FPP only cutscenes might be a deal-breaker for me

[SigilFey]

Okay, we're starting to take on that edge, once again. This is a general warning to remain respectful of all others at all times. If you don't care for something, you are free to argue your views.

Don't attempt to put words in other people's mouths. Don't make accusations, and don't try to tell others what they should or should not be thinking. Feel free to express your thoughts based upon your opinion (and those who support it). The opposite opinions are just as welcome. No one is right, and no one is wrong. Not how it works.

In the end, CDPR will release their vision of the game...not everyone else's. Everyone is free to like it or dislike for what it is. No one is free to start pointing fingers because they didn't get their way.

 

[Mebrilia]

Not that I recall it wasn't. The paraphrase comes from this quote:



Want to is not will.


IMO this is still true. It may not be as much customization as many like, but it is still a full born character creator with appearance, background and stat based customization.


IMO this one is true too. But we've run circles around what makes an RPG before. To keep it short. Stats and TPP do not equal RPG. Making choices as a character within the game and experiencing story consequences as that character based on choices are what make an RPG. That's what role playing is. Making choices as a character and experiencing consequences based on our choices. That clearly is the focus of this game.

Thank you for finding for me that quote because honestly many people accused me about lies when i mentioned that. Indeed that was the intention but you can also agree the end result is nothing even remotely similiar to the pen and paper. They just took all the pen and paper system scrapped it out, adapted some skill all combat and stealth related then building on that and going in the opposite direction.
This is not an adaptation is not even an attemptent to an adaptation it is just create a whole new thing despite what it was in the systems on the pen and paper so different that is even far from the spirit.

About the character creation. No that is not create your character from the ground up because you have a V with a defined personality that even speaks with no player imput. All you have is the decision you take as players on how you move in the world but V is not your character is just an entity with a defined personality. I can be more specific on that.

Fallout new vegas: Where you can truly roleplay and create statistically or even the character with the personality you want because the system allows it. This is called character agency.

Fallout4: You are just nate and nora and those character have even if blandly a defined personality. You can't chose how to answer. You can do quests and take decision but is all about player agency not character agency.

Stats that can be used to build a character with a skill system that is able to customize how you character personality is and act in to the world now that is a optimal roleplay system. ((New Vegas as example))

TPP is nice because it shows your character in the context of the world. You will be your character you will take the decision you will define your character personality and you will even see how you look cool during that ((perfectly in the cyberpunk spirit)

Instead FPP is more good for player agency usually people that approched the newer brand of rpgs the one that are being made for people that dislike rpg.

"Oh this game has no voice acting! Reading is boring!"

"Oh my i failed the quest because my character is not good to persuade people! That so unfair!"

"Oh no! I do play rpg but i don't care about the lore!"

"The character i created has actually flaws this is shocking!"

"I roleplay myself in rpg"

"Oh my i keep missing because my character is not good to handling guns. This is so clumsy!"

"Oh no! i went overboard installing implants and my character went on a rampage because of cyberpsychosis that sucks!"

This is the kind of players i am talking about. The kind of players rpgs should not made for.
But hey this is my unpopular opinion.

Meanwhile any DM-GM-Narrator in his own right will tell you that usually the people that put theirself in theyr character and are no able to design a character with his own distinct personality are and for this awful roleplayers.

Yes FPP is a problem because it means you have to implement twitch fast paced combat and fluid FPS mechanis for people to have fun! You see it yourself the major complain from the people that are okay with fpp is.
"Shooting seems like to shot with softair weapons the shooting needs so punch."
"Oh no they downgraded the graphic of the game!"

It all boils down at what kind of audience CD projekt cather more and for what i saw they are fare more interested on the shooters crowd. It sucks to be a roleplayer in the 2019

 

[Bloodartist]

That is basically what it is now. Again, and people aren't talking about this enough, CDPR is marketing this game as an "action" game now on their official media accounts. RPG elements are just stats and skills, which almost every FPS does these days. Even Call of Duty has skill trees.

I believe not. The multi-faceted dialog and branching story are just as much RPG elements. In fact the devs have been advertising the story as more complex and freeform than practically any other game Ive heard of.

ps. Regarding the various controversies, I believe CDPR is much to blame about this, as they vehemently refuse to use their own forums to relay info about the game. Instead they use social media and interviews where things get lost in the translation. Especially in regards to interviews which at least I don't follow as closely, as most of the info is repeated over and over across all interviews. Why would I read something Ive read already? At best the interviews are like the game broken telephone... someone might make an article that is based on another article, which is based on another article which is based on an interview.

Trying to find what the devs have said most recently is like looking for a needle in a haystack since there is no one official channel. No wonder people repeatedly misinterpret what the devs have said... even after you ignore the trolls which are always there.

 

[Aestron]

Greetings, all. I almost never write in forums but feel strongly enough about this issue that I'd like to offer a few of my opinions.

With complete respect to developers everywhere, who pour their hearts and souls into their games, I think it's important to realize that this game, and all others, are made for the players, not the developers. If the players are happy with what the developers produce, then everyone wins; the players will sing the developers' praises potentially for years to come. This is especially important if the developers are considering DLC -- or other games, for that matter -- in the future. If the players are not happy, then everyone loses, the developers most of all. It affects their reputation among the gaming community and also hits their bottom line -- a double whammy. Gamers have long memories and are slow to forgive.

Bioware made the decision to protect the "artistic integrity" of the writers telling the story of Mass Effect -- and completely botched the ending of arguably one of the most beloved series in the history of computer gaming. I would venture to say that this was the beginning of the end for them; IMHO, they have never recovered. Artistic integrity is never worth disappointing the players.

Immersion is to me the wrong focus. What I seek from the games I play is engagement. To again use Mass Effect as an example, I found the interface to be sufficiently immersive, and from the videos released so far, it's clear that CDPR have excelled in this. But what made Mass Effect so compelling to me personally was to see the character I had created in the cut scenes, interacting with NPCs, and generally living out the consequences of my choices. It didn't matter that there was only one male and one female voice; this visibility of my created character made the experience of each playthrough *mine*. An FPP-entirely, or even -mostly, perspective would have significantly diminished the impact for me and, thus, the engagement. Less engagement = less fun, less interest in repeated playthroughs, and less interest in whatever future the game may have.

The bottom line -- and what I feel the mantra should be for every game developer -- is this: if at all feasible and possible, strive to give the players what they want. The consequences for not doing so are never good (or as profitable as they might have been) and are potentially devastating. Anthem may never hit its stride, and it's a rare developer that can recover from an initial release like that of No Man's Sky.

 

[gogmeister777]

I can only assume this decision has to be something other than immersion as perspective has nothing to do with immersion in a game.

This is why I try to avoid the now infamous 'I' word. It really does seem to mean different things to different people and no helpful discussion can be had unless one definition is first agreed upon. That's not gonna happen methinks.

For me, it means one thing and one thing only. How much does it make me feel like 'I'm in the game'? The more it does, the more 'I' the game is

In other words, VR is king with FPP being second, based on my very specific definition. That means perspective has everything to do with it in this regard.

To me, the 'I' word does not mean enchanting, atmospheric, engaging, bewitching, captivating etc... Games that are VR/FPP can be those things, but that would be down to how well the game world is constructed and is separate from the treacherous 'I'

So lets not have a go at CDPR for their choice in seeking maximum 'I' when it probably means something entirely different to the person who is upset. Criticise TPP all you want, but there's no point saying they're 'wrong' specifically with regards to 'I' if the two parties aren't even talking about the same thing in the first place.

 

[StereoFlava]

Heres my respectable take, this thread is 18 pages of crying.

 

[gogmeister777]

I don't know what your definition about RPG is, but generally, hardcore RPG fans are not consider Elder Scrolls (especially Oblivion and Skyrim) and Baldur's gate as true RPGs.

Baldur's Gate is not considered a true RPG?

You know, recently, the UK Prime minister prorogued parliament, England managed to win the 3rd test match, the Amazon was ablaze, violent protests broke out in Hong Kong and legendary bodybuilder Franco Columbu sadly passed away.

Your statement has shocked me more...

 

[Gillian_Seed]

Greetings, all. I almost never write in forums but feel strongly enough about this issue that I'd like to offer a few of my opinions.

With complete respect to developers everywhere, who pour their hearts and souls into their games, I think it's important to realize that this game, and all others, are made for the players, not the developers. If the players are happy with what the developers produce, then everyone wins; the players will sing the developers' praises potentially for years to come. This is especially important if the developers are considering DLC -- or other games, for that matter -- in the future. If the players are not happy, then everyone loses, the developers most of all. It affects their reputation among the gaming community and also hits their bottom line -- a double whammy. Gamers have long memories and are slow to forgive.

Bioware made the decision to protect the "artistic integrity" of the writers telling the story of Mass Effect -- and completely botched the ending of arguably one of the most beloved series in the history of computer gaming. I would venture to say that this was the beginning of the end for them; IMHO, they have never recovered. Artistic integrity is never worth disappointing the players.

Immersion is to me the wrong focus. What I seek from the games I play is engagement. To again use Mass Effect as an example, I found the interface to be sufficiently immersive, and from the videos released so far, it's clear that CDPR have excelled in this. But what made Mass Effect so compelling to me personally was to see the character I had created in the cut scenes, interacting with NPCs, and generally living out the consequences of my choices. It didn't matter that there was only one male and one female voice; this visibility of my created character made the experience of each playthrough *mine*. An FPP-entirely, or even -mostly, perspective would have significantly diminished the impact for me and, thus, the engagement. Less engagement = less fun, less interest in repeated playthroughs, and less interest in whatever future the game may have.

The bottom line -- and what I feel the mantra should be for every game developer -- is this: if at all feasible and possible, strive to give the players what they want. The consequences for not doing so are never good (or as profitable as they might have been) and are potentially devastating. Anthem may never hit its stride, and it's a rare developer that can recover from an initial release like that of No Man's Sky.

Thanks for sharing your views, I share many of them myself.

Realistically as someone who has been gaming for a long time I shouldn't be shocked and caught off guard by something that is as sure as death but I continuously am because of the continuous rise and fall of the latest chosen one.

That sure thing in the gaming industry like every other industry is the #1 goal of industry and that is profit.

Right now I'm not very happy with CDPR and their reputation in my eyes has taken a hit but in reality that means nothing to them and I'm not sure it should but of course I wish it did.

That being said they're still easily one of my top 3 game developers because they're great at what they do but the bottom line is always the bottom line and no matter how much you like someone selling you something, their goal is profit and who can really blame them.

Ultimately as some who was planning on putting in hundreds of hours into this game, my money isn't any better than the guy who buys the game because of hype and maybe beats it once or the guy who buys it cause he likes to shoot his gun and plays it for 30 hours but never finished it because the new COD just came out and for every 1 of me there are a 100 of them.

People love FPS games and from a business perspective it makes sense to please the masses just like Square Enix did by in my opinion making a joke of a Final Fantasy game in FFXV yet the game is still selling well but a lot of long time FF fans hated it.

Working people want money for their work and when it comes to money the only acceptable amount is more.

Look at RockStar, Bethesda, EA, 2K, Activision and on and on and on. CDPR will join them because it's inevitable.

 

[Sir_Parsifal]

I personally think it will greatly enhance immersion. And the POV sex scenes. Lol.

 

[Itsdacisco]

Greetings, all. I almost never write in forums but feel strongly enough about this issue that I'd like to offer a few of my opinions.

With complete respect to developers everywhere, who pour their hearts and souls into their games, I think it's important to realize that this game, and all others, are made for the players, not the developers. If the players are happy with what the developers produce, then everyone wins; the players will sing the developers' praises potentially for years to come. This is especially important if the developers are considering DLC -- or other games, for that matter -- in the future. If the players are not happy, then everyone loses, the developers most of all. It affects their reputation among the gaming community and also hits their bottom line -- a double whammy. Gamers have long memories and are slow to forgive.

Bioware made the decision to protect the "artistic integrity" of the writers telling the story of Mass Effect -- and completely botched the ending of arguably one of the most beloved series in the history of computer gaming. I would venture to say that this was the beginning of the end for them; IMHO, they have never recovered. Artistic integrity is never worth disappointing the players.

Immersion is to me the wrong focus. What I seek from the games I play is engagement. To again use Mass Effect as an example, I found the interface to be sufficiently immersive, and from the videos released so far, it's clear that CDPR have excelled in this. But what made Mass Effect so compelling to me personally was to see the character I had created in the cut scenes, interacting with NPCs, and generally living out the consequences of my choices. It didn't matter that there was only one male and one female voice; this visibility of my created character made the experience of each playthrough *mine*. An FPP-entirely, or even -mostly, perspective would have significantly diminished the impact for me and, thus, the engagement. Less engagement = less fun, less interest in repeated playthroughs, and less interest in whatever future the game may have.

The bottom line -- and what I feel the mantra should be for every game developer -- is this: if at all feasible and possible, strive to give the players what they want. The consequences for not doing so are never good (or as profitable as they might have been) and are potentially devastating. Anthem may never hit its stride, and it's a rare developer that can recover from an initial release like that of No Man's Sky.

I completely agree, however being an artist myself I can respect their view. You are very correct though! customer care should be highly regarded! I knew a musician who could have sold his cd for $20 u.s but decided to only sell it for $5 because he wanted more people to listen to it who couldn't afford it. And the fans loved him for that move.

Post automatically merged: Sep 4, 2019

Thanks for sharing your views, I share many of them myself.

Realistically as someone who has been gaming for a long time I shouldn't be shocked and caught off guard by something that is as sure as death but I continuously am because of the continuous rise and fall of the latest chosen one.

That sure thing in the gaming industry like every other industry is the #1 goal of industry and that is profit.

Right now I'm not very happy with CDPR and their reputation in my eyes has taken a hit but in reality that means nothing to them and I'm not sure it should but of course I wish it did.

That being said they're still easily one of my top 3 game developers because they're great at what they do but the bottom line is always the bottom line and no matter how much you like someone selling you something, their goal is profit and who can really blame them.

Ultimately as some who was planning on putting in hundreds of hours into this game, my money isn't any better than the guy who buys the game because of hype and maybe beats it once or the guy who buys it cause he likes to shoot his gun and plays it for 30 hours but never finished it because the new COD just came out and for every 1 of me there are a 100 of them.

People love FPS games and from a business perspective it makes sense to please the masses just like Square Enix did by in my opinion making a joke of a Final Fantasy game in FFXV yet the game is still selling well but a lot of long time FF fans hated it.

Working people want money for their work and when it comes to money the only acceptable amount is more.

Look at RockStar, Bethesda, EA, 2K, Activision and on and on and on. CDPR will join them because it's inevitable.

agreed, multiplayer coming soon.

Post automatically merged: Sep 4, 2019

In the end, CDPR will release their vision of the game...not everyone else's. Everyone is free to like it or dislike for what it is.

There you have it folks, from the moderator. I instantly thought of ME3 ending drama, eventhough I actually liked the original ending I was surprised when Bioware came back to make changes. I hope CDPR adds an option for TPP. I take this quote as meaning..They are pretty much coming out with the game, its too late to change, judge it when it comes out.

 

[arscrusader]

Look how well that worked out for Ea/Bioware lol
In the end vote with your wallets

 

[Secretz]

In the end, CDPR will release their vision of the game...not everyone else's. Everyone is free to like it or dislike for what it is.

Very true. Honestly, as a writer, I respect them sticking to their vision, even though I pretty much disagree with it. I just hope that if their vision isn't as successful and popular as they hope? That they own it and not behave like some other developers and blame the gamers for not getting what they were striving for.

Anyway, back to the first-person view and the whole "because immersion!" reason; if immersion is the reason for going solely first-person, can we expect every action involving V's hands to be fully animated like the first-person view in Red Dead Redemption 2, or will there still be the lame cursor prompts? If it's the latter instead of the former, CDPR's quest for maximum immersion is already off to a bad start, in my opinion.

 

[JMB96815]

I don't know what your definition about RPG is, but generally, hardcore RPG fans are not consider Elder Scrolls (especially Oblivion and Skyrim) and Baldur's gate as true RPGs.

I couldn't disagree more about Baldur's Gate. Especially if you are saying hardcore RPG people.

 

[CyberBobber]

Meh, does not really concern me. I know of no games that went for full FPP, including cinematics so hey, it might be groundbreakingly great.

Besides, it does not affect gameplay.

I cant remember many FPP games either. Most games prefer third person one. Im kinda puzzled by this topic, this isnt usually discussed among gamers.

Now I remember Far Cry New Dawn had first person..

Its gonna be ok if asked from me. It opens up nice opportunities like you can put music behind the character and stuff instead on it. Also you can change focus by turning players head etc.

 

[Bondaebu]

I couldn't disagree more about Baldur's Gate. Especially if you are saying hardcore RPG people.

Explain why if you wannna raise objection.

The reason why I don't think Baldur's gate is true rpg is on post #305, #311

 

[Secretz]

I cant remember many FPP games either. Most games prefer third person one. Im kinda puzzled by this topic, this isnt usually discussed among gamers.

Now I remember Far Cry New Dawn had first person..

Its gonna be ok if asked from me. It opens up nice opportunities like you can put music behind the character and stuff instead on it.

Thanks for illustrating just how pointless CDPR's alleged "robust character creation" will be for the majority of the game.

 

[CyberBobber]

Thanks for illustrating just how pointless CDPR's alleged "robust character creation" will be for the majority of the game.

Photo mode?

 

[Secretz]

Explain why if you wannna raise objection.

The reason why I don't think Baldur's gate is true rpg is on post #305, #311

If I read correctly, your dispute over Baldur's Gate being a true RPG is because of linearity? You realize your rather myopic view on what constitutes a true RPG flys in the face of some of the most beloved RPGs in history, right? The nonlinear RPG wasn't always a thing, you know...many great RPGs came out that were fairly linear before thankfully nonlinear RPGs became popular.

Post automatically merged: Sep 4, 2019

Photo mode?

Kind of a poor substitute, but sure...there's that.

 

[CyberBobber]

Kind of a poor substitute, but sure...there's that.

Its gonna be fun to see how first person tackles the lenght of the game, third person might be better for long game, I suppose we just gotta see how it plays out. Yup, third person is alot more dynamic, might be better for longer game.

 

[Bondaebu]

If I read correctly, your dispute over Baldur's Gate being a true RPG is because of linearity? You realize your rather myopic view on what constitutes a true RPG flys in the face of some of the most beloved RPGs in history, right? The nonlinear RPG wasn't always a thing, you know...many great RPGs came out that were fairly linear before thankfully nonlinear RPGs became popular.

I don't deny Baldur's Gate is one of the most beloved RPG. Of course it could be called RPG but adding 'true' term is another problem.

RPG is genre about role-playing. If your choice can't change anything, or change very subtle things and that's it, your choice is meaningless. In BG, choice is all but illusional. Even in Witcher 3 the game provides so many meaningful choices which affect main story, fate of major characters and world state.

This is why I don't consider Baldur's gate as "True" rpg(I hate using this word though). And again, the game can be called RPG for sure. It's relative.