Turn Based Combat or Shooter ?

+
But it should be more than that. You should be able to target specific locations (weak spots) on someones body. Similar to both Splinter Cell and Alpha Protocol. (I think at least some of the Splinter Cell games had a system like that. Where you can stop or slow down time and target someone.)

Yeah.. That seems a bit too close to copying other games, don't you think? And i'm not even sure if it would work as well as it did in those games.. I mean, sure, they have a lot more advanced tech in Cyberpunk, but i would rather aim the weapon myself.
 
But it should be more than that. You should be able to target specific locations (weak spots) on someones body. Similar to both Splinter Cell and Alpha Protocol. (I think at least some of the Splinter Cell games had a system like that. Where you can stop or slow down time and target someone.)
The problem there is that you are refereing to mechanics that use semi-automatic weapons. When you step that up to automatic or melee weapons, it just doesn't transfer very well.

If a multiplayer option is brought it, how would this work in that environment?

Bullet time, (or some other slow-mo mechanicism,) can work in multiplayer, (as shown in Max Payne 3,) and the slow motion gives you plenty of time to aim shots at locations.
 
The problem there is that you are refereing to mechanics that use semi-automatic weapons. When you step that up to automatic or melee weapons, it just doesn't transfer very well.

If a multiplayer option is brought it, how would this work in that environment?

Bullet time, (or some other slow-mo mechanicism,) can work in multiplayer, (as shown in Max Payne 3,) and the slow motion gives you plenty of time to aim shots at locations.

It does work well enough in Fallout though, doesn't it? All i want is a combination of that system and the one in Alpha Protocol. And they can always turn that function off for multiplayer. (If there is a multiplayer.)

I do like your bullet time idea. But i also feel it is a bit too overused. (And games like COD, abused the heck out of slowmo.)
 
It does work well enough in Fallout though, doesn't it? All i want is a combination of that system and the one in Alpha Protocol. And they can always turn that function off for multiplayer. (If there is a multiplayer.)

I do like your bullet time idea. But i also feel it is a bit too overused. (And games like COD, abused the heck out of slowmo.)

Personally, I am not a fan of the VATS system, mainly because it removes player skill from the equation.

If the function is turned off during any multiplayer action then there is no point having it in the game.

Alpha protocol was fine in this respect. You still had to aim for yourself and there was a timer on the slow motion.

personally, I would be more than happy with the classic Max Payne slow-mo.
 
It does work well enough in Fallout though, doesn't it? All i want is a combination of that system and the one in Alpha Protocol. And they can always turn that function off for multiplayer. (If there is a multiplayer.)

I do like your bullet time idea. But i also feel it is a bit too overused. (And games like COD, abused the heck out of slowmo.)

When i first started playing Fallout 3, (and i love Fallout 3) i thought VATS was really awesome. But never used it ever again after exiting the vault. It is way more fun playing without it. Although i do remember using it while using sniper rifle a few times for perfect head shots.

Personally, I am not a fan of the VATS system, mainly because it removes player skill from the equation.

If the function is turned off during any multiplayer action then there is no point having it in the game.

Alpha protocol was fine in this respect. You still had to aim for yourself and there was a timer on the slow motion.

personally, I would be more than happy with the classic Max Payne slow-mo.

It doesn't really take skill out of the question. As far as i know, both the damage and the accuracy still depends on your skills and stats.

Also, as i'm kinda against the idea of a system like VATS, (maybe against is not the right word for it) i wouldn't mind a system like the one in Alpha Protocol.. That game was awesome!
 
Personally, I am not a fan of the VATS system, mainly because it removes player skill from the equation.

If the function is turned off during any multiplayer action then there is no point having it in the game.

Alpha protocol was fine in this respect. You still had to aim for yourself and there was a timer on the slow motion.

personally, I would be more than happy with the classic Max Payne slow-mo.

While i'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with you, i still feel having VATS as an available (optional) software in the game, wouldn't really hurt the game itself. Make it something hard to get if you have to.. It would still be fun.
 
While i'm neither agreeing or disagreeing with you, i still feel having VATS as an available (optional) software in the game, wouldn't really hurt the game itself. Make it something hard to get if you have to.. It would still be fun.

I'm all for options.. But still, VATS wasn't even that useful. And how hard are we talking about it here? Why would we have hard time getting such a software?
 
(Quietly moves the thread back to the Cyberpunk section, as it looks like we are get a game-related discussion after all)
 
A nice compromise if is going to be third/first person approach is have an hotkey that switch for a moment in a tactical menu....

Example... You have to deal with some gang on the street that try to ambush you (in case you have companions and the game allow it) you hit spacebar and the camera switch in a isometric wiew or a far wiew... In that manner you are able to tell to companions what to do... Move. there... take cover there... attack a dude....then you hit spacebar again and your followers make the exactly order your did...

About the combat... Always skill and stat based even if is real time ...
 
I am not disputing that some weapons from games we played 10 years ago or more were over powered.
I perfectly understand the principle of 'balanced weapons' in computer games.
Instagib does remove the majority of tactical play. Certainly when it comes down to weapon choices.

None of this changes the fact that technology has moved on. Games are not built around instagibs and hitscan one shots anymore. Actual projectiles have trajectories and you have to lead targets at range.

Also, your origional point was that "The most powerful weapons are the easiest to use." That is a very broad field that encompasses a lot more than just Quake and Unreal Tournament. So, I pointed out the flaw in your logic and I also stated that nowadays you need more skill to use more powerful weapons and weaker weapons are easier to use.

I am far from worried about any weapons in CP2077. For a start, the only weapon that would work in a hitscan way would be lasers, (which are not all that powerful in 2020 so I don't see them becoming mega weapons in the future.) CDPR produce games they want to play because they love games. They care about games and gamers. I really don't expect them to screw up the game by creating an uber-weapon that makes all others pointless.

No...balance doesn't concern weapons. Balancing is about setting a dilemma, like a trap with a powerful item inside and it's one of the final stages after map gameplay is built around core gameplay mechanics. It's in the risk/reward field but when it comes to weapons, that's core gameplay designers can't do anything about it and only castrate through the map when needed. My previous post was pointing out games don't rely only players' aiming skills 'cause that fucks tactical options (thus fucking game balance as well) and this doesn't add anything to core gameplay (which is about rules stating where you spawn, how fast can you move, jump, various core systems etc etc you can't touch).The super OP ut99 sniper rifle and the sniping spots with very few tactical options are great example of "castration" i suggest to see.
Long story short, you don't balance a game mode through core gameplay modification like weapons. You deal with weapons through an input and and output and in your "modern games" case, that's damage output you have to care about . 'Cause all "realistic" weapons are op weapons meant to kill some enemies with a single load. This, without considering the style of gameplay yet....
All these points about weapons you have brought up have nothing to do with the laser of death. That's what a weapon in a 3d shooter is meant for being powerful, while games depending only on stats don't follow this logic.

allow me to quote this bit....
None of this changes the fact that technology has moved on. Games are not built around instagibs and hitscan one shots anymore. Actual projectiles have trajectories and you have to lead targets at range.

Also, your origional point was that "The most powerful weapons are the easiest to use." That is a very broad field that encompasses a lot more than just Quake and Unreal Tournament. So, I pointed out the flaw in your logic and I also stated that nowadays you need more skill to use more powerful weapons and weaker weapons are easier to use.

Just look to what's wrong in this, 'cause it just doesn't work. What can you add to the argument stating "technology has moved on"? It's not even about "technology" in the first place, it's about rules that ut and quake games explored to get the most solid (due to their semplicity) gameplay ever known in shooters. That's why they are considered some of the best fps ever, quake in particular is immortal since it dealt not only with lots of tactical layers but even with hitscan weapons without fucking up aiming skills or one between mobility and movement speed unlike all other shooters. Told you the amount or quality of info (gameplay played in this case) is something different from validity of opinion. Quake is a una tantum kind of game which gameplay was squeezed all out and it's still unmatched to this day.
 
My main issue with VATS, as I said before, is the removal of player skill from the equation.

How about a compromise? What about an implant that 'highlights' targets and even individual body parts so that they are easier to individually target? Think of an overlay applied to a target under your crosshairs:

This overlay can then show individual areas of the target: upper torso, lower torso, limbs and obviously the head.

What we are left with is a real time version of VATS, (with no percentages but perhaps the name of the body location,) which I would suggest should last as long as the target remains within your field of view, (so as long as you face them, cover being unimportant.)
View attachment 1068

By highlighting the targets body part, you make them eaier to target. Combine this with a slow-mo mechanic and you get something pretty close to VATS but without removing player skill. The best part is that all of these elements can be added or taken away with a Modular HUD system.

Now, there is also the subject of Smartguns. The description of this technology in the Cyberpunk Rulebook would pretty much match the "Tracking Point" scope.

If you combine this element with individually targetted body parts, you really do have Real Time VATS.

(Quietly moves the thread back to the Cyberpunk section, as it looks like we are get a game-related discussion after all)
New game invented. "Thread Pong".
Let's see how many times we can get the thread moved!
 

Attachments

  • targeting.jpg
    targeting.jpg
    71.9 KB · Views: 53
My main issue with VATS, as I said before, is the removal of player skill from the equation.

Only if you choose to use it, the beautiful thing about vats is that you could always choose to just fight manually, which for meant a much better chance of hitting, and better damage.
 
Using V.A.T.S. has some serious drawbacks though; it's based on action points, and while the game does pause and allow you to let your character aim instead of doing it yourself, once you release the V.A.T.S., the action will continue, so your enemies will be moving and so on, and what's actually detrimental to you is the fact that you can't go into V.A.T.S. again, since you're out of action points.

Now you're left with having to fight in real time, but your enemy is already clawing your head off.

Also, V.A.T.S. doesn't give a rat's ass about the fact that your character may be shooting at the last pixel of a wall, instead of the intended target. It will still run through all of the actions given to it, and you've just basically killed yourself.

And finally, if your character's shooting skill is bad, V.A.T.S. is useless beyond three feet. You'll be getting shit like 23% to hit. Good luck with that. Meanwhile, you can shoot headshots at a mile if you've got the gear, regardless of your shooting skill. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, anyways, which is obviously what I'm talking about, since that's where V.A.T.S. is from.
 
For sure not pure shoter..... All things should be influenced by stats and skills.. not only implant..
 
Using V.A.T.S. has some serious drawbacks though; it's based on action points, and while the game does pause and allow you to let your character aim instead of doing it yourself, once you release the V.A.T.S., the action will continue, so your enemies will be moving and so on, and what's actually detrimental to you is the fact that you can't go into V.A.T.S. again, since you're out of action points.

Now you're left with having to fight in real time, but your enemy is already clawing your head off.

Also, V.A.T.S. doesn't give a rat's ass about the fact that your character may be shooting at the last pixel of a wall, instead of the intended target. It will still run through all of the actions given to it, and you've just basically killed yourself.

And finally, if your character's shooting skill is bad, V.A.T.S. is useless beyond three feet. You'll be getting shit like 23% to hit. Good luck with that. Meanwhile, you can shoot headshots at a mile if you've got the gear, regardless of your shooting skill. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, anyways, which is obviously what I'm talking about, since that's where V.A.T.S. is from.

Well, if your character sucks at shooting, don't use vats... if you suck at shooting sue vats... if both you and your character suck at shooting... well thats too bad...don't get in fights...
 
Well, if your character sucks at shooting, don't use vats... if you suck at shooting sue vats... if both you and your character suck at shooting... well thats too bad...don't get in fights...

Sue them? Isn't that a bit... how can I put this... corporate for a nomad?
 
Top Bottom