Bossbattle Variety

[Nikola_Nesic]

The Quiet "boss fight" is among my top favorite fights ever. Everything was top notch, the buildup, execution, the feeling of danger.. just perfect.

If you call airdrop on her, that knock her down right away, you can call something like box for example

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

You've pointed out various points about the combat design, but have failed to articulate why they are essentially bad. If this is purely a rant to state your personal distaste for such things, then you'll forgive us for disagreeing. But if you're serious about having the developers change things up, your points have to be objective, well-informed and logical from a game design perspective - it's the kind of feedback I'm sure CDPR would really appreciate.

You know, if you take the current bossfight concept and execution out of the game and evaluate it in isolation, it's not that bad. I would shun it nonetheless due to my personal distaste for bossfights. But from the way it looks as a feature of its own, it's not that bad. Pretty common and none too special, but... yeah. You get the picture.

However... When I keep the concept and execution within the context of the game, I can not help but feel it is very rigid and out of place solution in a (supposedly) otherwise such a lively and "realistic" (for the lack of a better word) game. Like a speedbump on a highway in the middle of nowhere. What is it doing there?

The way it halts the flow in such a weird and gamey way, through an arena where you circle strafe and dodge and learn the predetermined movement patterns of the superman "boss", and wait for a slow powerattack so that you can circle around the enemy to put a few shots at the conveniently glowing weak spot, then rinse and repeat, is more reminiscent of action games that are dedicated on such arcade activities and don't even pretend otherwise (like Dark Souls, or oldschool sidescrollers and platformers). The mechanism in which it works, is foreign and detached in its arcadeness to what happened before it and how the game otherwise works, and as such, it is both thematically and mechanically ill fit for a game like this. That's why I said earlier that it's almost as if there was a sudden momentary switch to another game.

That's why I see that it would serve the game much better if, instead of a "boss fight", there was a "boss event" that, while being free for the player to attend to, has a narrative reason of happening and that flows generally in a much free'er and organic way that is befitting the mission at hand. Where the tension and challenges, and tactical opportunities for skill use, whether it's the players wish to kill everyone or just escape as quickly as possible or what ever, come from the surrounding happenings where everyone is put on the same line, even the "boss" character (i.e. no ridiculous HP sponginess or forcefields). So to say that disabling/apprehending the "boss character" would be a tactical edge in solving the situation (violently) rather than the sole point, and that doing it or leaving it undone would bare its own consequences.

The way it (the actual fight, not the mission as a whole) is now, is simplistic and cheap in its execution and offers nothing, but an easily forgettable momentary thrill. One could argue that that is the point of a bossfight, a momentary thrill to move onwards from, but one could also ask himself, would it not be better if it was something more than that.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Like a speedbump on a highway in the middle of nowhere. What is it doing there?

I see it more like following an healthy regular diet but from time to time you have a burger, fried chicken or a cake: it breaks the routine with a nice climax of flavour. I'm not saying that the regular diet is bad, but once in a while is nice to eat unhealhy (and very tasty) food.

 

[Snowflakez]

I see it more like following an healthy regular diet but from time to time you have a burger, fried chicken or a cake: it breaks the routine with a nice climax of flavour. I'm not saying that the regular diet is bad, but once in a while is nice to eat unhealhy (and very tasty) food.

Gonna have to agree with kofe here.

Tone is important in a game like this, especially a story-driven one. When you suddenly switch gears to an arcadey boss fight, it can feel "off."

Personally, as I said, I'll just have to wait and see the gameplay before I cry foul about CDPR's implementation of the idea or praise it (and even if I don't love it, there's lots else in the game for me to love so I'm not going to be upset). But early impressions without gameplay are not 100% fantastic in every conceivable way.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Gonna have to agree with kofe here.

oh, but I wasn't implying he was wrong, I just find it funny how the perspective is different.

And how much I love unhealthy food.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I see it more like following an healthy regular diet but from time to time you have a burger, fried chicken or a cake: it breaks the routine with a nice climax of flavour.

That's what I'd want it to be. And what I'm trying to suggest isn't meant to take that away.

So rather than just a burger, fried chicken and cake, I'd try to push it towards kobe burger with matured cheddar, pan fried quality free range chicken and sacher cake made with Belgian dark chocklate and quality XO cognac. If you catch my drift.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

If you catch my drift.

I don't know, but I think I'll have a second dinner now.

 

[Snowflakez]

Man, I'm hungry now.

 

[fridgeband]

You know, if you take the current bossfight concept and execution out of the game and evaluate it in isolation, it's not that bad. I would shun it nonetheless due to my personal distaste for bossfights. But from the way it looks as a feature of its own, it's not that bad. Pretty common and none too special, but... yeah. You get the picture.

However... When I keep the concept and execution within the context of the game, I can not help but feel it is very rigid and out of place solution in a (supposedly) otherwise such a lively and "realistic" (for the lack of a better word) game. Like a speedbump on a highway in the middle of nowhere. What is it doing there?

The way it halts the flow in such a weird and gamey way, through an arena where you circle strafe and dodge and learn the predetermined movement patterns of the superman "boss", and wait for a slow powerattack so that you can circle around the enemy to put a few shots at the conveniently glowing weak spot, then rinse and repeat, is more reminiscent of action games that are dedicated on such arcade activities and don't even pretend otherwise (like Dark Souls, or oldschool sidescrollers and platformers). The mechanism in which it works, is foreign and detached in its arcadeness to what happened before it and how the game otherwise works, and as such, it is both thematically and mechanically ill fit for a game like this. That's why I said earlier that it's almost as if there was a sudden momentary switch to another game.

That's why I see that it would serve the game much better if, instead of a "boss fight", there was a "boss event" that, while being free for the player to attend to, has a narrative reason of happening and that flows generally in a much free'er and organic way that is befitting the mission at hand. Where the tension and challenges, and tactical opportunities for skill use, whether it's the players wish to kill everyone or just escape as quickly as possible or what ever, come from the surrounding happenings where everyone is put on the same line, even the "boss" character (i.e. no ridiculous HP sponginess or forcefields). So to say that disabling/apprehending the "boss character" would be a tactical edge in solving the situation (violently) rather than the sole point, and that doing it or leaving it undone would bare its own consequences.

The way it (the actual fight, not the mission as a whole) is now, is simplistic and cheap in its execution and offers nothing, but an easily forgettable momentary thrill. One could argue that that is the point of a bossfight, a momentary thrill to move onwards from, but one could also ask himself, would it not be better if it was something more than that.

Okay, so if I understand correctly, would I be correct to guess that you would enjoy fighting a large amount of low level enemies and use the environment against them or just fight them head on as a "boss event" or an event that is difficult rather than fighting one strong boss?
Since we're using only what we know so far (50 minute gameplay reveal, V an Frankie VS Maelstrom gang and boss at the end) We can observe a few things about that interaction with the maelstrom gang.

1. We're able to approach that mission in many different ways. (cooperating or not cooperating with the corporate woman, and many other choices. We can see that in the 48 minutes of gameplay, that V and Jackie choose the less violent and slightly more diplomatic approach, but of course it goes more violent in the end as we can observe.)
2. If we had gone in violently from the start, Jackie and V make cautious and impressed observations about the environment and how they would have been harmed or killed by all the traps (like mines) all over the entrance of the base.
3. When things go crazy (because of the virus in the money chip) V and Jackie are forced to essentially fight that "Boss Event" where they have to fight an entire gang base full of many many standard level enemies (maelstrom gang members) Technically, this was that "Boss event"
4. Finally V and Jackie move on to the final "individual Boss Character" who no doubt, is very angry and wants revenge. V and Jackie fight the boss, and win.
So I would argue that depending on how you handle situations, that by your definitions (if I understand correctly) that the player is able to experience many "Boss events" and "individual Boss fights" and even "environmental Bosses" Since the entire gang base was rigged with dangerous traps, it's like the whole base is a boss if you didn't bypass it by being more careful. Interesting right?
These are just my opinions of course. Peace.

Post automatically merged: Jun 30, 2019

Gonna have to agree with kofe here.

Tone is important in a game like this, especially a story-driven one. When you suddenly switch gears to an arcadey boss fight, it can feel "off."

Personally, as I said, I'll just have to wait and see the gameplay before I cry foul about CDPR's implementation of the idea or praise it (and even if I don't love it, there's lots else in the game for me to love so I'm not going to be upset). But early impressions without gameplay are not 100% fantastic in every conceivable way.

Maybe it just seems or feels arcade-y because the Maelstrom gang leader is wearing a mech suit and does some boss type stuff, and we've just seen things like it before in the past? I'm just saying. Peace.

 

[Snowflakez]

Maybe it just seems or feels arcade-y because the Maelstrom gang leader is wearing a mech suit and does some boss type stuff, and we've just seen things like it before in the past? I'm just saying. Peace.

I think it feels arcadey because there was no way to bypass it unless you made choices that you could not have predicted beforehand. The player was funneled down a series of corridors after the virus was discovered, until they reached the "boss room," where they had to dodge attacks, attack glowing weak points, etc.

Don't get me wrong, it's good to have unexpected outcomes, but with the Royce encounter, there should have been an opportunity to sneak by him or just turn around and leave. Remember, they already had the flathead chip from Dum-Dum's corpse. Why did they need to proceed through the base and fight him? Because video games, that's why.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Why did they need to proceed through the base and fight him?

because they had to show a boss fight in a 48 min gameplay. Let's see how it is once the game is released, I wouldn't be so sure that mission wll look the same at all, to be honest.

This mission doesn't exist at all, HUD was very different AND enemies didn't have levels (god whyyyyy they added levels????????????)!

 

[Snowflakez]

because they had to show a boss fight in a 48 min gameplay. Let's see how it is once the game is released, I wouldn't be so sure that mission wll look the same at all, to be honest.

This mission doesn't exist at all, HUD was very different AND enemies didn't have levels (god whyyyyy they added levels????????????)!

True, and I'm definitely willing to wait and see. I'm buying multiple copies of the game no matter what, so... My nitpicks really don't mean much. I'm very happy with the concessions they've already made for me (not me specifically) so far. The way they've described skill-based shooting, and skills in general, is exactly what I was hoping for and it's almost like they took our feedback word-for-word into account there.

The bossfight system is hardly a make-or-break situation.

The levels... yeah...

 

[scraverX]

Something that I've picked up from this thread, and I'll try to put this as not critically as possible, but the "boss fight" as a speed bump could only seem that way in the context of the demo I've heard described from this year was done as a series vignettes.

The fight with Sasquatch is a speed bump because that particular character took the direct approach. Which is very much a case of consequences and things fitting thematically, by which I mean; the consequence of taking the direct approach is you may have to end up fighting a 'boss'.

Encounter Design, and I use that terminology specifically, is a very involved and complex process. The fact that CDPR are trying to show us that they have approached encounters from multiple directions is, in my mind a very positive thing.

When it comes to the hacking angle, I saw someone commenting about them feeling it might be difficult in a 'stressful situation'. I agree, but in this particular iteration of the universe hacking is a situation where an ability to plan ahead comes in.
If you take that play style you are not so much doing things on the fly as putting things in place to be triggered at some future stage. At least, that's my read from descriptions of this years E3 presentation.

 

[Tangsta]

Remember, they already had the flathead chip from Dum-Dum's corpse. Why did they need to proceed through the base and fight him? Because video games, that's why.

The demo showed that there were a variety of approaches the player could make before even entering that building. I believe the "diplomatic" approach was chosen. It just so happens that for the particular mission, the narrative simply wanted V to get "screwed over" by the Corpo agent - it was a setup - and so the diplomatic approach became the "guns blazing" option. I do believe in other missions in the final version of the game, choosing certain options will actually result in that approach being taken ultimately, it's just sometimes the game will throw curve balls at you to keep things interesting, or it may just be something special for this particular demo.

I recall there was a hacking opportunity after the virus incident that the player wasn't able to utilise because V's hacking skills were too low. That might perhaps be a way out that would bypass Royce and his henchmen. The only other way out was the "combat" route, filled with enemies to fight and culminating in a boss fight with Royce.

 

[scraverX]

The demo showed that there were a variety of approaches the player could make before even entering that building. I believe the "diplomatic" approach was chosen. It just so happens that for the particular mission, the narrative simply wanted V to get "screwed over" by the Corpo agent - it was a setup - and so the diplomatic approach became the "guns blazing" option. I do believe in other missions in the final version of the game, choosing certain options will actually result in that approach being taken ultimately, it's just sometimes the game will throw curve balls at you to keep things interesting, or it may just be something special for this particular demo.

I recall there was a hacking opportunity after the virus incident that the player wasn't able to utilise because V's hacking skills were too low. That might perhaps be a way out that would bypass Royce and his henchmen. The only other way out was the "combat" route, filled with enemies to fight and culminating in a boss fight with Royce.

My read on that scenario is much the same.

 

[Snowflakez]

The demo showed that there were a variety of approaches the player could make before even entering that building. I believe the "diplomatic" approach was chosen. It just so happens that for the particular mission, the narrative simply wanted V to get "screwed over" by the Corpo agent - it was a setup - and so the diplomatic approach became the "guns blazing" option. I do believe in other missions in the final version of the game, choosing certain options will actually result in that approach being taken ultimately, it's just sometimes the game will throw curve balls at you to keep things interesting, or it may just be something special for this particular demo.

I recall there was a hacking opportunity after the virus incident that the player wasn't able to utilise because V's hacking skills were too low. That might perhaps be a way out that would bypass Royce and his henchmen. The only other way out was the "combat" route, filled with enemies to fight and culminating in a boss fight with Royce.

My problem is with the narrative forcing you to do stuff that doesn't make sense.

We had the flathead chip, and thus the bot itself. There was no reason for us to be forced to fight anyone else after that first room if we didn't want to.

It does seem like they're changing that in the most recent demo, as I read that the player could simply walk or sneak by Sasquatch to get to the NetWatch guy. Which would be great, and what I would have liked to see in the Royce mission.

 

[Tangsta]

My problem is with the narrative forcing you to do stuff that doesn't make sense.

Well, you were technically trapped inside the building after the virus went off. The mission then was to find a way out. But really, I think this might have been just a one-off for the demo because the developers wanted to provide a brief glimpse at the game's combat. The route that was taken was very much intentional in order to fulfil this goal.

 

[Snowflakez]

Well, you were technically trapped inside the building after the virus went off. The mission then was to find a way out. But really, I think this might have been just a one-off for the demo because the developers wanted to a brief glimpse at the game's combat. The route that was taken was very much intentional in order to fulfil this goal.

Yes, I think you're probably right.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

We're able to approach that mission in many different ways.

That’s fine. And good. But beside the point.

My focus is simply on replacing the arcade fight sequence with something more sound and thematically fit mechanicswise. It might require some retooling of the mission (any mission with such boss at the end), but how that is done doesn’t really concern me all that much.

In Royces case it might be something as simple as he runs off to rig the building to blow up and leave. You then have a number of choices: stop him before the bomb is armed, be late and try to disarm the bomb (with Royce gone), catch him as he’s arming the bomb and deal with that situation, leave as quickly as possible, you got the chip, you don’t give a fuck what happens next, or let the building blow up and die.

And at facing Royce... subdue him and deal with him (kill or let him go or call Militech to come and collect him), or kill him outright. Not in an arena match, but in a ”live” situation. Royce need not be a conventional boss at the end of a dungeon (same goes for any other ”boss”), just a reagular mook like everone else, but with firepower and skill to kill you easily, but he can also die rather quickly just as anyone.

 

[Snowflakez]

That’s fine. And good. But beside the point.

My focus is simply on replacing arcade fight sequence with something more sound and thematically fit mechanicswise. It might require some retooling of the mission (any mission with such boss at the end), but how that is done doesn’t really concern me.

I do like the idea of boss encounters over boss fights. I think it's not just more thematically realistic, but also just plain cooler from a gameplay standpoint. I mentioned it before, but I agree that having to think on your feet and contend with environmental challenges as well as enemies/a "boss" character is a neat idea, and something more games should do.

Taking out the boss may be beneficial for loot and making the encounter as a whole easier, but let's say you still have to deal with autonomous security systems, mines, etc. that you can hack, blow up, or send your spiderbot in to fiddle with.