Your Fears For the Game - Combined Thread

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
The question is: Can you stich together valuable single player gameplay with long lasting multiplayer.
Answear: NO! unless you are Starcraft, GTA, Warframe, Path of Exile, Stellaris, Wargames, Civilization...
Generally people want their 60$ SP ARPG, and will be VERY unhappy if they do not get it, or if it gets spoiled by cutting content off, or enforcing dlc.
There is also problem with gambling, which could or should be law regulated. P2W undermines game popularity so it is not good path.
After SP campaign there could be some co-op heist mode, with cosmetics, and cyber haircuts. FashionPunk. Style over matter. Some players may enjoy grinding or paying for neo flames for their flying ride.


 

Guest 4149880

Guest
felixsylvaris;n9867311 said:
The question is: Can you stich together valuable single player gameplay with long lasting multiplayer.
Answear: NO! unless you are Starcraft, GTA, Warframe, Path of Exile, Stellaris, Wargames, Civilization...
Generally people want their 60$ SP ARPG, and will be VERY unhappy if they do not get it, or if it gets spoiled by cutting content off, or enforcing dlc.
There is also problem with gambling, which could or should be law regulated. P2W undermines game popularity so it is not good path.
After SP campaign there could be some co-op heist mode, with cosmetics, and cyber haircuts. FashionPunk. Style over matter. Some players may enjoy grinding or paying for neo flames for their flying ride.

Actually SP games can have a long lasting MP, Yes, if they develop a freeform system that allows players spend as much time as they want in the activates related to MP, sure. Its not the rule that a game can't have both worth while options. Lack of imagination is all that comes down to. Thank the great developers that think outside the box.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Willowhugger;n9862451 said:
I'm pretty sure we're going to have a set protagonist

I do hope not. I wouldn’t want this opportunity to become a ”story of that guy”, as flat and inoffensive as possible by design to suit most players, highly limited as s character (no freedom of expression), and with a throat cancer to sound menacing.

I wouldn’t want that with yhis game.

Willowhugger;n9862641 said:
You also cannot do meaningful stories in a video game without a character having a set backstory, personality, and friends/associates.

That’s not true.
 
Last edited:
Shavod;n9863831 said:
I envision it like that: you don't choose your role when creating/customizing (even if CDPR decides to implement set protagonist, most likely it won't be already established character like Geralt, which would indicate that certain level of player involvement in character creation may still remain) character, instead your PC starts as a social outcast (someone rising from the gutters, as early previews claimed), maybe former braindance addict, tabula rasa, who finally receives from fate a chance to do something with his own life, rather then "live" as someone else. At first all the doors are opened for you, but as you make more choices and close other doors, your character starts growing into one of the specific roles, until making an ultimate choice that puts you on singular path, completely unique for this particular role, by thus also unlocking all role related benefits, like for example unique ability. But that's just my guess.

This would in fact be consistent with the approach in the Witcher series, like for example how Geralt can side with the Order or the Scoia'tael in the first game, or remain neutral. First one of the paths is locked out in the third chapter, then a final decision between the other path and neutrality is made in the fourth one. Delaying major branches in the story and character development may be preferred due to cost or related reasons (even making a couple of main quests in the last third of the story specific to each role is a substantial amount of extra content), but it also allows the player to learn more about the available options before having to decide.
 
Willowhugger said:
You also cannot do meaningful stories in a video game without a character having a set backstory, personality, and friends/associates.


I don't really understand why people always think of the Elder Scrolls when it comes to customizable characters. Many games handle that aspect quite differently. I personally prefer customizing my character and her backstory, traits, skills etc.

I fondly remember the beginning of Shadowrun Returns - when my ex-security cyberpunk elf just casually chatted her way into a crime scene that would normally have been off limits. So that's a great example for selectable background stories.

One example for exotic races would be the beginning of Icewind Dale 2 - when you're just landing on a pier in the middle of a goblin invasion. If you play as a drow, some folks will wonder whether you're actually with the goblins ^^ I just wish there would have been more such references to your race in that game - I love such detail.

When it comes to friends and or associates Baldur's Gate does a good job in that regard. Again you have a fully customizable character with gender, race, class, etc. Still they had no problem giving you a certain destiny and friends (whom you may reject if you so choose ^^ )

That is not to say that a blank slate is bad - I'm just saying there's a lot of room between Elder Scrolls and The Witcher. And I'm totally preferring customization. Among many things because it greatly improves replayability and invites you to experiment. Since I tend to play through games very often, that's one of the major factors for me. Nothing's a greater bummer than a game with fixed protagonist and limited choices in game.
 
UhuruNUru;n9861761 said:
You miss my point, and GTA doesn't really make yours, GTA5's single player, was abandoned due to the Multiplayer Mode. Rockstar turned their back on it, and failed to support the single player portion of the game, just milked that online trash. I never played that game, mostly because they were focused on that Multiplayer mode.

There's an assumption there which bothers me in that they needed to continue supporting a fully finished story and game.

Even when single player turns out great, if for example, about 20% of the resources have been put towards a Multi-player mode.
Then it's lost 20% of the potential greatness it should have had, and is diminished as a result.
I'd much rather see then focus on one, or the other, and having long given up on all multiplayer, I want it to be single player only.

Those resources wouldn't exist without the multiplayer mode as the POLISH GOVERNMENT gave them money to create Multiplayer for Cyberpunk 2077.

[qupte]As for trusting CDPR not to go down the Loot Box/Micro-transaction route, they already have.
GWENT, already exists to say they will, and that ended any trust that they won't repeat that.[/quote]

The idea they can't do a fun Magic the Gathering game because it's a cheap way to make money and thus IS AGAINST THE FANS is ridiculous. People like Gwent and companies should be allowed to sell products that make them money. What is this, the Soviet Union?

Players can use cash to buy GWENT cards by buying kegs (Loot Boxes), each keg contains five cards.
I don't play Mobile, FTP. or any Multiplayer due to microtransactions, and Loot Boxes, are a million times worse.
I refuse to even install Galaxy, and use GOG for the Classic Installers, it's why I use GOG for every game I can.
I can't even use the multi-player modes for newer releases that require their store client, and I prefer that.

Yes and that's your choice. As long as the game isn't forcing you to do it and it isn't necessary to progress, there's nothing wrong with it.
 
felixsylvaris;n9867311 said:
The question is: Can you stich together valuable single player gameplay with long lasting multiplayer.
Answear: NO! unless you are Starcraft, GTA, Warframe, Path of Exile, Stellaris, Wargames, Civilization...
Generally people want their 60$ SP ARPG, and will be VERY unhappy if they do not get it, or if it gets spoiled by cutting content off, or enforcing dlc.
There is also problem with gambling, which could or should be law regulated. P2W undermines game popularity so it is not good path.
After SP campaign there could be some co-op heist mode, with cosmetics, and cyber haircuts. FashionPunk. Style over matter. Some players may enjoy grinding or paying for neo flames for their flying ride.

This game has taken eight years to make. They literally could make a 200 hour single player game and then make a massive multiplayer then stitch it together.

kofeiiniturpa;n9868151 said:
I do hope not. I wouldn’t want this opportunity to become a ”story of that guy”, as flat and inoffensive as possible by design to suit most players, highly limited as s character (no freedom of expression), and with a throat cancer to sound menacing.

I wouldn’t want that with yhis game.

That's pretty much the customizable character in a nutshell. Personality-less bland pieces of cardboard who can usually say "mean, snarky, or diplomatic." I guess I want a set character because I want to have a person who is a part of the world and has friends, enemies, and a past. I admit part of this was motivated by the Adam Jensen of Human Revolutions who had a girlfriend, friends, coworkers, and more.

They removed most of that for the sequel.

That’s not true.

Faceless backgroundless characters are nonentities. They can't have personalities and are just ciphers to project the player on--and they just....are so terribly written because since they have to be everyone, they can't be anyone. I don't really know a single exception to the rule. Geralt is the greatest of video game protagonists because while you can choose his decisions, they always express his fundamental character.
 
Last edited:
Willowhugger;n9870521 said:
Personality-less bland pieces of cardboard who can usually say "mean, snarky, or diplomatic.

Sounds like you've been playing Bethesda games. That's their approach to the letter, "be however, do what ever, nobody cares", but it's not the rule.

For one, the player character does not need to be the centerpiece of the story. A complete stranger passing/happening by is just as fine a character as someone the desiger has prewritten fro you down to every detail (even better since he has the potential to offer a vastly more varied experience).

Secondly, saying the character, unless predefined, is a non-entity who can't have a personality is false. It all depends on how how well the player is allowed to express different personalities and how well the game is made respond and react.
 
kofeiiniturpa;n9870701 said:
Secondly, saying the character, unless predefined, is a non-entity who can't have a personality is false. It all depends on how how well the player is allowed to express different personalities and how well the game is made respond and react.
If you've played Bloodlines there are a few references in the game specifically aimed at which Clan your character was from assuming you had the typical traits associated with that Clan. Not perfect, but it did give your character some "personality".
 
kofeiiniturpa;n9870701 said:
Sounds like you've been playing Bethesda games. That's their approach to the letter, "be however, do what ever, nobody cares", but it's not the rule.

For one, the player character does not need to be the centerpiece of the story. A complete stranger passing/happening by is just as fine a character as someone the desiger has prewritten fro you down to every detail (even better since he has the potential to offer a vastly more varied experience).

Secondly, saying the character, unless predefined, is a non-entity who can't have a personality is false. It all depends on how how well the player is allowed to express different personalities and how well the game is made respond and react.

Eh, there's plenty of games where you're passing through but what made the Witcher so good was you were really immersed in the world and a part of it. You had a long history with Triss, Yennefer, Yarpin, and everyone else.

I mean, Mass Effect is fun, but Shepard doesn't become a PERSON until 3.
 
Willowhugger;n9870521 said:
I don't really know a single exception to the rule. Geralt is the greatest of video game protagonists because while you can choose his decisions, they always express his fundamental character.

Nah. Lots of people just play themselves as Geralt. And he only had -one- dialogue choice. Basically, you weren't role-playing, you were just running the writer's lines of Gruff Geralt the Tough.

Exceptions to your "rule" - cool created characters found in

Fallout 1 and 2

Planescape Torment

Arcanum

Vampire Bloodlines

Shadowrun - Dragonfall.

My character had backstory, moral choices and character progression, enhanced by his ( man kofe is going to mock me for this SO HARD) skills, stats, abilities and perks.

A good RPG gives you tools - and those tools you choose form your character, which in turn affects the world.

No matter how you played Geralt, he's still gruff, tough, chemically-augmented super-soldier Man Type A. You can do variations but that's it.

As opposed to my female Malkavian. She's nuts! But tender to the helpless. Mostly. Except a few times and she was distracted. Also screw you authority. Whereas my male Tremere...was a male Tremere. Pretty cookie cutter.

And my Fallout 2 character liked to fight with his hands, stole only from the rich, lied when necessary and made friends with everyone. Second run the guy was insecure, clung to his power armour, saw himself as a Knight, so never lied and exploded people when he hit them. Also had terrible luck, heh.

Really a question of freedom - the same freedom Witcher tries to give you in terms of factions and morals, extended to character building.
 
Yep, my female Tremere in Bloodlines was brutally pragmatic, if it got the job done she'd lie, cheat, and steal. She never went out of her way to be an a-hole, she was just a bitch with a capital 'B'.
...
...
...
Maybe I was just playing myself?
...
...
...
Naw.
 
Last edited:
Suhiira;n9871571 said:
Yep, my female Tremere in Bloodlines was brutally pragmatic, if it got the job done she'd lie, cheat, and steal. She never went out of her way to be an a-hole, she was just a bitch with a capital 'B'.
...
...
...
Maybe I was just playing myself?
...
...
...
Naw.

Hah. I like it. I have Bloodlines, but never got too far. I played the first hour or so and then just never went back to it. Do you think it still holds up now? Anything in particular you found to be unique to it as a game?

Also, Sard, I partially agree and partially disagree. What do you mean he only had one dialogue choice? I've played over a 1,000 hours of the game and very rarely found a situation where I only had one option.
 
For VtB it is importasnt to get unofficial patch. Troika was falling apart at release so base game is a bit unpolished and buggy at places.

As ig it is still good... the style is good, dialogues, characters, mood, some quests are great. Graphic outdated but with dignity. The fight mechanic could be a bit blunt, and too simple.
However, it is one game when you generally have options The degree at which you can jugle fighting, sneaking, talking, power... is not often repeated.
 
Graphic and combat wise Bloodlines is frankly lousy.
But as an RPG ... dialog, options, story, it's great.

And yes ... the Unofficial Patch is mandatory.
 
Oh My God, the government of the United States of America is looking to make loot boxes and microtransactions in video games be illegal, well with a senator from the state of Hawaii first.

Here it is.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/com...f_hawaii_announces_action_to_address/dq62w5m/

Here is what he said.

These kinds of lootboxes and microtransactions are explicitly designed to prey upon and exploit human psychology in the same way casino games are so designed.

You can see he said loot boxes and microtransactions

I never though I would see the government of the United States of America get involved and so fast too.

Also Belgium just announced today that loot boxes are illegal.

I think CD Projekt RED will have to get rid of those kegs now from GWENT: The Witcher card video game.
 
Willowhugger;n9871261 said:
I mean, Mass Effect is fun, but Shepard doesn't become a PERSON until 3.

I didn’t find ME to be particularly fun. The first was playable, but the rest I couldn’t bother with.

Shepard is also a predefined character, though. He is always Shepard and acts and sounds and plays like it just like Geralt is always Geralt.

I found the the chosen one from Fallout 2, the vault dweller from Fallout, and the courier from New Vegas much more lively, personalised, interesting and fun to play than neither Geralt nor Shepard nor Jensen from Deus Ex because I had a say in who they were and who they became. I didn’t just follow a script of the hero (like I do in every story driven game RPG or not), I helped create both, the story and the protagonist and the games and their stories reacted to it.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9872491 said:
I didn’t find ME to be particularly fun. The first was playable, but the rest I couldn’t bother with.

Shepard is also a predefined character, though. He is always Shepard and acts and sounds and plays like it just like Geralt is always Geralt.

I found the the chosen one from Fallout 2, the vault dweller from Fallout, and the courier from New Vegas much more lively, personalised, interesting and fun to play than neither Geralt nor Shepard nor Jensen from Deus Ex because I had a say in who they were and who they became. I didn’t just follow a script of the hero (like I do in every story driven game RPG or not), I helped create both, the story and the protagonist and the games and their stories reacted to it.

Matter of taste and all that, but personally I found the role playing aspects of the original Fallouts sharing the same problems I had with many other classic role playing games, in that they for me felt extremely limited and boring. Most of the times your dialogue options are either limited to the nicest guy you ever met or twisted ploughing psychopath with some neutral option in between. Plus the game actively discourages you from playing as a bad guy by eventually blocking over 90% of content if you got a really bad reputation, which leaves you most of the time with only one or two valid options, thus way too often making you feel like you are playing as a guy with bipolar disorder who switches between two extremes. IMO games like Bloodlines and Alpha Protocol (despite having a set protagonist) did this aspect much better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom