This is exactly my hope, and the kind of thing that should separate this game from Dues Ex: I can't go stealthy, so I have to just FUCK SHIT UP.
This is exactly my hope, and the kind of thing that should separate this game from Dues Ex: I can't go stealthy, so I have to just FUCK SHIT UP.
I think they should do something crazy like car-bosses. Normal Bosses are so overused in game industry. Also I wouldnt mind if there was mini-bosses.
Well said. Agreed entirely.
Regarding the Royce fight, my honest belief is that it was just a very early state, and the Sasquatch encounter is closer to what we can expect from the game's boss battles moving forward (avoidable, and at least believable). Particularly with the whole "you don't have to kill anyone" thing.
"Boss-fights" are fine. Every RPG had them in some way shape or form. What matters is to have them well implemented and designed according to the different paths of progression the character can take (since this is a solo\non party RPG)
You're playing a netrunner? Have it so you can hack the environment (turrets, bots etc) or even the boss.
A techie? Have your spiderbot capable of temporarily render him helpless.
A solo? You get the picture..
It dosen't have to have a deeper meaning. Sometimes one upping a powerful opponent by proper ability use (and prefered way of progression) is gratifying in itself -- if it's a free fight. If it's something like a boxing match, well, you'd better have your "boxing skills" (or multitude of skills and abilities that replace an abstract "boxing skill" stat) up to the task, though some hacking and sneaky stuff could potentially be used to lessen the gap --
This sounds good on paper but could be A LOT of work though, so if they do them like this, I'm not expecting to see too many "Boss-fights".
You're playing a netrunner? Have it so you can hack the environment (turrets, bots etc) or even the boss.
A techie? Have your spiderbot capable of temporarily render him helpless.
A solo? You get the picture..
It dosen't have to have a deeper meaning. Sometimes one upping a powerful opponent by proper ability use (and prefered way of progression) is gratifying in itself -- if it's a free fight. If it's something like a boxing match, well, you'd better have your "boxing skills" (or multitude of skills and abilities that replace an abstract "boxing skill" stat) up to the task, though some hacking and sneaky stuff could potentially be used to lessen the gap --
This sounds good on paper but could be A LOT of work though, so if they do them like this, I'm not expecting to see too many "Boss-fights".
Believable up until you start fighting her. The whole cavetroll act there is just ridiculous, and combine that with the rest of the platformer boss fight tropes like strictly coreographed movement patterns to dodge (even if you have ranged weapons at your disposal), ton of HP and glowing soft spots where you can damage her...
I’m not a sucker for realism, but I would like the features (especially big ones like these) and mechanics to make at least some amount of sense in the context of the setting.
It’s a tad confusing even, that CDPR apparently puts tons of attention to detail and ”immersion” factors, and yet they let these sorts of ridiculousness’ slip in. These nonsensical bosses, bullet stopping swords, mid air jumps, curving bullets... lord knows what else.
I mean, you obviously have to give gameplay fun some (even a lot of) leeway over ”realism”, and I don’t need 1-headshot kills or anything, but there are these things like verisimilitude and suspension of disbelief and these features I mentioned sound like they were just thrown in without a second thought. And it’s jarring to think, that, playing the game, among all the focused content, you suddenly bump into something that feels so blatantly out of place (mechanically, that is, for example the animal theme the Animals have going for them doesn’t bother me one bit; it’s a tad interesting even).
Anyhow, they aren’t changing those things be cause I and possibly a handful of other people (I remember Wisdom at least was not very happy about them) have some qualms with them. Most people obviously want exactly what they are being offered. But there it is anyway, the rant...
Last edited:
Levels, that 99% will gate enemies if not gear as well. And +X% DMG to bullets perks. What else do we need to know that the "immersion claim" was just a way to justify the FPP (and avoid the shitstorm as much as possible)?
BTW, as I stated in other occasions, I'm 100% in favour of boss battles and the varier they are the better. They need to make sense and be justified by narrative, but I like some climax here and there.
I’m not inherently against boss battles, but I really would like some creativity to be put in their design, and that they’d make mechanical and thematic sense. As much as I like that there are routes around them, the current way they are being handled for a character that does end up in combat with them comes off really really badly.
My guess on this is that perhaps, the "arcade-ey" boss fights is their mean of adding some "fun bits" to the game. So the whole experience don't go full Blade Runner depressing. But I join you on your posts, the more we learn about the game development, the more immersion promises tend to be half-assumed, that's... kinda sad. I'm 100% sure we can make a dark themed, immersive game and make a great game too, or at least one that avoid clichés like glowy targets and "here I come" attack patterns and still remain fun. If we wanted to have more "arcade fun" we still have plenty of those in our library... Don't need that in my CP77 though but whatever.
I believe the future of solo games is in "crossed-interactivity" and "AI awareness" (yeah the terms are invented) : where one object stops to exist for a unique function (generally it never pass 2-3 distinct functions), so it can be interacted with at multiple levels that the AI can recognize and react to. Simultaneously, the AI based characters stop being developed among what purpose they serve but starts to "realize" their situations and do something about it (this to be done to a certain extent, ofc this is just a game... not a life simulation). Yes it implies more work, but if you get your ground-level development right, everything will begin to overlap together without (major) problems, and you'll experience some true emerging gameplay, with diverse issues etc... It is important that both things (AI awareness and Crossed-Interactivity) works together, and I don't know if one game tried this concept yet, but the result is rewarding and makes games that truly belong to the new generation.
(I know my lat point may look shady, but I can come back later to show examples of how I see it working.)
But isn't that what they claim they will do for CP2077? The gameplay demo, towards the very end, had the narrator explicitly state there were multiple ways they could've solved that mission and the combat option was just one of many.
Your request also prompts me to highlight the fact that video games are not inherent simulations. Realism is only beneficial to video games to a certain extent, beyond that it will harm the gameplay systems the developers are trying to implement, and gameplay systems are what makes any video game "fun". You're obviously arguing for more immersion, but that comes at a cost and there needs to be a balance.
Looking through your criticisms, I'm having some trouble understanding some of your points here. First of all, why would you create a combat character and NOT want combat boss battles? What exactly is so immersion breaking about Royce going for a tactical retreat in order to suit up in his armored exoskeleton (with shields to mitigate projectiles) to take you out?
Last edited:
The point is specifically about the fights and how they are designed and conducted as arcade arena fights akin to ends of levels in platformers if and when a combat character is chosen.
Last edited:
I hope that when hacking a boss, or doing any kind of hacking anywhere in the game that time is stopped while inside the hacking process. I can't imagine ever getting an opportunity to hack the boss or hack during something dangerous happening because I will get killed if I'm not paying attention and hacking would probably take too long to ever making it worth risking it. I am interested in very fun and deep and complex hacking that is challenging, but not frustratingly impossible, and that type of hacking probably takes a good amount of time and effort to complete. Simultaneously, I also want to be able to hack everything, even in the moment. I think that time-stopping during hacking (relatively speaking) for V (main character) would thematically and canonically make sense because if the hacking process is going on inside of the computer parts of V's brain, high speed computing and the perception of that effort and information processing would make the rest of the world appear to slow down considerably or stop. There's also that "Kereshnikov" ability (totally misspelled that, I'm sorry) that when activated allows V to enter something similar to "bullet time". So we already know that it is well within the realm of canonical possibility that time can be perceptually slowed or frozen, so to me this would strongly and in an undebatable way of presenting that evidence confirm that this must be this way. I can't speak for CDProjektRed, but I feel beyond 100% confident that time must freeze during hacking, because it would break the game if it didn't. (Should I make a separate thread on this? and if I do, where would you suggest I post it?)
I also wanted to say that I
+1 everyone in this thread that I felt made very good points that made good sense, and I feel that their opinions should definitely be considered by CDProjektRed.
Yes, but your alternative suggestion of Royce ramming through a wall with a vehicle doesn't make any type of sense to me - I mean, how would a relatively low level punk like Royce even get access to a tank? You'd probably need to be a corporate exec at Militech to have that. This isn't to say that BMP-esque vehicles doesn't exist in this game, Royce was just a low level boss fight (probably an introductory boss), so there may be far more epic encounters later on in the game.
Arena fights are common for a reason: it is the most balanced way to allow the player to utilise the combat abilities the game makes available to them. You need room to move around and flank the enemies, and/or use the numerous abilities at your disposal, and likewise for the enemy. Within these confines, fight mechanics can be controlled but still allow some variety in how each fight turns out.
You have to think from the perspective of the developers. How do you please those who want strong combat mechanics as well as those who prefer a more avant-garde approach to the situation? It's not easy, and I'm sorry to say, but I would argue what you want is the minority opinion.
EDIT: Also, I do agree that not all boss fighs should be arena fights, and I doubt that will be the case in this game. Expect the majority to be, however (provided you've chosen the combat option).
Last edited:
It was an alternative to the exoskeleton, to underline the point of the near invulnerability Royce had even though his body was clearly exposed.
That there is a "space" where a fight takes place is not the crux of the problem, but how it happens there (as it has been presented thrice now) and why, is.
Both, Royce and Sasquatch... and also the scavenger gang boss, but without the "weakspot"... behave like marionets on a loop with shining "please hit me here" lights in their asses. The way the fights are set up mechanically is horrible, given the context. It's almost like suddenly you're playing a different game for a moment. It's an inorganic stop-motion moment in its bare simplicity and contextual incoherence.
I don't know why anyone would even want to make a combat character, if that's what they'd be encountering several times during the course of the game; dodging the puppets as they repeat their coreography over and over and shooting them in the convenient glowy spot.
That's my criticism of it. The execution. That's why I'm pushing for there to be more to the situation than simply that. That even if there is a "special" character there, the combat encounter isn't just a Mega Man style level ending.
I am, believe it or not.
The story of my whole history on these boards.
Although, in this specific case, I don't really know why people would oppose making the boss battles more... "organic" in their nature, if you will. Unless people are just absolutely in love with what's been shown and described so far.
Last edited:
He had a shield, which can only be disabled if you can take out the weak-spot. This is no different from your suggestion that they somehow "smoke" Royce out of his tank, which will expose him. Btw, that BMP battle you suggested is also an arena fight - it's just a bigger arena.
Except in Royce's case, it wasn't convenient at all. The weakspot will only be highlighted if you performed a scan prior to the fight, and there is the very likely possibility players may not even realise this and skip it. Not only that, even with the weak-spot highlighted it was located in his rear, so you have to somehow manoeuvre around him to get a clear shot, which will require some skill, or the right abilities to be unlocked.
It seems to me that this is purely a subjective criticism of how to boss battles should be, rather than an objective point of how the combat can be done better or poor/good game design. The system isn't "broken", and I fear you've simply faced far too many examples of poorly designed boss battles to see this. A well designed arena fight is fun and exciting.
This I also disagree with, and I have asked you this earlier. What is wrong with how the Royce fight is set up? He performed a tactical retreat and set himself up at the only exit out of the building, which he knew the PC will eventually reach. What is so nonsensical about this?
Then you'd understand that boss battles aren't just narrative moments, but also a "test" for the player to see if they have mastered all the game mechanics the game has introduced thus far. What you're suggesting disregards this concept, or finds it irrelevant.
Last edited:
I enjoy boss fights more when they do not feel like the arena they are in, is an arena. If I know it's an arena, I feel like it's already too late and I don't enjoy it any more. I instantly lose immersion.
It has to feel very realistic by the standards of the universe the game takes place inside of, and shouldn't instantly make it obvious or clear that the area the player is fighting the boss inside of is a designated "arena" I feel like the fights should go more natural and I should only realize at the end of the fight if I walk around that AFTER the fact I can say "Hmm this was an arena"
If that's how you want to look at it. There is always an element of subjectivity with these discussions, some filtering always needs to be done.
The point, however, was and is, that the arena fights as they are so far presented are very arcade in their nature (and I've explained in what manner), and I'd rather have them conducted in a more organic way both narratively and mechanically. That they don't seem like a cyclops waiting for the player at the end of a dungeon than then has to be hit in the eye during a very rigidly coreographed fight to kill it and finish the dungeon. If there's a "boss" in a hall after the dungeon, he should be there for a reason other than waiting specifically for the player to come and kill him, that he is there doing something and the event of "boss fight" is rather a "boss situation" where the "boss character" is not the point of it all, but just part of the situation.
There can be various logical reasons for this, one such reason is that if he knew where you'd eventually be, he can set up traps and modify the arena to his tactical advantage.
From a game design perspective, it is better to have him be the last opponent in that building because the game wants to "teach" or force you to use skills which it will be testing you on, in the eventual boss fight. Having the boss show up before then can be considered bad game design. For example, to get to Royce, the player had to navigate through his minions and there were platforming sections which allowed the player to utilise the double jump and strafe abilities, as well as scanning and hacking opportunities. These are abilities you'd need to use against Royce to best him.
But the maelstrom gang leader guy with the mech suit wasn't waiting there by accident, he was waiting there to get revenge on the player before they left the area for killing his gang with the corporate virus chip. Also, if a boss character isn't the point, and was just accidentally part of the situation, then players would be like "why is this even here?" but then they would think a level deeper and rationalize "well this is still technically a boss that was programmed into the game to wait for me here"
see what I mean?
Post automatically merged:
That is genius.
That is genius.
It's really just how boss battles are meant to be when done right. Credit goes to CDPR for a well designed boss encounter here.
This article explains it further:
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/134503/boss_battle_design_and_structure.php
I thought it was a great read when I discovered it. I highly recommend it for everyone in this thread.
Last edited: