Style over substance wins again! It's the future we're in, with celebrities famous for being celebrities, politicians with no ideals or ideas, and corporations that epitomise style over substance. Better to rebrand than change!
Style over substance wins again! It's the future we're in, with celebrities famous for being celebrities, politicians with no ideals or ideas, and corporations that epitomise style over substance. Better to rebrand than change!
It's like 88% cocoa Peruvian chocolate, sweet and bitter at the same time...
When you can construct an argument that can't be easily reduced to "But I like it this way!", I'll bother deconstructing it. Yours is a taste position, not a mechanics/style/function one. CDPR think that the Cyberpunk world works better for single player, so the focus can be on story, rather than constant buff/nerf balancing. The vast majority of CP2020 players would agree that, even if they might quite like an MMO of the same world, they'd like to play the single player game being offered. You can keep at it all you want, but this isn't a Bioware forum, where devs will happily swallow their principles and design ethics just to pander to the loudest complaints. Trust me, I already tried
So basically you are telling that they don't want to spend resources balancing roles nor maintaining an MMO gaming environment and infrastructure.
Well I say this: Too bad!
They haven't indicated any interest in that, Designer. None at all. Any more than an interest in spendig resources building a Cyberpunk city-simulation manager or a Cyberpunk space/atmo shooter or a Cyberpunk dating game.
Although those all sound pretty cool, but that's probably because Cyberpunk.
It's not too bad - it's just not what CDPR wants to do. i don't blame them - MMOs are really tricky and, typically, a lot less fun than a well-made RPG. Which is why we still await a true WoW-killer. Everything else has fallen short.
Although those all sound pretty cool, but that's probably because Cyberpunk.
It's not too bad - it's just not what CDPR wants to do. i don't blame them - MMOs are really tricky and, typically, a lot less fun than a well-made RPG. Which is why we still await a true WoW-killer. Everything else has fallen short.
No, he's saying that CDPR isn't going to throw out the last 2 years of development progress in favour of producing a completely different game in the same setting using a completely different engine and business model.
It's a Single Player with Multiplayer elements, (which have yet to be identified,) and it doesn't matter how much you want that to change, it won't.
Now, I am not a moderator, but I highly recommend that of you want to keep posting in this thread then it should be on topic. If you want to keep banging on about why you believe 2077 would be better as an MMO, then there are suitable threads for that, but this isn't one of then.
Oh my, is the MMO monkey in here too? *sigh*
That's a role we can happily eliminate: Jacked up, twinked out corpse-teabagger. Needs to go imho.
That's a role we can happily eliminate: Jacked up, twinked out corpse-teabagger. Needs to go imho.
Yea, banning me is the best way to ensure that I won't buy any game of this company in my life again. Also not for my children.
Nooo...I think Cap means the stereotypical MMO jackass that a large scale MMO often attract. You know the type - they populated Barrens chat with loud yells about genitalia and truly bad jokes while loot-stealing for their characters who already had waaay more gear than they needed.
We all played with those people and we all regretted it.
We all played with those people and we all regretted it.
What is with the MMO talk? CDPR has made it clear neither Witcher 3 nor '77 will be like an MMO. In fact they've stated their distaste for them on more than one occasion. I remember an interview where they said that the problem with RPG's nowadays was that they were taking cues from MMO's. This was all the way back before TW1 had released.
It's somewhat relevant ( TOPIC COPS HIDE) to the topic - MMO roles arguably distill the fantasy and game design tropes down to their essentials, outside character flavour.
For Cyberpunk, much of this debate is the viability of Roles like Rocker and Media in a game design and resources-cost sense. It is difficult to imagine them in-play in the current accepted gameplay world of shoot/sneak/chat, at least without being redundant.
For an RPG with multiple classes, especially a modern one, I often refer to Bloodlines. I feel it's more appropriate as a guideline than MMO class-design but, again, BL does not have a multiplayer concept at all.
In a multiplayer environment, MMO roles and classes become quite relevant - you see it now in games like Battlefield. The ability to heal is a nce gameplay change-up from everyone doing damage.
For Cyberpunk, much of this debate is the viability of Roles like Rocker and Media in a game design and resources-cost sense. It is difficult to imagine them in-play in the current accepted gameplay world of shoot/sneak/chat, at least without being redundant.
For an RPG with multiple classes, especially a modern one, I often refer to Bloodlines. I feel it's more appropriate as a guideline than MMO class-design but, again, BL does not have a multiplayer concept at all.
In a multiplayer environment, MMO roles and classes become quite relevant - you see it now in games like Battlefield. The ability to heal is a nce gameplay change-up from everyone doing damage.
Very true. Just about every MMO features the classic archetypes of the RPG character. It would be nice in 2077 to be able to build a custom 'class' based around a role, rather than taking a class and making it fit a role.
And yet, we all found a way to include all roles in a campaign... and we had fun.
In all of your examples you are forgetting one key characteristic of both sandbox and roleplay... that people do not always want a group or combat role. There are a lot of people who are at their most content just being a merchant, an entertainer, or even a "boss" who just delegates to a group. There are people who just enjoy having a job patrolling the land and fighting crime, without ever having to group with criminal elements.
Eliminating roles is just lazy game design. If an MMORPG is to succeed today it must think outside the box, be innovative, and meet the expectations of the target audience. A role does not have to work in one type of game mechanic (adventuring), it simply need to work in the game.
Aaah..actually..a lot of Refs discourage or flat out deny certain Roles, depending. Netrunner gets the chop fairly often. Cop, too, since most Teams operate on the dark side of the law.
Rockerboys are allowed but typically there is little to nothing Rocker-specific so they are a cross between a weak Solo and a weak Fixer.
Nomads are played rarely because most people just make a Solo and give him or her a cool bike.
Corporates are generally re-rolled into something more Team-appropriate, when they are allowed at all.
In my experience.
Edit: I'm not sure I'd say Witcher's spirit or heart is why I like it. I'm not sure that's inaccurate, though. More that I like W1 and 2 because the writing is great, the PC is minimal, the gameplay is fun and, oh yes, Geralt rocks.
Rockerboys are allowed but typically there is little to nothing Rocker-specific so they are a cross between a weak Solo and a weak Fixer.
Nomads are played rarely because most people just make a Solo and give him or her a cool bike.
Corporates are generally re-rolled into something more Team-appropriate, when they are allowed at all.
In my experience.
Edit: I'm not sure I'd say Witcher's spirit or heart is why I like it. I'm not sure that's inaccurate, though. More that I like W1 and 2 because the writing is great, the PC is minimal, the gameplay is fun and, oh yes, Geralt rocks.
So from what I've been reading everyone is very hung up on the exclusion/inclusion of roles or their viability as playable classes (I haven't played the pen and paper, just the witcher 1 and 2 and am really excited about this game, so I might be completely off base here). To me it seems like this wouldn't even be a problem, if the Roles are essentially "background" that has effects on the game and allows you to play it. The first few posts were pretty heavy about the exclusion of cops, but I really don't see it as a problem in the game- if its open world narrative there is going to be an overall story arc, so the game devs would have you select your Role at the start, and that determines base stats and some initial skills. Then, because there is a storyline and a beginning and end, you are *thrust* into a different setting. i.e. becoming a grey warden in DA:O. You can then skill in different ways according to how you play and missions change based on your decisions, but the overall arc stays the same.
So maybe everyone is forced to join the police and fight crime or whatever (or whatever story arc they come up with), but your initial Role determines your reactions to it, like maybe the cop gets dialogue and missions for being a cop and a criminal has to still become a cop or whatever but they can have quests where they use their criminal background to their advantage or turn the police into an extension of the criminal underworld...
And people can still play within the roles, if missions are designed for roles but still fit in the overall story arc, so if you don't want to fight you don't have to. Same problem, multiple ways to a solution.
Although, I wouldn't want this to be like Dragon Age, because that was too "good", your role was pre determined as a good guy, you couldn't play as a darkspawn and try to overthrow the world sort of thing. I am hoping for more open choices than just race and class, but I think Roles can still can be implemented in a way that doesn't make the game too heavy.
So maybe everyone is forced to join the police and fight crime or whatever (or whatever story arc they come up with), but your initial Role determines your reactions to it, like maybe the cop gets dialogue and missions for being a cop and a criminal has to still become a cop or whatever but they can have quests where they use their criminal background to their advantage or turn the police into an extension of the criminal underworld...
And people can still play within the roles, if missions are designed for roles but still fit in the overall story arc, so if you don't want to fight you don't have to. Same problem, multiple ways to a solution.
Although, I wouldn't want this to be like Dragon Age, because that was too "good", your role was pre determined as a good guy, you couldn't play as a darkspawn and try to overthrow the world sort of thing. I am hoping for more open choices than just race and class, but I think Roles can still can be implemented in a way that doesn't make the game too heavy.
I find this to be true for refs who host the game very linearly. In my campaigns I would work each role into the story. For me, it was not about a group adventure, but rather letting my RP crew assume a role in the Cyberpunk world. Which is how any MMO should be. In a role-play game, MMO specifically, I don't need to go out on missions if all I want to do is be a cop patrolling the streets or rock star performing a gig. My point is that not everyone in an MMORPG (or even PvP) wants to be some form of combat or group essential role.
I agree with everything you have to say, so long as I refuse to read the letters MMO. Which I do. Wonder why there's a blank spot at the end of that first sentence?
How do you host a game? That's a weird way to put it. CPunk isn't an online game. Yet. PnP games take place wherever - sometimes at the Ref's house, sometimes at a player's.
Anyway.
Although the idea of running a game that caters to individual player is great, outside a video game or very small group, that's massively time consuming. Let's say you have four players, each doing their own thing around the table. If each of the players takes a mere ten minutes of play time to do what they want with the Ref, it will be forty minutes from the beginning of each player's turn to the start of their next turn. 40 minutes.
Not really doable in a PnP sense. Play be email, sure. Some MUD or chat-based game where players interact primarily with each other and don't need a GM, sure.
But for PnP, it is usually about a group adventure. Individual plot lines show up, but trying to hand equal time to each player or each Role...how would you do that? I find it hard to believe certain Roles weren't slighted, probably by a lot, over the course of a campaign.
Anyway.
Although the idea of running a game that caters to individual player is great, outside a video game or very small group, that's massively time consuming. Let's say you have four players, each doing their own thing around the table. If each of the players takes a mere ten minutes of play time to do what they want with the Ref, it will be forty minutes from the beginning of each player's turn to the start of their next turn. 40 minutes.
Not really doable in a PnP sense. Play be email, sure. Some MUD or chat-based game where players interact primarily with each other and don't need a GM, sure.
But for PnP, it is usually about a group adventure. Individual plot lines show up, but trying to hand equal time to each player or each Role...how would you do that? I find it hard to believe certain Roles weren't slighted, probably by a lot, over the course of a campaign.
I have never banned any roles. I have made players have to justify roles and told them no when they could not. This was in the campaign I am running now.
Have limited skills to certain levels.
Have encouraged certain roles in a theme game but usually let the players make whatever they want then build the game around them.
No MMO has sucked me in the way EverQuest did. That was mostly the people I played with. The few I have tried since then were short lived. The way people act in game, and all the walkthroughs have robbed the fun for me.
Have limited skills to certain levels.
Have encouraged certain roles in a theme game but usually let the players make whatever they want then build the game around them.
No MMO has sucked me in the way EverQuest did. That was mostly the people I played with. The few I have tried since then were short lived. The way people act in game, and all the walkthroughs have robbed the fun for me.
You're right, it SHOULD, but it never is. Not everyone ends up being a min/maxed, but the vast majority do. The ame can be applied to PnP to a lesser extent, mainly because the power gamers often get avoided or warned off by the gm.
The fact is that the average level of stupidity in a given group of people is exponentially increased with the growth in size of said group. That is true of all walks of life.