What do you think the "Tactical Mode" will be about?(will it be something like VATS?)

[Guest 4149880]

I think the idea of lethal combat in 2077 is that every action the player makes, will have repercussions, good and bad. If you're a reckless player and end up getting shot up and severely injured, it will require long recovery periods, it might require medical attention, possible emergency surgeries. Loss of limbs or critical conditions. Injecting super serum for health just doesn't fit this world. How deep will they go in terms of gameplay when it comes to recovery from these combat scenarios.

When it comes to death in 2077, it doesn't quite make sense to simply kill the player off just to have the player hit "Reload" and do something else. Of course death should be possible but will it be permanent or will death be somehow changed for the sake of gameplay. Every time the player dies, they become more and more machine with permanent loss of humanity. If they handle death in the traditional sense, and just reload the game from a moment before. Fine but I think it could be more in some form.

I think if the game ends up using more or less basic combat features, its the combat and recovery system that will prove how much and how far the player can go. Putting limits on the game being a run and gun FPS which is not what 2077 should be.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Let the FPS folks have what they love, full control, and the RPG folks what they love, character control.

Oh hey, someone made a video with some concrete examples for your "dual mode" (although it's aimed at making Fallout great again, but no reason it shouldn't fit here too). Starting at 18:10 mark.

 

[Suhiira]

Oh hey, someone made a video with some concrete examples for your "dual mode" (although it's aimed at making Fallout great again, but no reason it shouldn't fit here too).

Lots of good ideas/concepts here.
Thanks for finding and posting this link!

Tho I'd prefer not to see "survival" and "extreme gear wear/breakage" as central game concepts. They should certainly exist, as options one can toggle or adjust when one starts a game. But too often I've seen it taken "to far" so the game pretty much revolves around obtaining food/drink/gear and any mission or story takes second place. And a limited (by volume, mass, or number of items) inventory system just makes this worse. Realistic ... yes ... but not "fun", it quickly becomes a repetitive chore. This is fine, even desirable, in a game focused on "survival", but not in a game that's not.

Doesn't really matter what game such a combat system is used in, it's the idea of taking advantage of the strengths, and popularity, of each system rather then compromising both with some hybrid system, or alienating one group or the other by going fully one direction or the other as the only option. Being able to swap between systems on the fly is just fine in a strictly single-player game, but if there's a multi-player component this just won't work, both systems can't function at the same time because of inherently opposed game mechanics.

 

[Deviatee]

I'm thinking it'll turn 2077's combat into some sort of turn-based system with an isometric or top-down view. Perhaps a tribute to its pen and paper roots.

 

[Suhiira]

I'm thinking it'll turn 2077's combat into some sort of turn-based system with an isometric or top-down view. Perhaps a tribute to its pen and paper roots.

Highly doubtful.
I just pray there's an option for something besides FPS (player centered) combat for those of us that want to play and RPG (character centered).

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I'm thinking it'll turn 2077's combat into some sort of turn-based system with an isometric or top-down view. Perhaps a tribute to its pen and paper roots.

That’d be awesome, but yeah, as said above it’s unlikely.

The pessimist in me says to expect just some sort of boring glorified bullet-time gimmick or something else similiarly sighworthy, if it is a thing at all anymore. The optimist, though, wants to wait and see because there really is a boatload of ways of doing it ’right’.

I’m leaning more towards the pessimist side, though, because it has history of being more right than wrong (and the example just seems more trendy than something leaning towards the classical side of RPG’s).

 

[Decatonkeil]

I'm not a fan of VATS or of any videogame RPG that tries to do two things as different as a real time and turn based combat system to please both crowds (Arcanum). It rarely works and ends up super imbalanced.
I hope it's more of a way to manage the rest of our party which we won't be directly controlling. Telling them where to move, who or where to focus their attacks on, where to take cover, asking for suppressive fire or diversions etc. while the main combat is done in a more action way controlling our own main character.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I don’really care about little balance problems here and there if the benefit is more versatile and mechanically interesting RPG gameplay. I do get bored fast, if the offered gameplay differs little if at all from its multitude of peers all around the market. That’s why I very rarely buy modern AAA games anymore. There’s so little for me, that the cost outweighs the benefits.

 

[OddSockSR]

No one like VATS it seems.

 

[Snowflakez]

No one like VATS it seems.

I think its more that people see it as a crutch-y way of implementing an "RPG" combat system. Instead, it fails to interest me at all and takes me out of the game.

I think a lot of us would prefer an actual RPG combat system as an alternative to the FPS/shooter style of games like Fallout 4 and such.

 

[OddSockSR]

I think its more that people see it as a crutch-y way of implementing an "RPG" combat system. Instead, it fails to interest me at all and takes me out of the game.

I think a lot of us would prefer an actual RPG combat system as an alternative to the FPS/shooter style of games like Fallout 4 and such.

I'm definitely with you on that and I think tactical mode would be similar to X-com as another guy stated up there.

 

[S3r1ous]

if its about gameplay more, remember the amazing MGSR demo

 

[Snowflakez]

if its about gameplay more, remember the amazing MGSR demo

How does this relate to a tactical mode?

 

[S3r1ous]

if its about gameplay more, remember the amazing MGSR demo

Well one of the ideas is that you sort of slow down time and slice enemies, cars, environment to pieces, tactical

 

[S3r1ous]

its quite similar idea to VATS actually, but executed completely differently(have direct control over actions)

 

[Snowflakez]

No thanks. If we're going to have a tactical mode, it should be a true RPG mode. Not an active slashing/directional combat system. That's not tactical...That's action. It's like saying Mount & Blade's combat is tactical because its directional.

 

[S3r1ous]

VATS doesnt even give you control, you have to click things DURING slowmo, doesnt make any sense, why not give complete control, what RPG elements will that break
you are right thou, its a balancing act of whats needed
ultimately it should fit into the cyberpunk "powers" etc

 

[Snowflakez]

VATS doesnt even give you control, you have to click things DURING slowmo, doesnt make any sense, why not give complete control, what RPG elements will that break
you are right thou, its a balancing act of whats needed
ultimately it should fit into the cyberpunk "powers" etc

Complete control is not compatible with a true RPG. Su can weigh in on this better than I, but essentially, if the player is pointing and shooting and there's no skills checking whether or not you hit, you're playing an FPS - an action game. Not an RPG.

You can have Action RPGs, of course, but that's already what 2077 is going to be more than likely. Tactical mode can be and should be different.

 

[Suhiira]

<clip> if the player is pointing and shooting and there's no skills checking whether or not you hit, you're playing an FPS - an action game. Not an RPG.

That's pretty much it.
Is the player in control = Action/FPS.
Is the character in control = RPG.

 

[Guest 4149880]

Well, no one has really made the clear distinction of specifically how they think Cyberpunk 2077 as an RPG is supposed to actually play compared to it being an action game, vice versa or both mixed.

I expect the game to play in real time action TPP/FPP, but character's actions and results will change, based on/and governed by RPG mechanics, such as characters performance, offence and defense.

I still believe RPG/Real time mechanics can co exist very well. And I expect this with 2077.