it won't be easy, but the real question is ... Is it worth it?
                  As to the testing and tweaking of two sets of mechanics, if it's not a competitive game it's not all that critical. You only need them to be reasonably compatible with each other because it's not like two players are going head-to-head are using them against each other. Now if CP2077 is intended to be some sort of PvP Deathmatch game then I totally agree the idea is foolish and bound to have nearly insurmountable problems. But guess what ... it isn't COD2077.
                  "When you talk you are only repeating what you already know. But if you listen you may learn something new." - Dalai Lama

                  Comment


                  • I'm pretty open to any combat system, but I'd like something in the middle. That is, I hope it is not a fps twitch-fest, but on the other hand I don't want the typical mmorpg combat system which amounts to me and the enemy taking turns kicking each other in the shins until one of us falls over--the winner being the one who entered the fight with the biggest pair of boots.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Scottgun View Post
                      but on the other hand I don't want the typical mmorpg combat system which amounts to me and the enemy taking turns kicking each other in the shins until one of us falls over--the winner being the one who entered the fight with the biggest pair of boots.
                      Right? Ugh, no.
                      All posts are typically and brilliantly my own, unless you see my Moderator Voice. | We have Rules! Read 'em! | Visit the Forlorn Hope! |For OFF TOPIC, our Community Section is here to service you!

                      Comment


                      • In RT, Deus Ex & System Shock 2 aiming so far is the best, it takes recoil super serious and really shows the progression in certain skill without crippling guns' stats. Even though the guns themselves suck in these games, this should not a problem for Cyberpunk setting.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Scottgun View Post
                          But on the other hand I don't want the typical mmorpg combat system which amounts to me and the enemy taking turns kicking each other in the shins until one of us falls over--the winner being the one who entered the fight with the biggest pair of boots.
                          Originally posted by Sardukhar View Post

                          Right? Ugh, no.
                          Exactly, this is one of the reasons destiny is the first MMO that is a good game (even if it is kind of shit for a few other reasons) actual engaging game play. I do not expect anything like MMO combat in CP 2077 but i also don't expect CoD either.

                          Comment


                          • What is probably my biggest fear is that the combat ends up like The Division.

                            Comment


                            • I am actually hoping that along with the real-time combat they will implement something like the V.A.T.S. system from the Fallout series as it perfectly fits in the Cyberpunk universe.Also it's worth mentioning that CDPR intended to implement something like that in The Witcher 3 but eventually gave up on it.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Zagor-Te-Nay View Post

                                True: rpg , gameplay and base mechanics are the most criticized aspect of all of CDPR games...but there is a difference between trying to present criticism and shitposting. And you don't need a PhD in base psychology to tell the difference. More thorough, comprehensive examination including pro and cons, while willing to accept other people's opinions, next to angry, emotional outburst characterized accompanied with little else than childish hyperboles and insults.

                                What I have little patience for is that kind of infantile single mindedness where everything is either 10 or 0 with nothing in between ( which is more typical for some in the gaming community). There are also a lot of positives to mention, from sound design and combat music, good animation quality, unique mechanics like group aggro, unique boss design, etc.
                                Group aggro is very common design and not unique at all Arhkam games do this. The boss design sucked it was very piss poor(the DLC bosses were much better props for the improvement). There were some good things(toxicity meter system punishing potion chugging, the idea for combat preparation, good looking combat animations, etc..) but the execution was generally poor or lazy in terms of general mechanics, controls, leveling and balance. I never said it was either 10/10 of 0/10. If I had a rating the games gameplay it would be in between 5 or 6 out of 10.
                                Last edited by LegateLaniusThe2nd; 18-01-17, 21:25.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X