Having bought both the regular and Collector's Edition, and read basically all the 2020 and RED Sourcebooks, you could say I was pretty hyped for 2077's release. As we all were. Having beat it around Christmas of 2020, I had a good few gripes about the game. As we all did. This doc is something I wrote around that time (in about a couple of days), detailing my expectations and suggestions (which were built off the 2018 demo and the original TTRPG). I then sat on it for a couple of years, adding bits and bob here and there. What with the pandemic, Grad School, and the CDPR hack, there was a lot to deal with on both sides.
But now that CDPR's patched up a good few things, and Edgerunners was awesome enough to cause a resurgence of interest, I figured now was the optimal time to share it. Commenting is enabled, so feel free to make suggestions and otherwise leave feedback! I'm decently proud of it I guess.
While Scissors' Megareport details precise value tweaks and variable improvements, this doc is more about design and system changes. So they're pretty complementary to each other (We've reviewed and approve of each other's reports).
I'm aware that it's probably a lot, but considering that CDPR is moving to Unreal, and wants a multiplayer expansion at some point, I think this feedback is pretty important. So, while they can do some of it already (especially with the help of mods), they should definitely implement it for sequels and multi. A point that I do mention in the doc. And assuming CDPR makes an expansion past Phantom Liberty, they should 100% make it about alternate paths, full Life-Paths, and such.
Also, a lot of the gunplay stuff is reminiscent of Tarkov, but I didn't know that when writing. I'd heard of Tarkov, but didn't actually know its mechanics. So that was just an odd case of convergent evolution.
Reading through this, I can only say what I've just witnessed has left me in awe. I was never one to go through game forums myself, but with the resurgence in interest for the game as you said, I've likewise decided to make an account to give my two cents on the problems that have been gawking at me since the launch of the game, and I've hence also decided to play the game now start to finish for a third time.
While I can't say whether or not this document will amount to something CDPR will hear, I honestly hope it does, though I feel like it could be expanded yet still with some things and as coincidence has it, I've been sleeping on these for a while, and instead of making my qualms with the game a separate post, I feel like it would do it enough justice to just leave them here, because clearly you're someone who really intensely cares about the franchise, and I feel as if having a discussion here would be much more efficient than dividing it through another post. In truth, I was debating whether to go through with the idea at all given how in my life I tend to see a pattern of takes like this sinking into obscurity among the others, but reading through it has left me so inspired I've decided to give it my all on the matter, exposure be damned.
So without further a-do, the things I'd add to this report are:
The tackling of something I like to call "menuization" within the game
Tackling the issue of NPC driving with you riding shotgun not really being consistent with the context behind the wheel
Tackling the almost looter-shooter like gunplay
Overhauling the Life Path system
Originally, I was planning to make a more far reaching trail of nitpicks, but given how your report actually tackles many of my complaints right out the get go, I will simply include the problems that you either haven't included or, to my own belief at least, overcomplicated (I do not mean this with any disrespect, I just do not see some of the things you've highlighted fixable within the current game rather than in a sequel, like almost overhauling the amount of alternate choices in the main quests almost completely).
1. The tackling of "menuization"
Allow me to walk you through the first ~12 in game hours of playing through my V's day:
To start, I get my V up around 7 AM from his Corpo Plaza apartment bed. I walk him over to the bathroom, take a shower(against everyone's expectations of me as an RPG player, terribly similar to my real life), then grab a cup of coffee or alternatively pour some tea if I'm really feeling like it. Get to my stash, check whether or not there's a different set of weapons I'd like to bathe in the blood of my enemies with that day, then set out the door, down the elevator and, upon exiting the lobby of the building, getting into my Type-66 and accelerating off towards whatever poor bastard I decided didn't need legs, or arms, or a head, or whatever else anymore that day.
Fast forward to about 4-5 PM the same day, I'm more or less satisfied with the progress I've made, and fly off in the direction to the Afterlife, the prime source of cocky Night City mercenary downtime city-wide. I use someone's parked Thorton outside the entrance as a brake for the Quadra, because obviously why do anything in this city normally when you can do it with style on somebody else's expense, and get out the car proceeding to walk downstairs towards the bar.
Being that I didn't feel like screwing Claire out of her revenge this save, she greets me and happily asks me if I'd like something to drink.
The first thing I notice is I cannot sit down anywhere. "Well no big deal" - I think - "I'll just drink standing." - and promptly click on the "Could use a drink" dialogue prompt.
Following the brief exchange I am sent to a vendor store menu. Bunch of drinks to choose from, yet out of the twenty or so in the menu, I am sure as Hell not coming to the Afterlife for the Bolshevik Vodka or Broseph Ale... give me a
Jackie Wells
! So I click on the drink, get offered to pick a quantity (while subconsciously wishing that the game knew I am an Eastern European, and therefor, just always set the choice to max), and pay for the drink.
I exit the menu, still standing... where the Hell is my drink? So I open another menu, get to my backpack > consumables > find the drink > "consume", and finally exit out the menu after drinking my drink with only a shitty two status effects to show for it.
TLDR: I have just gone to the supposedly most prestigeous mercenary hotspot in the entire city... and I couldn't even sit down and watch myself have a drink, all while needing to break the immersion with not one but two menus?
I understand that some, perhaps even many, would see this as nitpicking, and I'd likely agree with you... were it not for the fact that we know the game has an amplitude of quests where you can do just exactly that; sit down and have a drink. Cyberpunk is neither running on some ancient Classical Age equivalent engine like the Creation Engine where even implementing ladders is a difficulty, nor can you make the argument that the actions would take too much time to animate or implement.
The lack of this feature more expansively in free roam just completely baffles me; games like this are sold on the fantasy of roleplaying; it feels almost like some sort of weird design hindsight that you make sure even someone who doesn't want V to drink alcohol doesn't have to drink alcohol in quests, yet make the mere animation of sitting down and taking a drink at one of the most iconic bars in the game (nevermind the multiple others you see and go through throughout the course of the game) completely non-existing in free roam.
And it's not like this cannot be implemented so late into the games lifespan; I did just describe earlier how I make my V quote;
take a shower, then grab a cup of coffee or alternatively pour some tea
And the Corpo Plaza apartment wasn't even present in the first version of the game, but rather added as an element of a future update later down the road... so if an update can add an entire apartment where you can drink not one but TWO different drinks without the presence of menus (three in total for the apartment if you count sitting down at the bar stool to smoke or drink Whiskey), then why can't a future update add doing the exact same, between a handful of choices, for some bars if not every?
Now I'm not saying I should be able to order absolutely every drink on the menu with the ability to sit and drink it, but at the very least, if I'm heading to drink at the Afterlife, I should be able to at least sit down and order with a drinking animation either;
A) a Johnny Silverhand
B) a Jackie Wells
C) a David Martinez
Maybe giving Claire a handful of dialogue options to talk about each would be above and beyond, but for simplicity's sake, I say I'm content enough with just ordering the damn drinks without an onslaught of menus or the incapability of being able to even see myself drink them.
And this is not just a problem that has plagued Cyberpunk, but it is also a problem which has plagued Witcher much earlier. With Cyberpunk, however, the issue is much more prominent, given that much of CDPR's reasoning for switching to only a first person perspective was to retain this idea of some of the interactions and animations hitting much closer to home than what they would at a third person perspective... plus I'm at the personal opinion it is much less permissible to have less animations in a game about a franchise which pioneers the idea that the style at which you do something is everything. The fact there's not a dedicated animation for doing something as common as getting shitfaced (and even more so for other actions such as eating, technical ability hacking doors or windows, interacting with the environment... you get what I mean) is weird. It creates this weird situation where much of the world is eye candy which you can look at but not touch, similar more to games where environmental interaction isn't a priority, much to the dismay of an RPG fan like myself.
And while Witcher does hold the same problem, I'd argue it tolerates it much more gracefully. After all, when I picture playing Witcher I find it hard to imagine Geralt going out of his way to chug a mug of straight Witcher moonshine in the middle of a fight or sit down at the nearest tavern and drink himself senseless; both events may add to the immersion but in Witchers case it's less about the interaction with the world so much as it is the slaying of the monsters. In your report you kept referring to games in which "everything the NPC's can do, you can do" making you feel like "an equal", which I agree with wholeheartedly and the majority of my bickering is devoted to exactly this. Luckily, the remaining points will be much shorter.
2. Quest NPC driving
Now if anyone thought not being able to sit down and drink is nitpicking, you haven't seen anything yet; this specific issue flew over my head the first two times playing, and was it not for River I would've never noticed, however now that I have I feel like it needs to be talked about: the quest driving.
Personally, when I sat into Dexter's car for the first time, it felt revolutionary; I genuinely cannot recall a time when I've played an RPG or in general a singleplayer game where I was the one being driven and not the other way around. I'm sure people will find some which exist but the memory of the car ride with Dexter is really the most burned into my memory, even if what the driver was basically doing was just driving around in circles until I'd make up my mind.
The issue I wish to highlight relates to how, seemingly, most characters will obey specific parameters while driving you no matter what.
Now when I say no matter what I don't mean that if a truck is blocking Panam from a road she needs to go over while transporting you that she'll drive into it and send it flying like her whole car is made of some adamantine alloy (even though that has happened to me a few times).
What I mean is that many characters who end up joining you in quests which involve driving outside of combat engagements, like Panam, River, the Peralez chauffeur and Kerry all simply exhibit the same driving reflexes absolutely irregardless of the context of the drive.
And this is fine for the most part; when you meet Panam for the first time, she drives mostly within reason: doesn't cut corners, doesn't make ridiculous turns... and it makes sense; in the quest, Panam tells you that the enemies you are looking for in the location you are on your way to are due to arrive in the evening, and usually I set off with Panam within normal hours, possibly early afternoon, so Panam driving responsibly when you have all the time in the world is reasonable.
Now lets put this into contrast with River.
At the end of Rivers questline
revolving around the arrest and investigation into Anthony Harris (who I have, for some reason, miswrote as Anthony Hopkins twice in a row now writing this text), if you manage to figure out where the murderer lived and conducted his atrocities at
, River will drag you off out into the Badlands
towards the farm where his nephew is located
. Along the way River will sound and act frustrated, even punching his wheel.
This scene would be very strong given the impression the entire questline has... if River didn't drive the same as anyone else in the game.
With the way River behaves, you'd think that upon reaching the highway or something, he'd step on the gas pedal, see him fly off in the direction you're going on your way to
save his nephew.
Instead, what happens is the one time it would've been appropriate of River to pretend traffic laws are just a suggestion, suddenly now is the time the game decides the driver should behave responsibly; River never goes over 100 mph (according to the speedometer, personally I don't believe the actual speed feels even close to 100 mph) on the main road, and even drives slower on the dirt road he drives off on.
I know I can't speak for every characters enthusiasm towards obeying traffic in stressful situations, but I think in this specific case maybe "Screw road safety" would've been an appropriate response to the circumstances.
3. The gunplay
As far as the gunplay goes, I do think making all guns have constant, consistent damage numbers is the most logically consistent and easiest solution to the problem the gunplay has, that being that it's too looter shooter-y where you can't really take time using a gun without finding one three or four level ups later which just blows it out of the water regardless of rarity.
The best solution would be making the same rarities of the same gun boast the same damage numbers, maybe with a chance of different status effects on each at most which you can change yourself. Putting time into learning the upgrade system could also allow you to tweak the damage on the guns individually, and it wouldn't hurt being able to name them either.
Consistent damage numbers would also solve the issue with the iconic weapons; iconic weapons are suppose to be iconic, the milisecond you start making the gunplay too much of a numbers game you've kinda lost the edge to the point of making iconic weaponry: it's suppose to be the best of it's class, not just best for the level you got the stuff on.
Though at the same time, I do think your report takes the concept a bit too far; different caliber ammo? Unique rounds? I like choices as much as the next guy, but I think maybe the modifications on the gun itself influencing damage amount and type is enough. I definitely get where you're coming from, but I feel like many would find the fact damage type being influenced by bullets rather than weapon modifications a nuisance very quickly, even if it would be a sort of love letter to more diehard fans of the genre.
4. The Life Path system
The Life Path system as it is now is superficially useful. At best, it influences the first 20ish minutes of your game and, at worst, a handful of dialogue options, most of which not really that much more beneficial than any of the others.
I'd prefer for the Life Path system to take things a bit further, but it would require a total overhaul of each intro, so I realistically do not find this possible of happening, but basically:
I think that, in similar vein to your proposal, each branch should have you working within the confines of your life path rather than all pushing you out into the same circumstance; that being the montage with Jackie after getting your ass arrested/fired/whatever.
So for example should you choose to start with the Corpo life path, you are given a unique set of quests only a Corpo life path character could undertake. Same goes for Street Kid and Nomad.
Corpo and Street Kid should both boast a dedicated faction map mechanic, with Street Kid being more liberal in allegiance than Corpo. Nomad would have no such mechanic, however to compensate for this Nomad would be more liberal in nature in regards to people you may work quests for, therefor making the choice of quests broader.
Street Kid would have you start in a self chosen gang and attempting to wrest influence from the others. Simple premise, many of the characters needed to make it decent are already in the game and players already gain some insight about who controls what neighborhood through the map as it is already.
Corpo would restrict you to the confines of working for Arasaka, and the premise would be within the same idea as Street Kids, but applied on a corporate level rather than a gang level. Theoretically this could also prove to make corp relevant characters, like for example Meredith, more interesting. Like Street Kid, the general idea and foundation is already there, Hell, we even know that Arasaka came back only recently to Night City, so to have you start off at nothing would even be logical within the lore.
The thing I disagree with you on is making *any* career change accessible to a player of any life path. I believe that if you attempt trying to please everyone at once that there is a high risk of pleasing no-one, and if I or anyone else really wanted to go from corpo-rat to Nomad smuggler that it's more likely we'd just have picked Nomad from the start.
There are a few more things I could say about the game, but I think this is ample food for thought for now, and it was already quite late as I began writing this. I look forward to bounce a few ideas back and forward though, even if only for hypotheticals sake, as I like discussing what-if's like this.
Reading through this, I can only say what I've just witnessed has left me in awe. I was never one to go through game forums myself, but with the resurgence in interest for the game as you said, I've likewise decided to make an account to give my two cents on the problems that have been gawking at me since the launch of the game, and I've hence also decided to play the game now start to finish for a third time.
While I can't say whether or not this document will amount to something CDPR will hear, I honestly hope it does, though I feel like it could be expanded yet still with some things and as coincidence has it, I've been sleeping on these for a while, and instead of making my qualms with the game a separate post, I feel like it would do it enough justice to just leave them here, because clearly you're someone who really intensely cares about the franchise, and I feel as if having a discussion here would be much more efficient than dividing it through another post. In truth, I was debating whether to go through with the idea at all given how in my life I tend to see a pattern of takes like this sinking into obscurity among the others, but reading through it has left me so inspired I've decided to give it my all on the matter, exposure be damned.
So without further a-do, the things I'd add to this report are:
The tackling of something I like to call "menuization" within the game
Tackling the issue of NPC driving with you riding shotgun not really being consistent with the context behind the wheel
Tackling the almost looter-shooter like gunplay
Overhauling the Life Path system
Originally, I was planning to make a more far reaching trail of nitpicks, but given how your report actually tackles many of my complaints right out the get go, I will simply include the problems that you either haven't included or, to my own belief at least, overcomplicated (I do not mean this with any disrespect, I just do not see some of the things you've highlighted fixable within the current game rather than in a sequel, like almost overhauling the amount of alternate choices in the main quests almost completely).
1. The tackling of "menuization"
Allow me to walk you through the first ~12 in game hours of playing through my V's day:
To start, I get my V up around 7 AM from his Corpo Plaza apartment bed. I walk him over to the bathroom, take a shower(against everyone's expectations of me as an RPG player, terribly similar to my real life), then grab a cup of coffee or alternatively pour some tea if I'm really feeling like it. Get to my stash, check whether or not there's a different set of weapons I'd like to bathe in the blood of my enemies with that day, then set out the door, down the elevator and, upon exiting the lobby of the building, getting into my Type-66 and accelerating off towards whatever poor bastard I decided didn't need legs, or arms, or a head, or whatever else anymore that day.
Fast forward to about 4-5 PM the same day, I'm more or less satisfied with the progress I've made, and fly off in the direction to the Afterlife, the prime source of cocky Night City mercenary downtime city-wide. I use someone's parked Thorton outside the entrance as a brake for the Quadra, because obviously why do anything in this city normally when you can do it with style on somebody else's expense, and get out the car proceeding to walk downstairs towards the bar.
Being that I didn't feel like screwing Claire out of her revenge this save, she greets me and happily asks me if I'd like something to drink.
The first thing I notice is I cannot sit down anywhere. "Well no big deal" - I think - "I'll just drink standing." - and promptly click on the "Could use a drink" dialogue prompt.
Following the brief exchange I am sent to a vendor store menu. Bunch of drinks to choose from, yet out of the twenty or so in the menu, I am sure as Hell not coming to the Afterlife for the Bolshevik Vodka or Broseph Ale... give me a
Jackie Wells
! So I click on the drink, get offered to pick a quantity (while subconsciously wishing that the game knew I am an Eastern European, and therefor, just always set the choice to max), and pay for the drink.
I exit the menu, still standing... where the Hell is my drink? So I open another menu, get to my backpack > consumables > find the drink > "consume", and finally exit out the menu after drinking my drink with only a shitty two status effects to show for it.
TLDR: I have just gone to the supposedly most prestigeous mercenary hotspot in the entire city... and I couldn't even sit down and watch myself have a drink, all while needing to break the immersion with not one but two menus?
I understand that some, perhaps even many, would see this as nitpicking, and I'd likely agree with you... were it not for the fact that we know the game has an amplitude of quests where you can do just exactly that; sit down and have a drink. Cyberpunk is neither running on some ancient Classical Age equivalent engine like the Creation Engine where even implementing ladders is a difficulty, nor can you make the argument that the actions would take too much time to animate or implement.
The lack of this feature more expansively in free roam just completely baffles me; games like this are sold on the fantasy of roleplaying; it feels almost like some sort of weird design hindsight that you make sure even someone who doesn't want V to drink alcohol doesn't have to drink alcohol in quests, yet make the mere animation of sitting down and taking a drink at one of the most iconic bars in the game (nevermind the multiple others you see and go through throughout the course of the game) completely non-existing in free roam.
And it's not like this cannot be implemented so late into the games lifespan; I did just describe earlier how I make my V quote;
And the Corpo Plaza apartment wasn't even present in the first version of the game, but rather added as an element of a future update later down the road... so if an update can add an entire apartment where you can drink not one but TWO different drinks without the presence of menus (three in total for the apartment if you count sitting down at the bar stool to smoke or drink Whiskey), then why can't a future update add doing the exact same, between a handful of choices, for some bars if not every?
Now I'm not saying I should be able to order absolutely every drink on the menu with the ability to sit and drink it, but at the very least, if I'm heading to drink at the Afterlife, I should be able to at least sit down and order with a drinking animation either;
A) a Johnny Silverhand
B) a Jackie Wells
C) a David Martinez
Maybe giving Claire a handful of dialogue options to talk about each would be above and beyond, but for simplicity's sake, I say I'm content enough with just ordering the damn drinks without an onslaught of menus or the incapability of being able to even see myself drink them.
And this is not just a problem that has plagued Cyberpunk, but it is also a problem which has plagued Witcher much earlier. With Cyberpunk, however, the issue is much more prominent, given that much of CDPR's reasoning for switching to only a first person perspective was to retain this idea of some of the interactions and animations hitting much closer to home than what they would at a third person perspective... plus I'm at the personal opinion it is much less permissible to have less animations in a game about a franchise which pioneers the idea that the style at which you do something is everything. The fact there's not a dedicated animation for doing something as common as getting shitfaced (and even more so for other actions such as eating, technical ability hacking doors or windows, interacting with the environment... you get what I mean) is weird. It creates this weird situation where much of the world is eye candy which you can look at but not touch, similar more to games where environmental interaction isn't a priority, much to the dismay of an RPG fan like myself.
And while Witcher does hold the same problem, I'd argue it tolerates it much more gracefully. After all, when I picture playing Witcher I find it hard to imagine Geralt going out of his way to chug a mug of straight Witcher moonshine in the middle of a fight or sit down at the nearest tavern and drink himself senseless; both events may add to the immersion but in Witchers case it's less about the interaction with the world so much as it is the slaying of the monsters. In your report you kept referring to games in which "everything the NPC's can do, you can do" making you feel like "an equal", which I agree with wholeheartedly and the majority of my bickering is devoted to exactly this. Luckily, the remaining points will be much shorter.
2. Quest NPC driving
Now if anyone thought not being able to sit down and drink is nitpicking, you haven't seen anything yet; this specific issue flew over my head the first two times playing, and was it not for River I would've never noticed, however now that I have I feel like it needs to be talked about: the quest driving.
Personally, when I sat into Dexter's car for the first time, it felt revolutionary; I genuinely cannot recall a time when I've played an RPG or in general a singleplayer game where I was the one being driven and not the other way around. I'm sure people will find some which exist but the memory of the car ride with Dexter is really the most burned into my memory, even if what the driver was basically doing was just driving around in circles until I'd make up my mind.
The issue I wish to highlight relates to how, seemingly, most characters will obey specific parameters while driving you no matter what.
Now when I say no matter what I don't mean that if a truck is blocking Panam from a road she needs to go over while transporting you that she'll drive into it and send it flying like her whole car is made of some adamantine alloy (even though that has happened to me a few times).
What I mean is that many characters who end up joining you in quests which involve driving outside of combat engagements, like Panam, River, the Peralez chauffeur and Kerry all simply exhibit the same driving reflexes absolutely irregardless of the context of the drive.
And this is fine for the most part; when you meet Panam for the first time, she drives mostly within reason: doesn't cut corners, doesn't make ridiculous turns... and it makes sense; in the quest, Panam tells you that the enemies you are looking for in the location you are on your way to are due to arrive in the evening, and usually I set off with Panam within normal hours, possibly early afternoon, so Panam driving responsibly when you have all the time in the world is reasonable.
Now lets put this into contrast with River.
At the end of Rivers questline
revolving around the arrest and investigation into Anthony Harris (who I have, for some reason, miswrote as Anthony Hopkins twice in a row now writing this text), if you manage to figure out where the murderer lived and conducted his atrocities at
, River will drag you off out into the Badlands
towards the farm where his nephew is located
. Along the way River will sound and act frustrated, even punching his wheel.
This scene would be very strong given the impression the entire questline has... if River didn't drive the same as anyone else in the game.
With the way River behaves, you'd think that upon reaching the highway or something, he'd step on the gas pedal, see him fly off in the direction you're going on your way to
save his nephew.
Instead, what happens is the one time it would've been appropriate of River to pretend traffic laws are just a suggestion, suddenly now is the time the game decides the driver should behave responsibly; River never goes over 100 mph (according to the speedometer, personally I don't believe the actual speed feels even close to 100 mph) on the main road, and even drives slower on the dirt road he drives off on.
I know I can't speak for every characters enthusiasm towards obeying traffic in stressful situations, but I think in this specific case maybe "Screw road safety" would've been an appropriate response to the circumstances.
3. The gunplay
As far as the gunplay goes, I do think making all guns have constant, consistent damage numbers is the most logically consistent and easiest solution to the problem the gunplay has, that being that it's too looter shooter-y where you can't really take time using a gun without finding one three or four level ups later which just blows it out of the water regardless of rarity.
The best solution would be making the same rarities of the same gun boast the same damage numbers, maybe with a chance of different status effects on each at most which you can change yourself. Putting time into learning the upgrade system could also allow you to tweak the damage on the guns individually, and it wouldn't hurt being able to name them either.
Consistent damage numbers would also solve the issue with the iconic weapons; iconic weapons are suppose to be iconic, the milisecond you start making the gunplay too much of a numbers game you've kinda lost the edge to the point of making iconic weaponry: it's suppose to be the best of it's class, not just best for the level you got the stuff on.
Though at the same time, I do think your report takes the concept a bit too far; different caliber ammo? Unique rounds? I like choices as much as the next guy, but I think maybe the modifications on the gun itself influencing damage amount and type is enough. I definitely get where you're coming from, but I feel like many would find the fact damage type being influenced by bullets rather than weapon modifications a nuisance very quickly, even if it would be a sort of love letter to more diehard fans of the genre.
4. The Life Path system
The Life Path system as it is now is superficially useful. At best, it influences the first 20ish minutes of your game and, at worst, a handful of dialogue options, most of which not really that much more beneficial than any of the others.
I'd prefer for the Life Path system to take things a bit further, but it would require a total overhaul of each intro, so I realistically do not find this possible of happening, but basically:
I think that, in similar vein to your proposal, each branch should have you working within the confines of your life path rather than all pushing you out into the same circumstance; that being the montage with Jackie after getting your ass arrested/fired/whatever.
So for example should you choose to start with the Corpo life path, you are given a unique set of quests only a Corpo life path character could undertake. Same goes for Street Kid and Nomad.
Corpo and Street Kid should both boast a dedicated faction map mechanic, with Street Kid being more liberal in allegiance than Corpo. Nomad would have no such mechanic, however to compensate for this Nomad would be more liberal in nature in regards to people you may work quests for, therefor making the choice of quests broader.
Street Kid would have you start in a self chosen gang and attempting to wrest influence from the others. Simple premise, many of the characters needed to make it decent are already in the game and players already gain some insight about who controls what neighborhood through the map as it is already.
Corpo would restrict you to the confines of working for Arasaka, and the premise would be within the same idea as Street Kids, but applied on a corporate level rather than a gang level. Theoretically this could also prove to make corp relevant characters, like for example Meredith, more interesting. Like Street Kid, the general idea and foundation is already there, Hell, we even know that Arasaka came back only recently to Night City, so to have you start off at nothing would even be logical within the lore.
The thing I disagree with you on is making *any* career change accessible to a player of any life path. I believe that if you attempt trying to please everyone at once that there is a high risk of pleasing no-one, and if I or anyone else really wanted to go from corpo-rat to Nomad smuggler that it's more likely we'd just have picked Nomad from the start.
There are a few more things I could say about the game, but I think this is ample food for thought for now, and it was already quite late as I began writing this. I look forward to bounce a few ideas back and forward though, even if only for hypotheticals sake, as I like discussing what-if's like this.
You absolutely hit this on the head. Especially re: Menuization. A huge thing that was missing from the retail version is the diegetic experience we got from, say, the ripperdoc menu in the E3 demo. I was really disappointed when I saw that they cut that. Diegetic Interfaces, like interactable junk items, are absolutely paramount for a game like Cyberpunk. The lack of First-Person animations and interfaces, in a game that boasts first-person immersion, is jarring beyond belief. And it screams so clearly of cut content.
The Driving AI issue is spot-on, and I see it as a symptom of the general lack of dynamic behavior among AI, traffic or not. So in order to fix that, they need to fix driving AI overall.
Naturally, I strongly disagree about the caliber thing. Remember that Fallout 3 and New Vegas had this ammo system, and these games are over a decade old, running on an engine almost twice that age. So if CDPR wants to meet expectations, they really have to include this. Gunplay needs to be both highly faithful to the tabletop and robust enough to stand on its own. And considering they've done insanely good work with the actual feedback and animations, I don't see why they can't do this.
I'm 100% with you on the lifepath. I can only reiterate stuff I had in the megareport. Basically, there needs to be buffs, gameplay differences, perks, etc. to each lifepath. It should basically feel like 3 different DLCs. And that's what it was advertised as. So you're totally right here.
Naturally, I strongly disagree about the caliber thing. Remember that Fallout 3 and New Vegas had this ammo system, and these games are over a decade old, running on an engine almost twice that age. So if CDPR wants to meet expectations, they really have to include this. Gunplay needs to be both highly faithful to the tabletop and robust enough to stand on its own. And considering they've done insanely good work with the actual feedback and animations, I don't see why they can't do this.
Funny you should mention Fallout 3 and New Vegas, because it is actually those same games that are the reason why I advocate not to include a more robust ammo system.
As I've stated before, I understand where you're coming from; older RPG's like specifically Fallout have had this as a mechanic, and including it +10 years after the games came out seems like a no brainer... however I cannot honestly say, at least in the name of myself and people I've spoken to who have played the game, that really utilizing those mechanics the way you're encouraged to is often the case.
In theory? Sure. The more options the better... but in practice, I think it would generate a lot of clutter, because suddenly instead of the same one ammo type feeding the same type of weapon, you now have dozens each just feeding two or three weapons... are you really going to go out of your way to find or craft a bunch of 4G shells when, going by hypothetical likelihood here, 12G is going to be much more readily available? I've had this same problem in Fallout, where I just find a bunch of ammo except the one I need for my favorite gun, and it quickly turns into an annoyance having to use the crappier weapons or weapons unfitting for my character build on enemies I'd totally destroy otherwise.
At that point using the weapons you want suddenly turns too much into a question of ergonomics: am I really going to strip a place dry for all the various gunpowder, shell casings, bullet tips and then craft it into a specific ammo type... just to make my gun fire when I want, what I want, in the status effect that I want?
I mean, why shouldn't all of my same weapon types fire the exact ammo type they need, and leave status effects as a weapon-side solution? I won't exactly be in the mood to craft Dragon Breath shells every time I want my shotgun to burn people alive. In theory, even if it keeps itself this basic, it could still offer a compromise; if the status effects are weapon-side, and the ammo use is also weapon-side, then logically, if you allow for players to customize their own weaponry, then you don't have to import a bunch of different ammo types while also retaining the same effect.
If I put work into my 9 mm pistol, say I have the option to swap out the status effect type and the ammo it uses from pistol ammo and poison to 12G shotgun ammo and fire... then who's to say my character isn't just simply using Dragons Breath rounds, all without the hassle of modifying my pistol to a degree to which I need to have specifically these size shells with this specific status effect?
Funny you should mention Fallout 3 and New Vegas, because it is actually those same games that are the reason why I advocate not to include a more robust ammo system.
As I've stated before, I understand where you're coming from; older RPG's like specifically Fallout have had this as a mechanic, and including it +10 years after the games came out seems like a no brainer... however I cannot honestly say, at least in the name of myself and people I've spoken to who have played the game, that really utilizing those mechanics the way you're encouraged to is often the case.
In theory? Sure. The more options the better... but in practice, I think it would generate a lot of clutter, because suddenly instead of the same one ammo type feeding the same type of weapon, you now have dozens each just feeding two or three weapons... are you really going to go out of your way to find or craft a bunch of 4G shells when, going by hypothetical likelihood here, 12G is going to be much more readily available? I've had this same problem in Fallout, where I just find a bunch of ammo except the one I need for my favorite gun, and it quickly turns into an annoyance having to use the crappier weapons or weapons unfitting for my character build on enemies I'd totally destroy otherwise.
At that point using the weapons you want suddenly turns too much into a question of ergonomics: am I really going to strip a place dry for all the various gunpowder, shell casings, bullet tips and then craft it into a specific ammo type... just to make my gun fire when I want, what I want, in the status effect that I want?
I mean, why shouldn't all of my same weapon types fire the exact ammo type they need, and leave status effects as a weapon-side solution? I won't exactly be in the mood to craft Dragon Breath shells every time I want my shotgun to burn people alive. In theory, even if it keeps itself this basic, it could still offer a compromise; if the status effects are weapon-side, and the ammo use is also weapon-side, then logically, if you allow for players to customize their own weaponry, then you don't have to import a bunch of different ammo types while also retaining the same effect.
If I put work into my 9 mm pistol, say I have the option to swap out the status effect type and the ammo it uses from pistol ammo and poison to 12G shotgun ammo and fire... then who's to say my character isn't just simply using Dragons Breath rounds, all without the hassle of modifying my pistol to a degree to which I need to have specifically these size shells with this specific status effect?
This is totally reasonable and understandable, but I personally do enjoy that mechanic. I’m a real weirdo that way.
i like it when there are logical incentives and inconveniences that push me to do certain things. So having to craft Dragon’s Breath rounds to do fire damage sounds pretty damn sweet to me.
A good compromise would be to include status effects as a potential feature for Smart Guns. Integrated microfabricators, what have you. So for other guns, you have to craft rounds (or mod the weapon) but for Smart Guns, you simply load in your ammo and do status damage. It works both lore and gameplay-wise. Now people that want easy status effects have weapons that do the job for em.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying but have some disagreements with the Life Paths.
I think that, in similar vein to your proposal, each branch should have you working within the confines of your life path rather than all pushing you out into the same circumstance; that being the montage with Jackie after getting your ass arrested/fired/whatever.
No offense this sounds like a terrible idea. That would be three separate games and ruin the chance for a V to be a competitionist run. Also, the point of Cyberpunk 2020 is to be an Edgerunner. The game is about being a criminal merc, not a Nomad. You can be a nomad criminal merc but the important part is being a merc.
One of the biggest flaws of The Witcher 2 was the fact the Second Act of the game is unplayable due to choosing either Roche or Iorveth. You should be able to play both.
Corpo and Street Kid should both boast a dedicated faction map mechanic, with Street Kid being more liberal in allegiance than Corpo. Nomad would have no such mechanic, however to compensate for this Nomad would be more liberal in nature in regards to people you may work quests for, therefor making the choice of quests broader.
Addressing this part, Fallout: New Vegas' faction system has a robust disguise system as well as four separate paths for playing because it's very easy to make yourself Villified with the Legion or NCR by, well, killing a bunch of their members. The problem with a faction system within Cyberpunk 2077 is the game is 90% killing gang members for the NCPD.
The game is built around the majority of the side content being about doing missions against the gangs and I'm not sure how you would be able to do Faction rep without removing wholesale all of the NCPD hustles as you will be stopping countless murders, kidnappings, human trafficking, and more that will turn you against every faction except the Mox.
This seems an idea for a wholly less violent game.
Ironically, you DO have a faction rep system as well but the factions are the Fixers and you gain rep with them by doing missions.
The thing I disagree with you on is making *any* career change accessible to a player of any life path. I believe that if you attempt trying to please everyone at once that there is a high risk of pleasing no-one, and if I or anyone else really wanted to go from corpo-rat to Nomad smuggler that it's more likely we'd just have picked Nomad from the start.
I'd argue against this as well. A huge chunk of players enjoyed roleplaying going from a scumbag mercenary corpo to falling in love with Panam and living their final years in peace with the Aldecados.
It's a classic redemption and found family story.
Likewise, changing Life Paths for a Street Kid seems very sensible as I originally assumed we'd have one who wanted to become rich and powerful by joining a Corporation.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying but have some disagreements with the Life Paths.
No offense this sounds like a terrible idea. That would be three separate games and ruin the chance for a V to be a competitionist run. Also, the point of Cyberpunk 2020 is to be an Edgerunner. The game is about being a criminal merc, not a Nomad. You can be a nomad criminal merc but the important part is being a merc.
One of the biggest flaws of The Witcher 2 was the fact the Second Act of the game is unplayable due to choosing either Roche or Iorveth. You should be able to play both.
Personally, I very much enjoy that aspect of Witcher 2, and thus would definitely wanna see it in 2077. Really, more games overall. I find it enhances the completionist aspect, rather than detracts. I mean, besides, if you wanna play both acts in Witcher 2, you can simply load a previous save and make a different choice. Otherwise, you would risk breaking the narrative by doing both simultaneously.
I would also disagree with the 2020 argument. As it’s a TTRPG, Cyberpunk 2020 can very much be about being a Nomad, Corpo Exec, and so on. There‘s no reason you can’t run a campaign about those things, really.
Addressing this part, Fallout: New Vegas' faction system has a robust disguise system as well as four separate paths for playing because it's very easy to make yourself Villified with the Legion or NCR by, well, killing a bunch of their members. The problem with a faction system within Cyberpunk 2077 is the game is 90% killing gang members for the NCPD.
The game is built around the majority of the side content being about doing missions against the gangs and I'm not sure how you would be able to do Faction rep without removing wholesale all of the NCPD hustles as you will be stopping countless murders, kidnappings, human trafficking, and more that will turn you against every faction except the Mox.
This seems an idea for a wholly less violent game.
Ironically, you DO have a faction rep system as well but the factions are the Fixers and you gain rep with them by doing missions.
You could solve this by Making Scavs more diverse and numerous. Give them more factions, other than just the Russian guys. Adding psychogangs (as per 2020), various mercs, and just random crime overall would also help create a “Target-Rich environment.” You‘d be able to do as many NCPD quests for these guys as you want, without harming Standing with the Valentinos, Voodoo Boys, and so on. These latter gangs can get Standing, more quests, and overall more depth. While the Scavs, Raffen Shiv, psychogangs, etc. can be more of the fodder class.
Also, having non-violent options would be awesome. It’d incentivize stealth, hacking, etc. much more.
Not to mention, re: Fixer Standing, you can just tie gang-affiliated Fixer standing to Gang Standing overall. Padre is Valentino, Wakako is Tyger Claw, etc.
Personally, I very much enjoy that aspect of Witcher 2, and thus would definitely wanna see it in 2077. Really, more games overall. I find it enhances the completionist aspect, rather than detracts. I mean, besides, if you wanna play both acts in Witcher 2, you can simply load a previous save and make a different choice. Otherwise, you would risk breaking the narrative by doing both simultaneously.
I would also disagree with the 2020 argument. As it’s a TTRPG, Cyberpunk 2020 can very much be about being a Nomad, Corpo Exec, and so on. There‘s no reason you can’t run a campaign about those things, really.
You could solve this by Making Scavs more diverse and numerous. Give them more factions, other than just the Russian guys. Adding psychogangs (as per 2020), various mercs, and just random crime overall would also help create a “Target-Rich environment.” You‘d be able to do as many NCPD quests for these guys as you want, without harming Standing with the Valentinos, Voodoo Boys, and so on. These latter gangs can get Standing, more quests, and overall more depth. While the Scavs, Raffen Shiv, psychogangs, etc. can be more of the fodder class.
Also, having non-violent options would be awesome. It’d incentivize stealth, hacking, etc. much more.
Not to mention, re: Fixer Standing, you can just tie gang-affiliated Fixer standing to Gang Standing overall. Padre is Valentino, Wakako is Tyger Claw, etc.
1. Different strokes for different folks but I have a "canon" V in my head and with the Witcher 2, the other stuff flat out doesn't happen. As such, I feel like any subsequent playthroughs are things that would be undermined. Essentially, they're like the Legion quests for New Vegas. You can do as many quests for the murdering rapist slavers as you want but I feel like I'm never going to do them so what does it matter. Also, the more time and energy you devote to doing Life Path exclusive quests, the more time you lose and content you lose for ones that could be done for everyone as a whole.
It happened similarly in THE OLD REPUBLIC where the game had wholly different stories for every single class and while that was great, Bioware was able to produce x6 times faster expansions by doing them for all classes that could be played by everyone.
2. To almost immediately undermine myself, I do think they should have done much more with the Life Paths. I think the game would have benefited from having the opening be about an hour's length ala Dragon Age: Origins. The Nomad could have had their Clan exile them, the Corpo could do that assassination mission, and the Street Kid could have actually gotten away with the car in a chase and so on. Also, I do think a few missions for each of the Life Path wouldn't detract from the main game too much.
3. I admit while I don't believe a faction rep system would be good, I would have appreciated more chance to do work for other gangs. I regret there weren't more Mox quests as I very much would have enjoyed roleplaying my V as a friend of that gang ala Dwight from Sin City. The missions for Wakako and Clouds are as close to Tyger Claw faction missions as you're going to get.
I feel the Mox really were underused for such an interesting and fun gang.
4. Going with your Megareport, one of the things I would very much like for the game would be gang themes for both V's apartment as well as costumes as well as Equipment. I think it's a shame you can't become affiliated or even join any of the gangs in that respect or at least roleplaying wise.
5. I really would like animations for V drinking at the Afterlife. I think there's something lost when you get your "David Martinez" to go versus drinking it at the bar.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying but have some disagreements with the Life Paths.
No offense this sounds like a terrible idea. That would be three separate games and ruin the chance for a V to be a competitionist run. Also, the point of Cyberpunk 2020 is to be an Edgerunner. The game is about being a criminal merc, not a Nomad. You can be a nomad criminal merc but the important part is being a merc.
One of the biggest flaws of The Witcher 2 was the fact the Second Act of the game is unplayable due to choosing either Roche or Iorveth. You should be able to play both.
Addressing this part, Fallout: New Vegas' faction system has a robust disguise system as well as four separate paths for playing because it's very easy to make yourself Villified with the Legion or NCR by, well, killing a bunch of their members. The problem with a faction system within Cyberpunk 2077 is the game is 90% killing gang members for the NCPD.
The game is built around the majority of the side content being about doing missions against the gangs and I'm not sure how you would be able to do Faction rep without removing wholesale all of the NCPD hustles as you will be stopping countless murders, kidnappings, human trafficking, and more that will turn you against every faction except the Mox.
This seems an idea for a wholly less violent game.
Ironically, you DO have a faction rep system as well but the factions are the Fixers and you gain rep with them by doing missions.
I'd argue against this as well. A huge chunk of players enjoyed roleplaying going from a scumbag mercenary corpo to falling in love with Panam and living their final years in peace with the Aldecados.
It's a classic redemption and found family story.
Likewise, changing Life Paths for a Street Kid seems very sensible as I originally assumed we'd have one who wanted to become rich and powerful by joining a Corporation.
This is an amazing reprisal to my stance on the Life Path system and I agree on the counterargument... however I can't really find myself fully agree to it out of principle. The Fixer rep system doesn't exactly go as far as I think me and Sublimated here had in mind, but that's really a minor complaint so I'll address with a rebuttal to your chief argument against my vision for the Life Path system instead.
When it comes to role playing games, or even just most games in general, I always prefer a hyper realized specialization than a jack-of-all-trades - sure, V could easily go from Corpo to Street Kid and save a lot of time and trouble... but I feel like it would devalue the individual paths themselves to make them so readily interchangeable. Allow me to explain:
I think it's important that certain decisions have a sense of commitment to them, especially in RPG games; if I make the decision to play as an Orc in Elder Scrolls, it's very unlikely that, less I'm using some mod to change my appearance on the fly, that I'll be switching out from an Orc into, say, Imperial. Likewise if I'm roleplaying the role of a diehard fan of the Empire, it's unlikely I'll just accept the quest to off the Emperor in the Brotherhood or double cross the Imperials and grant Ulfric the Jagged Crown... Life Paths are at a similar position where having access to more than one just wouldn't make any sense in favor of the immersion, completionism be damned.
In theory, I know that realistically V is a mercenary and, his decisions being a product of player choice themselves, you could justify anything... but you have to ask yourself that if you're running with a specific theme (again, looking back at my diehard Imperial roleplay as an example), wouldn't doing the opposite of what you're gunning for in the name of completionism simply weaken both the narrative drive in your head and the potential strength of the individual path you've chosen for yourself?
If the Life Paths were mutually exclusive, then you could have scenarios where V is really, truly committed to the narrative drive of the choice; you could push V to a high ranking member of Arasaka, maybe even some sort of executive director. In order to make V swap from Corpo to, say, Nomad, you'd have to drop a lot of that realization for granted; you'd have to modify the life path in such a way where the Nomads do not universally hate you and/or make it in a way where V doesn't reach far enough into Arasaka positions to justify suddenly becoming a Nomad, because let's be honest no justification in the world is gonna justify V being some sort of higher up at Arasaka and suddenly deciding "Y'know what, I've had enough of finally enjoying the fruits of my years-long labor after a few days; I feel like pedaling drugs for the Nomads now." - it would be like being a master swordsman with universal prestige after years of work, only to decide that starting tomorrow you wanna hang up everything and practice becoming a master archer; sure logic like this may exist, but I feel as if it would significantly devalue each individual road itself. The only way to make it make sense is to downplay the undertaking that the first one originally was and do it in a way in which the decision isn't an absolute.
Second, I disagree on the idea that V in this scenario still can't go from Corpo to falling in love with Panam; Panam's entire questline doesn't screw with Arasaka at all, if anything they screw with Militech who is Arasaka's chief rival. Maybe getting chemistry with a committed Corpo V and Panam and hyping it up to eventually leaving with the Aldecaldos would be a harder sell than the circumstances which take place as the game is now... but if it's already a player driven choice it is then already a player driven decision whether "your" V has his Corpo rat redemption arc or not.
You can't even make the "it doesn't fit with canon V" argument because each individuals V is their players own canon. V isn't some character like Geralt with an onslaught of preset relations with a bunch of characters he has met before the game (with the exception of Jackie and a handful of people you meet in each Life Paths respective prologues of course), you can't say "Canon V would end up with Panam" the same way you could say "Canon Geralt would end up with Yennefer, he'd never pick Triss." There is no canon V... and even if there was, why in God's name should that stop me? It sure doesn't stop the people picking Triss over Yennefer.
Clearly we both come from different stances, you're speaking from a more completionist perspective... but I care much more for the narrative to be a big commitment in the name of roleplaying than I do for completing the game; completing the game is secondrary, it's the trip that should matter.
I know I've just kinda undermined my own point saying that you can't make V drop whatever he's doing in Arasaka and at the same time go with Panam, but I still believe deciding fuck all in the name of being with someone you love is still a much more comprehensible choice than just "I'll stop being an executive at Arasaka and pedal contraband for basically the fun of it."
It's certainly a matter of taste and not something that can really be defined and shouldn't be defined actually because I feel one of the major things that is important in a RPG that allows you to create your character is the element of choice. So it should be, if at all technically feasible, that a player character should be able to make choices within their narrative that are up to the player as well as at least change the ending of the story and outcomes of individual quests.
So we're not precisely disagreeing but a few more rebuttals if you don't mind discussing it further.
I think it's important that certain decisions have a sense of commitment to them, especially in RPG games; if I make the decision to play as an Orc in Elder Scrolls, it's very unlikely that, less I'm using some mod to change my appearance on the fly, that I'll be switching out from an Orc into, say, Imperial. Likewise if I'm roleplaying the role of a diehard fan of the Empire, it's unlikely I'll just accept the quest to off the Emperor in the Brotherhood or double cross the Imperials and grant Ulfric the Jagged Crown... Life Paths are at a similar position where having access to more than one just wouldn't make any sense in favor of the immersion, completionism be damned.
By contrast, one of the things that I absolutely feel is necessary as a storyteller is that your character goes through a meaningful arc as part of his or her storyline. You can certainly begin and end a storyline exactly where you started but the best video game storylines take advantage of the medium to make your choices as part of an immersive experience. "You" become someone very different at the end of the game from the start. To use your Skyrim example, I find there's something very special about the idea that you can begin as someone who is a die hard Imperial loyalist who after becoming immersed in Talos worship and seeing what the Thalmor are up to (not to mention almost having your head cut off) that you end up killing the Emperor with the Dark Brotherhood and helping Ulfric Stormcloak.
I actually think Corpo V is one of the most interesting life-paths as is because there's multiple endings to their storyline that depend on the idea that they cannot simply stick in place with "get back to serving Arasaka."
1. Goro's story works wonderfully as a contrast to a Lifelong Arasaka suck-up because the game beats you over the head with how pathetic and empty Goro's attempts to get back into Arasaka's good graces is. So much so that if you do choose "The Devil" ending, you have the option of selling your soul (literally) to them and eternal enslavement for the promise of immortality that is made clear to be the worst ending. You also have the option of deciding simply to live your last days in peace free from their power.
2. The other endings have you potentially developing a rapport with the anti-establishment Johnny Silverhand or Nomads that result in you choosing an ending where you decide to rebel against your corporate background to become a free man. You can also roleplay a selfish monster who only wants to live too but that choice has meaning because you start in a place of being essentially Random Minion 321# for the Empire.
Second, I disagree on the idea that V in this scenario still can't go from Corpo to falling in love with Panam; Panam's entire questline doesn't screw with Arasaka at all, if anything they screw with Militech who is Arasaka's chief rival. Maybe getting chemistry with a committed Corpo V and Panam and hyping it up to eventually leaving with the Aldecaldos would be a harder sell than the circumstances which take place as the game is now... but if it's already a player driven choice it is then already a player driven decision whether "your" V has his Corpo rat redemption arc or not.
I know I've just kinda undermined my own point saying that you can't make V drop whatever he's doing in Arasaka and at the same time go with Panam, but I still believe deciding fuck all in the name of being with someone you love is still a much more comprehensible choice than just "I'll stop being an executive at Arasaka and pedal contraband for basically the fun of it."
I actually think that "regaining the wealth and power you had as an Arasaka middle-manager" is implied to heavily be why V becomes an Edgerunner because having been blacklisted through no fault of their own, their James Bond skills and familiarity with cyberware and violence means that Edgerunning is the easiest way back up the ladder. Sort of like James Bond becoming a professional hit man or thieft - you have a particular set of skills that lend themselves to crime and Edgerunners are people who can get rehired by the corporations.
But that kind of gets into the point of "organic" roleplaying where much of the story has to be made up in your head as well. One thing I enjoy about cyberpunk 2099 is it gives you choices between murdering people outright or subduing them nonviolently. My V mostly was non-lethal but killed every Scav, the Brian Dance people, the people who tortured Evelyn, human traffickers, and Adam Smasher.
It was, system wise, largely irrelevant than a PC who just used machine guns but affected my roleplay a great deal.
You're right there's no "canon" V but V has enough commonalities that you can do a pretty good story about them in broad strokes.
I actually think Corpo V is one of the most interesting life-paths as is because there's multiple endings to their storyline that depend on the idea that they cannot simply stick in place with "get back to serving Arasaka."
I kinda agree but also disagree since i hade a corpo V in mind when i heard about the game pretty much. Could not really play the way i wanted too since the option isent there tho. The lifepaths are sadly pretty underused. I get why they did it but i think i just expected too much.
It happened similarly in THE OLD REPUBLIC where the game had wholly different stories for every single class and while that was great, Bioware was able to produce x6 times faster expansions by doing them for all classes that could be played by everyone.
Yea but the expansions storys was very much worse. But like i said before, streamlining makes it much easier but at the same time you kinda give up alot. It also wasent really the success Bioware/EA was hoping...
The issue I wish to highlight relates to how, seemingly, most characters will obey specific parameters while driving you no matter what.
Now when I say no matter what I don't mean that if a truck is blocking Panam from a road she needs to go over while transporting you that she'll drive into it and send it flying like her whole car is made of some adamantine alloy (even though that has happened to me a few times).
Ive had a few funny bugs that actually were very similar to what you described.
In the scene where V meets Oda the first time, it ends in Oda driving away. Except in my game Oda backed his car into a wall and some boxes, and got stuck, inching back and forth while giving crashing sounds. Meanwhile in the foreground Takemura was chatting normally as if nothing was wrong. It was hilarious. First person sure made the game more immersive... not.
I kinda agree but also disagree since i hade a corpo V in mind when i heard about the game pretty much. Could not really play the way i wanted too since the option isent there tho. The lifepaths are sadly pretty underused. I get why they did it but i think i just expected too much.
I wanted too be a corpo all the way, atleast at first when i heard about the game. I kinda realised that wont be happening but still hade some hope i could work with some corp in some way. You can somewhat play as greedy i guess by charging people on the way but thats kinda it. Ending was similar, went with the Devil since it was most fitting and was hoping for some reemployment atleast but nah, just sell your soul or go back with brain cancer.
I wanted too be a corpo all the way, atleast at first when i heard about the game. I kinda realised that wont be happening but still hade some hope i could work with some corp in some way. You can somewhat play as greedy i guess by charging people on the way but thats kinda it. Ending was similar, went with the Devil since it was most fitting and was hoping for some reemployment atleast but nah, just sell your soul or go back with brain cancer.
Oddly enough, I had the similar idea but when we started working for Arasaka in my first playthrough, I knew we wouldn't stay working for them for long. If we'd started with Militech or Night Corp. maybe our Corpo V would keep his job but Arasaka is the Galactic Empire of the setting. It'd be like starting a Star Wars game as an Imperial.
You know you're going to defect before the game is over.
It's also why I never entertained the Devil ending even though I was playing a corporate bigwig because, again, signing up for Arasaka was stupid as a Cyberpunk 2020 fan.
Oddly enough, I had the similar idea but when we started working for Arasaka in my first playthrough, I knew we wouldn't stay working for them for long. If we'd started with Militech or Night Corp. maybe our Corpo V would keep his job but Arasaka is the Galactic Empire of the setting. It'd be like starting a Star Wars game as an Imperial.
You know you're going to defect before the game is over.
It's also why I never entertained the Devil ending even though I was playing a corporate bigwig because, again, signing up for Arasaka was stupid as a Cyberpunk 2020 fan.
I think the idea of automatically defecting really doesn’t work here. A major element of Cyberpunk is the focus on societal failure/dysfunction at every juncture and level. Star Wars is a melodramatic hero’s journey archetype. Defecting from the Empire is necessary since the setting tends to more absolutist, black-and-white morality. Whereas a major aspect of Cyberpunk is, as Goro puts it, “everyone gets their hands dirty.” And whether your V chooses to do it via mercwork or under the strictures of a Corp is your choice. Or should be, at least.
I wanted too be a corpo all the way, atleast at first when i heard about the game. I kinda realised that wont be happening but still hade some hope i could work with some corp in some way. You can somewhat play as greedy i guess by charging people on the way but thats kinda it. Ending was similar, went with the Devil since it was most fitting and was hoping for some reemployment atleast but nah, just sell your soul or go back with brain cancer.
Same. I was expecting there to be stark gameplay and story differences between Lifepaths, as you can tell by my document. Having to play Corpo all the way and choose between Arasaka, Militech, etc. was the plan.
And honestly, I was hoping for multiple choices where you could just play as a Corpo Sec or Netrunner minion, just doing tedious missions until you load back to make a different choice. Would have been awesome.
I think the idea of automatically defecting really doesn’t work here. A major element of Cyberpunk is the focus on societal failure/dysfuntion at every juncture and level. Star Wars is a melodramatic hero’s journey archetype. Defecting from the Empire is necessary since the setting tends ti mire absolutist, black-and-white morality. Whereas a major aspect of Cyberpunk is, as Goro puts it, “everyone gets their hands dirty.” And whether your V chooses to do it via mercwork or under the strictures of a Corp is your choice. Or should be, at least.
Perhaps it's my familiarity with Cyberpunk 2020 speaking. There's every megacorp is black and gray morality. And there's Arasaka which is pure evil. Which isn't unknown in cyberpunk with OCP in Robocop, Weyland Yutani in Aliens, or Pharmacon in Johnny Mnemonic. They are not just the embodiment of fascist capitalism (which Paul Verhoven created OCP to embody based on his father's stories of the Nazis) but there to nicely show that there are limits to the moral ambiguity of even Cyberpunk 2020's setting.
Night City is not Grand Theft Auto where the world is so horrible that you can do whatever you want since nothing matters. its meant to be a horrible world you can make better in small ways. Which I think the game sometimes failed at. I think River's quest is the only story where you can do a genuinely decent thing for its own sake.
I really regret we didn't have an option to side with Yorinobu against his father's company.
Same. I was expecting there to be stark gameplay and story differences between Lifepaths, as you can tell by my document. Having to play Corpo all the way and choose between Arasaka, Militech, etc. was the plan.
And honestly, I was hoping for multiple choices where you could just play as a Corpo Sec or Netrunner minion, just doing tedious missions until you load back to make a different choice. Would have been awesome.
On my end, I was always expecting to play an Edgerunner because that is what Cyberpunk 2020 is about. I feel like what you're describing is more like The Old Republic and would have limited most of our gameplay options so that huge chunks of the content would be cut off from most playthroughs.
But we've mentioned this.
For me, I do appreciate the game creating the street samurai economy and describing how it works with Fixers, the Afterlife, and how most of the jobs go back to either individual contracts or corps. I did think the game failed to sell me on the fact of *WHY* my V was doing so many of these missions when they were dying, though.
It wasn't a hard fix either, like, "Get a bunch of Eddies just in case we need them as a war cgest" or "Get a bunch of Eddies because if you do survive, you'll need to retire after this."
I feel like what you're describing is more like The Old Republic and would have limited most of our gameplay options so that huge chunks of the content would be cut off from most playthroughs.
I kinda wish they hade done this tbh, diffrent quests for diffrent life paths. Would have made me play trough the game more times too see everything. But i get why too, would be a really short game vs a game thats pretty short already. SWtor make me playtrough it 6 times. The exps cut that down quite a bit ^^
I kinda wish they hade done this tbh, diffrent quests for diffrent life paths. Would have made me play trough the game more times too see everything. But i get why too, would be a really short game vs a game thats pretty short already. SWtor make me playtrough it 6 times. The exps cut that down quite a bit ^^
In Cyberpunk, really the answer is both. A few long branches populated by many shorter branches. Cyberpunk was advertised as a game where you can make multiple major choices, and I think this structure would lend itself to that quite well.
