I thought we had confirmation all V3 related material had been ruled non-cannon and fired into the sun? looks like I've got a preorder to cancel...
I'm pretty sure CDPR writers would write something more down-to-earth than the impossible program like DataKrash bullshit and paper-eating virus.
Even a sun magnetic field blasting all over planet Earth and resetting all electronics back to square one would be better.
Fourth Corporate War is also pretty dumb and over the top. Corporations killing their own customers along the way just to end the competitor is not a way to go.
Even a sun magnetic field blasting all over planet Earth and resetting all electronics back to square one would be better.
Fourth Corporate War is also pretty dumb and over the top. Corporations killing their own customers along the way just to end the competitor is not a way to go.
Last edited:
metalmaniac21;n9792311 said:
Yeah Nov 4th EMP DOD style...yeah or wait, what?
So, as far as I know V3 timeline is alternate.
But Firestorm is in.
And remember what happens at the end of Book 1 and Book 2? The very, very end? That thing Rache resets every year? Yeah.
55 years later is when the game takes place.
This allows CDPR to have 2020-ish tech levels without the 50 years of advances from man-portable railguns and the like.
But Firestorm is in.
And remember what happens at the end of Book 1 and Book 2? The very, very end? That thing Rache resets every year? Yeah.
55 years later is when the game takes place.
This allows CDPR to have 2020-ish tech levels without the 50 years of advances from man-portable railguns and the like.
No, like a solar superstorm in 2012 but actually happening.BeastModeIron;n9792371 said:
metalmaniac21;n9806311 said:
Sure we'll go with that, because that actually happened
Qualified as "near miss" since it didn't hit the planet directly, still...BeastModeIron;n9806531 said:
Working on a defunct equipment? Heroes, we salute you!Suhiira;n9806991 said:
Last edited:
metalmaniac21;n9807581 said:
Is that what you were told? Because how convenient that it didn't hit the planet because it would then require "them" to have proof these events actually occur when they never have.
Last edited by a moderator:
Like Suhiira said,there isn't an official map that portrays the entire city but we do have information about things outside of the downtown area.Also the NCART map from the sourcebook does a good job of at least showing the scale of the damn thing:Snowflakez;n9984381 said:
Pretty much everything you see between Central Night City and San Morro (basically that entire peninsula) is the urban area.The Combat Zone is somewhere in South City,a bit north of the actual "South Night City" text.The suburban area is to the south,east and there's a bit to the north east as well.
Snowflakez;n9983521 said:
Areas based on enemies/player level is a huge mistake. I remember not visiting a lot of areas in Witcher 3 because of low level enemies. If there is no challenging enemies in a certain area, there is little to no reason to go there.
Cyberpunk 2077 should instead have an unpredictable world where low level and high level anemies appear everywhere and anytime.
Last edited:
Realistic, but unfortunately this is one of those places where gameplay has to take precedence over reality.Lisbeth_Salander;n9987221 said:
Having to restart the game ten times because you got unlucky with a randoms encounter isn't going to make many players happy.
Reloading might not be an option if you don't have a save that's in a "safe" area, and the Ironman crowd ... they'd be justifiably very pissed.
Taking risks and blowing it due to your own actions is one thing, getting splatted by a random encounter you have zero control over or hope of beating is another.
Last edited:
Suhiira;n9987681 said:
Except that not having area limited by levels is an open world gameplay exploration issue.
Right, so the unpredictable factor could happen after you reach a high level in the game. Here's the problem: After reaching a high level in Witcher 3, the majority of the map becomes irrelevant to explore since enemies are very easy to kill. So after reaching a high level on Cyberpunk 2077, high level enemies should spawn more frequently in areas with low level enemies, in order to make the whole map relevant to explore.
Last edited:
Lisbeth_Salander;n9987221 said:
If there is an expected order of progression through areas (e.g. in Witcher 3 you play Whiter Orchard first, then Velen, etc.), then it makes sense to set levels in them accordingly. But a general trend in enemy level vs. location can be a good thing, it is strange to bump into level 40 drowners 100 meters away from identical looking level 6 ones. Getting killed frequently by random high level enemies may also discourage exploration. While levels based on the area are not necessarily the only way of implementing it, I think it is better if the levels generally follow some predictable rule, even if some amount of random variation is also added.
According to this thread: Challenging enemies = enemies extremely supperior than you.
My point is that after reaching level 10 in witcher, areas with level 6 enemies are gone. You have no reason to explore them ever again except for loot. To avoid that, after the player rach a high level in game, these areas should be balanced out with the respective player level in order to increase replayability, in other words, after reaching level 10 in Cyberpunk 2077, areas with level 6 enemies would have instead higher levels in order to not make things extremely easy for players. And with this, players would have another reason to explore those areas again and the map would become relevant as a whole.
My point is that after reaching level 10 in witcher, areas with level 6 enemies are gone. You have no reason to explore them ever again except for loot. To avoid that, after the player rach a high level in game, these areas should be balanced out with the respective player level in order to increase replayability, in other words, after reaching level 10 in Cyberpunk 2077, areas with level 6 enemies would have instead higher levels in order to not make things extremely easy for players. And with this, players would have another reason to explore those areas again and the map would become relevant as a whole.
Last edited:
Lisbeth_Salander;n9988211 said:
That is more a problem with how enemy levels are implemented, if they are more than 5 levels above or below the player, their stats are artificially modified to make them extremely strong (red skull icon) or weak (grey level number). Without this, low level enemies would still present some challenge, but it may also serve the purpose of enforcing a semi-linear progression.
sv3672;n9988681 said:
Did I mention that enemies would be 5 levels above the player? No. What I said was to make these level 6 enemies to gradually level up over time, and to be respective to player's progression, they wouldn't be higher to the player's level, they would instead still be lower, but not too much. The intention of this would be to not make things extremely easy and increase the open world exploration and replayability.
sv3672;n9988851 said:
Really? Guess I shouldn't have stopped playing Witcher 3 before 2016. Cyberpunk 2077 is in good hands then. Perhaps Cyberpunk 2077 shouldn't have levels at all? Everyone should be as lethal as CP2020, under the condition that the player could be equally lethal to enemies.
Last edited: