Cdpr wants to make unkillable children in cp2077.

[j3lly_m3lly]

why the hell game like cp2077 would b having such nonsense as unkillable children because of how somehow "they r just bttr than evry1 else and bc of that they r immortal" like in bethesda's games? i rly thought that cp2077 will b simply better than this and not have such annoying mechanics to spread some nonsense ideology started by other game developers.

 

[Garrison72]

Ain't worth going down this road son. Plus, children do die in these games. It's just for story reasons.

 

[j3lly_m3lly]

Ain't worth going down this road son. Plus, children do die in these games. It's just for story reasons.

cdpr said on twitter that players will not be able to attack children OR npcs connected with the plot. so it means that it has nothing 2 do with children being connected 2 the story, they just wants 2 do it the same way bethesda did it.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Actually would I prefer them not being in the game at all instead of them breaking immersion.

 

[Rawls]

Because killing kids would likely make the game AO. Which would put a serious dent in it's marketability (as in consoles and many retailers wouldn't support it). Also, I don't see a upside of randomly killing child NPCs. Unkillable kids outside of story beats perfectly consistent with CDPRs prior games, and I never felt like "man Geralt should really be able to kill the kids running around the streets." Would randomly killing kids make a game more immersive? I think not. Do I think there may be times kids may die as a result of actions taken in the game? Yes (like the kids potentially killed by the Crones in TW3). Do I think we'll be killing kids ourselves? No.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Also, I don't see a upside of randomly killing child NPCs. Unkillable kids outside of story beats perfectly consistent with CDPRs prior games, and I never felt like "man Geralt should really be able to kill the kids running around the streets." Would randomly killing kids make a game more immersive? I think not. Do I think there may be times kids may die as a result of actions taken in the game? Yes (like the kids potentially killed by the Crones in TW3). Do I think we'll be killing kids ourselves? No.

Minus we don't play Geralt, we're supposed to play someone we create and be able to decide what that character is thinking.
Maybe we'll go for the roleplay of a Cyberpsychosis V who consider meatbags as cockroach he needs to cruch, or simply a serial killer who likes to prey on kids.
The fact that you don't like to play such character doesn't mean no one does.

Aside of that there may be times when those kids may just be collateral damages, but if they are the only NPC who survive unarmed it do breaks immersion.

 

[Rawls]

Minus we don't play Geralt, we're supposed to play someone we create and be able to decide what that character is thinking.
Maybe we'll go for the roleplay of a Cyberpsychosis V who consider meatbags as cockroach he needs to cruch, or simply a serial killer who likes to prey on kids.
The fact that you don't like to play such character doesn't mean no one does.

Aside of that there may be times when those kids may just be collateral damages, but if they are the only NPC who survive unarmed it do breaks immersion.

If you think randomly killing kids makes a game more immersive or realistic, we'll just agree to disagree.

Also V is not a blank slate. I know you know that as we've discussed it several times. (S)he is still going to be a character we play, with a wider range of player agency than CDPR allowed with Geralt. However, that doesn't mean we can make him or her do anything we want.

 

[j3lly_m3lly]

Because killing kids would likely make the game AO. Which would put a serious dent in it's marketability (as in consoles and many retailers wouldn't support it). Also, I don't see a upside of randomly killing child NPCs. Unkillable kids outside of story beats perfectly consistent with CDPRs prior games, and I never felt like "man Geralt should really be able to kill the kids running around the streets." Would randomly killing kids make a game more immersive? I think not. Do I think there may be times kids may die as a result of actions taken in the game? Yes (like the kids potentially killed by the Crones in TW3). Do I think we'll be killing kids ourselves? No.

cp2077 alrdy contains scenes that r close (or equal, idk) to pornography and somehow consoles still supports it. so how making children npcs equal to normal people npcs would suddenly change it?

so u say u don't see upside of being able to randomly kill children npcs. i could say that I don't see upside of randomly killing any human or animal npc... outside of letting player do whatever the hell he wants as it's the purpose of an rpg game. a player who tries to do something sees upside of you know... being able to do that and it should be in the developers' best interest to give player the most possibilities as possible. there's no downside in having possibilities player can choose from. if player doesn't have possibility of killing children npcs, he shouldn't be having possibility of killing any human npcs. if player wants to murder npcs in an rpg game where u can kill npcs, he supposed to be able to murder any npcs he wants (if it will not break the game by killing important story characters), no matter if they r old people or children, they should all die equally whenever player wishes to kill them.

 

[Rawls]

outside of letting player do whatever the hell he wants as it's the purpose of an rpg game

Nope. That's not what crpgs do at all. They let a player pick between a set of prescripted options. If you want total freedom, you'll have to go with a pen and paper RPG.

no matter if they r old people or children, they should all die equally whenever player wishes to kill them.

Except that killing kids can get your game slammed with an AO rating, which will kill sales. You may not like that reality, but CDPR has to deal with the ratings systems as they exist.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

If you think randomly killing kids makes a game more immersive or realistic, we'll just agree to disagree.

Also V is not a blank slate. I know you know that as we've discussed it several times. (S)he is still going to be a character we play, with a wider range of player agency than CDPR allowed with Geralt. However, that doesn't mean we can make him or her do anything we want.

Then why not makes all non enemies immortal?
As you're not supposed to shoot them anyway.

 

[Rawls]

Then why not makes all non enemies immortal?
As you're not supposed to shoot them anyway.

Because there aren't potentially huge sales consequences to killing them. I'd like CDPR to be able to afford to continue making games.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Because there aren't potentially huge sales consequences to killing them. I'd like CDPR to be able to afford to continue making games.

So it is a auto-censor decision.
So why trying to justify it by stating immersion-thingy things when it's just a market decision?

 

[Rawls]

So it is a auto-censor decision.
So why trying to justify it by stating immersion-thingy things when it's just a market decision?

Because it's both. There is big downside AND no upside.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Because it's both. There is big downside AND no upside.

So there's an upside in killing innocents when they are adults?

 

[Rawls]

So there's an upside in killing innocents when they are adults?

There can be, depending on the V you want to play. I doubt any version of V will indiscriminately gun down kids though. Maybe in story beats with appropriate motivation.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

There can be, depending on the V you want to play. I doubt any version of V will indiscriminately gun down kids though.

That's just your personal preference, actually roleplay wise there is no difference between killing childrens and killing any other harmless innocent peoples (between market decisions of course).

For example I doubt Adam Smasher would hesitate even for a second to kill a child because he's a child.
So unless there is a story reason besides V immunity to cyberpsychosis nothing stops you to roleplay your fully borged V like a random cyberpsycho even if the game doesn't give a gameplay mechanic for that.

 

[doktor_fleck]

Roleplaying a character with cyberpsychosis would probably make you ignore the whole story and side quest anyway. Your whole "roleplay" would include killing random civilians and get wasted by MaxTac team in the end.

Sorry, but your argument is wrong.

 

[Sardukhar]

Political - and going ugly fast. Nor do we like to see other companies attacked. It's rude.

Killing children isn't "cool" and shouldn't be fun. It's quite likely CDPR doesn't think so either. Nor can you go cyberpsycho in-game.

Ideological accusations aside, this thread is going ugly. Remember Rule 1 is respect first. Only warning - then we lock it.

 

[Suhiira]

So there's an upside in killing innocents when they are adults?

Nope.
But there are players that take great pleasure in killing everything that moves, and destroying anything that doesn't, in a game. I'm REALLY hoping the police, and especially MaxTac not only react but turn characters that try such things in to red mist.

"But it's not realistic that I can't kill everything."
Try it in real life and see how far you get then tell me it's not realistic.

(( DISCLAIMER - This post is directed at the forum community not any specific poster.))

 

[j3lly_m3lly]

how is it that the cp2077's in-game pornography doesn't grant cdpr big financial problems but making children npcs equal to normal people npcs would suddenly change it and make consoles not want cp2077 being released on their console? would actually any of the greedy console companies went so kamikaze about that detail to the point of getting rid of the most anticipated game from their console and giving the competition an opportunity to surpass them? such scenario is very hard to imagine for me when the consoles are so competitive about popularity.