I don't expect EVERY door to be openable in game, though it would be great to have the option, through modding and DLC, to open them. This could give almost unlimited depth to the game in the long term.
I don;t really get that... empty apartments and empty shops don;t really provide depth to me... in fact they just kind of reinforce the opposite actually.
I don;t believe I have ever seen a sandbox game where you could go in every building. Doing so doesn;t even really make any sense. Even games where the buildings are spread out, and not a densely packed city... games like fallout and RDR, sure you could go in a lot of buildings, but not all of them, not even most of them.
I see this on every open world game forum I go to, and it never makes sense to me in the slightest really. Now don;t get me wrong, I love exploring, I love going into buildings even if its just to see whats there, even if there isn;t anything really there. But it doesn;t ahve to be, nor should it be, every building. Oh look, it;'s identical apartment number 452....
There are so many things this game already has on the plate, things it has to get right, that this just seems like a wildly beyond the limits request. I mean can anyone point to a open world game where this has been done? Where even half the buildings in the open world were enterable?
I don;t believe I have ever seen a sandbox game where you could go in every building. Doing so doesn;t even really make any sense. Even games where the buildings are spread out, and not a densely packed city... games like fallout and RDR, sure you could go in a lot of buildings, but not all of them, not even most of them.
I see this on every open world game forum I go to, and it never makes sense to me in the slightest really. Now don;t get me wrong, I love exploring, I love going into buildings even if its just to see whats there, even if there isn;t anything really there. But it doesn;t ahve to be, nor should it be, every building. Oh look, it;'s identical apartment number 452....
There are so many things this game already has on the plate, things it has to get right, that this just seems like a wildly beyond the limits request. I mean can anyone point to a open world game where this has been done? Where even half the buildings in the open world were enterable?
Imagine being able to stash gear in abandoned shops or apartments. Imagine being able to use a tool like RedKit to turn an abandoned building into a secret corporate R&D facility. Imagine being a theif, robbing almost everyone in the damn game.
The potential becomes ever more open.
Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout 3 and New Vegas. All these games have 90% of the buildings&homes enterable. Hell, Deus Ex HR had most of the buildings enterable and you could even take down a wall or two to enter a place. (Or door, if you are old fashioned)
Red faction 3 had everywhere enterable and you could utterly destroy everything.
Some very nice points there.
It was you.. It was your dream long time coming. And you've said, on many occasions, you will brutally kill yourself if this doesn't happen.. That you did.
Harsh (and I thought I was mean), but true- unless there's some gameplay or utility to be offered by entering a building, it doesn't make sense to have ability to do so. Personally, I hate the decorated room syndrome in games, where nothing exists but furniture and a few game items.
Also, if you're keen on modding, then you can mod empty spaces into the game world yourself.
The whole point of open world games are exploration. If you don't want any location that doesn't have gameplay, you should play linear games instead, open world games are not for you. Also, what makes you guys think those spaces will be empty?
Nah. Open world games are about spontaneity and surprise and options! I never explored all or more than half of any GTA game, Skyrim, whatever. Because it was boring after a certain point.
I mean, I like exploration, seeing what the devs did..but very, very, very often what they did was a repeat and a few textures. Du-ll.
Now if we had some crazy open-world game with dynamic AI and detailed areas that were subject to change and time, sure! Give me it all! But that is a truly, truly massive investment of time and resources for a city like Night City. Not practical.
Do the basic math on even a dozen apartment buildings, each with ten floors of ten apartments. That's 1200 separate areas, complete with detail, NPC Ai, etc.
Nope, not gonna happen until we get some kind of self-generating virtual worlds. Not to any non-bland extent, anyway.
I mean, I like exploration, seeing what the devs did..but very, very, very often what they did was a repeat and a few textures. Du-ll.
Now if we had some crazy open-world game with dynamic AI and detailed areas that were subject to change and time, sure! Give me it all! But that is a truly, truly massive investment of time and resources for a city like Night City. Not practical.
Do the basic math on even a dozen apartment buildings, each with ten floors of ten apartments. That's 1200 separate areas, complete with detail, NPC Ai, etc.
Nope, not gonna happen until we get some kind of self-generating virtual worlds. Not to any non-bland extent, anyway.
There is such a thing as random area generator. Back in the day, some games like Neverwinter Nights 1-2 and a few other games used them. (Even Diablo 2 had a similar system like that... Perhaps not as similar...) All you would need are some basic tilesets. (Sizes and shapes for apartments would be predetermined) And texture sets would help too. Also, you could randomize props and randomized texture sets would help as well. So, no two buildings and apartments would look like each other. You talk as if it's never been done before. AI is a bit more tricky. It could work like it does in Skyrim, but it is a bit too simple for my taste. (It works like; sit if you are close to a chair, sleep if you are close to a bed, have a conversation if you are close to an other NPC and so on.)
I agree it would take much work, but it is not impossible.
Hm. Pulling from "random" generators (or pre-fab templates) would be the way I'd do random building floorplans, too, but do we expect the floorplans to be static?
If I visit an apartment complex once, I expect the floorplan to stay the same on each visit, as well as the wallpaper / furniture layout remaining the same, as well.
Well..it's never been done before?
Not detailed, interesting, alive areas, nope! Not on a city scale. Not even close, that I can think of. Pleaaaaase prove me wrong, I'd love to play that game.
Not much is random and "randomly" built rooms and dungeons look just like that - random. Still no one has ever tried it on the scale of Night City.
I'd love it if they could - I think I've said i'd even give up vehicles if I could have a great, complex, detailed walkable city. Slim and I, for example, are in the faction that wants a smaller but hyper-detailed and interactable "city" - really a dozen blocks or so would be okay. Two dozen?
But we won't get that level of detail and I'd rather not give up cars or hijacking AVs for another fifty hours of same-same. Or have less cyberware or whatever choice set they picked that made it more like Oblivion and less like Grand theft Auto.
Not detailed, interesting, alive areas, nope! Not on a city scale. Not even close, that I can think of. Pleaaaaase prove me wrong, I'd love to play that game.
Not much is random and "randomly" built rooms and dungeons look just like that - random. Still no one has ever tried it on the scale of Night City.
I'd love it if they could - I think I've said i'd even give up vehicles if I could have a great, complex, detailed walkable city. Slim and I, for example, are in the faction that wants a smaller but hyper-detailed and interactable "city" - really a dozen blocks or so would be okay. Two dozen?
But we won't get that level of detail and I'd rather not give up cars or hijacking AVs for another fifty hours of same-same. Or have less cyberware or whatever choice set they picked that made it more like Oblivion and less like Grand theft Auto.
Your save is could hold all that information, no problem. The reason i gave Diablo 2 example was mostly because, even though area layout was randomly generated, it would remember the layout next time you visit. And in Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 and New Vegas, chests, closets, etc, would remember the randomly generated items in them. (Unless it is set to reset after a while) And as you well know, you can unload/drop all your gear to floor in a location and it will stay there forever.
Once in Skyrim, i was carrying too much and i could barely move, so i dropped two swords, a bow, and 4 Stormcloak armors in Battle-born house, after i completed the quest i completely forgot about it. After a month and over 40 saves, i accidentally revisited the place. Everything i dropped was still there. Also in Whiterun castle, i walked over the dining table and all the food felled to the floor, and when i revisited everything was still on floor. No one bothered to clean up.. What a shame.
Glad you partially agree. Or is it the other way around? With you i can never tell.. Why you have to defend both side of the argument at once.. Dammit Sard...
There are many reasons for a why a game environment exists, but primarily it is to provide a space in which the game can be played; it's not a playground or a sandbox, it's a playing field- it has rules, conditions, and objectives.
I'm talking about games here, not simulated interactive spaces, so that's why deciding how the environment facilitates gameplay should be prioritized before worrying about player autonomy, aesthetics or creative expression within the game environment.
Exploration and other such aspects fall under the kind of gameplay expected in role-playing games, but even in conventional PnP games, exploration comes at a cost, and results in a "reward", which can favour the player or not.
Essentially, if the exploration doesn't result in a reward or a penalty with regards to gameplay, then you're not playing a game, you're viewing a "movie".
In fact, all player actions should come at a cost, and dropping your equipment willy-nilly in the world and expecting it to be a-ok should not be an action facilitated by the game space.
Massive globs of environment which exists solely for the purpose of "empty exploration", facilitating player autonomy, or aesthetic reasons don't make sense in the bigger picture of the game world, and as such are unnecessary; a lot of open-world games suck because they incorporate useless globs of environment where there's much ado about nothing.
So that's why a game space needs to have all the essential components, in its environment and surroundings, which will facilitate various and numerous aspects of gameplay, and then incorporate spaces which allow exploration within those "useful" areas.
I'm not against exploration, I just think it should be done in a way that isn't meaningless to the game; it might be meaningful to the player to roam around or use the game space without risk or failure, but how is that proper gameplay?
Tl;dr: massive globs of environment which just exist to be viewed, and not played in, are not good game spaces.
I'm talking about games here, not simulated interactive spaces, so that's why deciding how the environment facilitates gameplay should be prioritized before worrying about player autonomy, aesthetics or creative expression within the game environment.
Exploration and other such aspects fall under the kind of gameplay expected in role-playing games, but even in conventional PnP games, exploration comes at a cost, and results in a "reward", which can favour the player or not.
Essentially, if the exploration doesn't result in a reward or a penalty with regards to gameplay, then you're not playing a game, you're viewing a "movie".
In fact, all player actions should come at a cost, and dropping your equipment willy-nilly in the world and expecting it to be a-ok should not be an action facilitated by the game space.
Massive globs of environment which exists solely for the purpose of "empty exploration", facilitating player autonomy, or aesthetic reasons don't make sense in the bigger picture of the game world, and as such are unnecessary; a lot of open-world games suck because they incorporate useless globs of environment where there's much ado about nothing.
So that's why a game space needs to have all the essential components, in its environment and surroundings, which will facilitate various and numerous aspects of gameplay, and then incorporate spaces which allow exploration within those "useful" areas.
I'm not against exploration, I just think it should be done in a way that isn't meaningless to the game; it might be meaningful to the player to roam around or use the game space without risk or failure, but how is that proper gameplay?
Tl;dr: massive globs of environment which just exist to be viewed, and not played in, are not good game spaces.
This game is going to be open world, that much is confirmed. It is also going to be a sandbox game. Also, you talk more like a FPS player than a RPG player. In a true RPG game, exploration is everything and never without a reward. (Size of that reward depends on the place.) You can find money, weapons, armor, clothing, valuables, as well as many other lootables in a location. Many quest related NPC's would go to their respectable homes at night, where you could talk with them for quest related stuff and which would also give you many interesting importunities for hiding in their house, waiting for them and killing them in their sleeps and get rid of the body without anyone knowing. (It is been said authorities will be aware of the crimes you publicly committed, so they will never forget your face) So, there is no such a thing as unusable area.. If an NPC stays there for day and night, without ever going anywhere, that game is totally and utterly dated crap.
There are different types of sandboxes, there's the Garry Mod type of sandbox and there's the HK city type like in Sleeping Dogs, and the best guess is that Night City is going to be closer to the latter type.
The HK type sandboxes don't allow unlimited player freedom- they have restrictions, guidelines, and conditions. As it concerns NPCs, there were countless NPCs with life cycles in HK, but why should all of them allow you into their houses? If the point of allowing access to buildings is to simulate reality, then it doesn't make sense within those sets of rules to allow players to go barging into random houses.
I would expect the savvy denizens of Night City to come equipped with anti-player-barging-in-their-house security measures, that's why I don't think we should expect access to an unlimited or a great number of inner building areas which are unrelated to the overall game.
There was some building exploration in Deus Ex HR, but overall it was useless for gameplay as being able to go into some random apartment didn't enhance or hinder the overall gameplay. I'm saying Night City could do it better- exploration should come at a cost, and result in either penalties or rewards or both.
If you're talking about "true RPGs", then you have to look at the PnP games. Do they ever allow unlimited exploration which is without risk or penalty? Whoever you're playing with would get tired as hell waiting for you to go from room to room in a sky scraper, collecting loot.
I also dislike the idea of "reward" being translated in material items- I think exploration should be rewarded by access to new gameplay elements, new NPCs, or anything other than just loot. So...yeah.
The HK type sandboxes don't allow unlimited player freedom- they have restrictions, guidelines, and conditions. As it concerns NPCs, there were countless NPCs with life cycles in HK, but why should all of them allow you into their houses? If the point of allowing access to buildings is to simulate reality, then it doesn't make sense within those sets of rules to allow players to go barging into random houses.
I would expect the savvy denizens of Night City to come equipped with anti-player-barging-in-their-house security measures, that's why I don't think we should expect access to an unlimited or a great number of inner building areas which are unrelated to the overall game.
There was some building exploration in Deus Ex HR, but overall it was useless for gameplay as being able to go into some random apartment didn't enhance or hinder the overall gameplay. I'm saying Night City could do it better- exploration should come at a cost, and result in either penalties or rewards or both.
If you're talking about "true RPGs", then you have to look at the PnP games. Do they ever allow unlimited exploration which is without risk or penalty? Whoever you're playing with would get tired as hell waiting for you to go from room to room in a sky scraper, collecting loot.
I also dislike the idea of "reward" being translated in material items- I think exploration should be rewarded by access to new gameplay elements, new NPCs, or anything other than just loot. So...yeah.
Did you ever really explore those apartments in Deus Ex HR? Some of my most memorable and funny moments was while exploring. I remember in one of the apartments, there were traps, rigged explosives, everything was to protect a safe in the other room. I broke the password of the keypad in the front door, i got passed some of the traps, but barely. But in the end, entering the room without triggering something proved too difficult, so i had to go trough a wall. It was fun as hell. But then, owner of the house comes back. I quickly opened the safe and got my loot and escaped without he ever knowing i was there. It was awesome. (I also remember Sard liking and mentioning a similar exploration in DXHR. It is quite memorable. But i'm guessing you didn't explore much did you?)
Also, since when you need them to allow you into their houses for breaking&entering? Its not like you are going to say "Hello, they hired me to murder you, could you please open the door?" Also, if you are doing that when they are at home, you should be ready for the consequences. And if you are there for a quest, even better.
And PnP is a terrible example for these kind of games because you cannot play PnP alone. Since you are playing with a group of people, your exploring cannot interfere with their gaming. GM will definitely not allow you to do such a thing. Also, you cannot truly explore something that you can't see. Your imaginary exploration could only take you so far. This is not the case with the video games. And no, those restrictions in games like Sleeping Dogs are not there simply to limit freedom, they are there because they are convenient. And the game is mostly about cars and gang relations. And it is also a terrible example since it is not an RPG game. We are talking about a Cyberpunk game that is open world, sandbox roleplaying game. Does it sound unique? Because it is. (I mean, come on, you can't even keep your sidearm in SD. How is that realistic?)
And you can somehow talk about realism and say there should be a unrealistic restrictions on freedom at same time. While Cyberpunk is all about freedom.
That up there is a good example of how exploring is tied into gameplay (which is exactly what I am asking for) because the part of the game you're describing above is tied into an optional objective or one of the storylines for DE. This is different from having two hundred rooms which are filled with nothing but furniture, and an item here or there, which is what the posts in the last two pages were mentioning. I think there was also an insistence for empty space.
Okay, you're just making straw man arguments here- go back, and read what I wrote, then talk.
If we're just talking about the realism of the environments, then it doesn't matter if the game is an FPS or RPG.
It also doesn't matter whether you're playing the game alone or with others, the point was that exploration which is meaningless to the game is discouraged, cumbersome, or risky in "true" RPGs. For example, in BG you are likely to die faster than you can take two seconds to collect your thoughts if you just go wandering to look for loot.
This is a nonpoint- I'm talking about making exploration meaningful for a game. Dude, if you're not going to talk on point, then it's not worth it.
And unrealistic restrictions? Seriously?
You being unable to enter a place because they didn't invite you in (Or the way you say it allow you in) is unrealistic. For gods sake, what are you, a vampire or something? Since when do you need permission to rob a place. And setting rules just to restrict freedom is unrealistic as well. Since when putting rules and restriction against committing a crime is realism? (Thats what i've called unrealistic, not your other points.)
I never said that. Did you ever read a post where i've said i wanted 100's of empty rooms to explore? (How does that even make sense?) NPC's should react to your presence if they see you in their home. Some should even try to shoot you or call the cops.
I'm not the one who makes straw man arguments here. You're saying there should be rules for the rules sake. Which does not make sense. Your point on "NPC's wouldn't allow you to enter their homes" is irrelevant. Not all of them are going to be home. You can sneak in. Or you may just break the door and kill whomever is inside. (Depending on what kind of person you are playing as.) Or they could be expecting you.. You may never know...
You kind of missed my point there. Thats a PnP mechanic (is it right to call it a mechanic? No matter.) to prevent the group straying too far from the story. In a PnP RPG, also, there isn't much to explore, since everything is limited to what the player and the GM can imagine. And GM would be irritated if players would constantly interrupt the story to explore and loot in the area. Of course GM isn't going to make it easy. Same mechanic cannot apply to video games. I mean, come on, it is retarded to think you would be always in danger. (Don't get this wrong, i would never call you retarded) Main story line cannot be safer than the exploration areas. LVL11 boss attacks you an you kill him with great skill, but LVL2 dude in the exploration area can kill you easily. Is that realism?
And I wait with baited breath for how CDPR will handle this. I think it's relevant to look at one similarity:
TW2 - three main areas accessed as the story progresses.
TW3 - three main areas accessed all at once.
They are sticking with a similar approach and then expanding it. If they take this idea of separate regions for '77, they can not only create diverse environments, but they can give the impression of a city that seems to live beyond the areas we explore. Also, the idea of free roaming with cars and such in a fully dynamic future city sounds beyond awesome, but keep in mind devs like Ubisoft and Rockstar have huge teams creating similar games, sometimes 1000+ people. Right now CDPR has around 40 people on '77, and after TW3 launches the rest will move over to make a team of hopefully 150-200. Logistics.
TW2 - three main areas accessed as the story progresses.
TW3 - three main areas accessed all at once.
They are sticking with a similar approach and then expanding it. If they take this idea of separate regions for '77, they can not only create diverse environments, but they can give the impression of a city that seems to live beyond the areas we explore. Also, the idea of free roaming with cars and such in a fully dynamic future city sounds beyond awesome, but keep in mind devs like Ubisoft and Rockstar have huge teams creating similar games, sometimes 1000+ people. Right now CDPR has around 40 people on '77, and after TW3 launches the rest will move over to make a team of hopefully 150-200. Logistics.