I could accept an unskilled person having a ~95% chance to hit at point blank range for a pistol... let's say point blank range for a pistol is up to 5 meters... against an unmoving and unaware opponent.
With the above asumption as a background:
If the opponent is aware, or unaware+walking, I would probably reduce it with a quarter (so 75% of the above suggestion).
If the opponent is aware+walking, or is unaware+running, I would probably half the original chance to hit.
If the opponent is aware+running I would go down as low as a fourth of the original unaware+unmoving opponent at 5 meters.
And for every time you double the range I would also reduce the chance to hit... either with one quarter, or a 5th or 6th or something (depends on what is considered the max range of the weapon, how many times you can double the range befor it becomes virtually "useless")
Those numbers are just arbitrary... and might or might not represent any kind of real statistics... I just sort of picked those numbers and assumtions out of thin air. But if an rpg game had what I stated above as the basis for an unskilled characters chance to hit, with a pistol at the range of 5 meters, then I could compleatly accept that. It sounds reasonable enough to me. I could even accept even lower % to... if you start out at maybe 70-80% chance for an unskilled to hit at 5 meters, and then go down from there depending on circumstances.
With the above asumption as a background:
If the opponent is aware, or unaware+walking, I would probably reduce it with a quarter (so 75% of the above suggestion).
If the opponent is aware+walking, or is unaware+running, I would probably half the original chance to hit.
If the opponent is aware+running I would go down as low as a fourth of the original unaware+unmoving opponent at 5 meters.
And for every time you double the range I would also reduce the chance to hit... either with one quarter, or a 5th or 6th or something (depends on what is considered the max range of the weapon, how many times you can double the range befor it becomes virtually "useless")
Those numbers are just arbitrary... and might or might not represent any kind of real statistics... I just sort of picked those numbers and assumtions out of thin air. But if an rpg game had what I stated above as the basis for an unskilled characters chance to hit, with a pistol at the range of 5 meters, then I could compleatly accept that. It sounds reasonable enough to me. I could even accept even lower % to... if you start out at maybe 70-80% chance for an unskilled to hit at 5 meters, and then go down from there depending on circumstances.
Last edited:
If we are speaking about real time combat, stats based aiming is only making it harder. There is something really wrong with system in which first you have to get a hit, and than your character need to hit. Same work have to be done twice. Most of the time it's only used to hide enemies terrible AI.
Stats based gunplay work only in turn based combat, or in games where you don't manually aim.
1 - You can always create turn based game in which all parties act simultaneously within a specified amount of time, take weapon, distance and position of both target and shooter into account when calculating outcomes. Stats based gunplay can work in turn based combat, but it doesn't mean that it can't work outside turn based combat or that all parties have to do it in IGOUGO system. Don't limit yourself while designing a game.
2 - Stats based aiming in real time combat sounds good for a game that's based on RPG with stats. It gives an importance to aim-related stats that affect gunplay while not completely removing the possibility from a skilled player to do well without forcing him to get a high aim stats in order to be able to hit anything. I have to confess that after this discussion I will be disappointed if we won't get something like aim stat now. It just makes sense.
Not to mention that there are a multitude of ways to implement such a system. I really don't see why not.
The player creates his character in the beginning, picks a suitable career package and assigns the career skills, 40 points I think there were (and possibly pick up skills too) - if CDPR uses those rules. So you make a character to suit your style already from there. How bad or good shot he is, is totally up to the player from the very beginning (in theory you could well start the game with 10 in pistols and play a Cyberpunk Lucky Luke, though of course with the caveat of having to leave some other available skills lower and/or to 0).
Alpha Protocol is hardly a pinnacle of this kind of design given its very troubled developement cycle (and how the skills there work; you have 15 skillpoints out of which only 3 contribute straight to accuracy and they are far apart). Both it and Deus Ex have the right core idea, but surely in this day and age such design can be perfected to far greater and more responsive lengths.
The player creates his character in the beginning, picks a suitable career package and assigns the career skills, 40 points I think there were (and possibly pick up skills too) - if CDPR uses those rules. So you make a character to suit your style already from there. How bad or good shot he is, is totally up to the player from the very beginning (in theory you could well start the game with 10 in pistols and play a Cyberpunk Lucky Luke, though of course with the caveat of having to leave some other available skills lower and/or to 0).
Alpha Protocol is hardly a pinnacle of this kind of design given its very troubled developement cycle (and how the skills there work; you have 15 skillpoints out of which only 3 contribute straight to accuracy and they are far apart). Both it and Deus Ex have the right core idea, but surely in this day and age such design can be perfected to far greater and more responsive lengths.
Last edited:
Man ,stats-based aiming = sucks.
Here's what CDPR should do:
Separate the two groups completely. Have a hardcore mode and have a RPG mode. It's not difficult.
Put the stat-based aiming at 999.9999 so that the carebears, the people with the reflexes of mummies and the wannabe human calculators do their thing in their corner.
Put the idiotic stat aiming thing to 0.0 and let bullets land where the cursor is aiming for the FPS people (well, eff that, not even the FPS people, just people with basic reflexes).
Let's see which mode is going to be the most popular for CP2078. Now who wants to bet on that?
Here's what CDPR should do:
Separate the two groups completely. Have a hardcore mode and have a RPG mode. It's not difficult.
Put the stat-based aiming at 999.9999 so that the carebears, the people with the reflexes of mummies and the wannabe human calculators do their thing in their corner.
Put the idiotic stat aiming thing to 0.0 and let bullets land where the cursor is aiming for the FPS people (well, eff that, not even the FPS people, just people with basic reflexes).
Let's see which mode is going to be the most popular for CP2078. Now who wants to bet on that?
Last edited:
I was under the impression that this was going to be first person. I would not play this if it's a 3rd person shooter. Hack and slashes like Witcher is fine in 3rd person, but not with shooters. The aiming mechanics with 3rd person shooters have to be completely unrealistic in order for it to work correctly. No thanks...
Because...? You're not really explaining anything.
What popularity has to do with any of this?
Thank you. I naturally am a good shooter with good reflexes and I employ realistic tactics when I play games. I want that to translate in the game, not be unable to hit the broad side of a barn while standing inside of it because my "stats" are bad...
Stats-based anything sucks. If you're smart enough to employ sound tactics in your attack and is skilled enough and have good enough reflexes, those aspects should increase your success. Not some arbitrary number that you just accumulate as you play...
Nah, it doesn't. It's just a design that doesn't inherently favor normal controllerporn you get from conventional action games.
We are talking about an RPG, are we not? There are factors concerning gunplay that aren't modeled in most FPS games. It ain't outside the realm of possibility that CDPR can implement these factors and made them be governed by stats. It makes game more realistic and put importance on having experienced shooter at the same time.
Last edited:
I liked Alpha Protocol a lot. And did not have any particular problems with if I missed due to not having put enough points into a certain weapon type. Unfortunatly it was released befor it should have been. Partly down to their publisher Sega who forced them to release it befor it was done, but of course partly also due to Obsidian them self. So far I have not played a Obsidian game I did not like though. And so far I have liked their "sequals" a lot more over the original games other companies made (KotoRII, NWN2, and Fallout New Vegas).
Also, looking at that videoclip above, to me most of those misses look like even in an fps the person would have missed. A lot of shots taken at far to great of a distence (where the target was both moving and in cover no less) with a pistol, many shots taken far to quickly as well (befor the circle has had time to "settle down" and get as small as it can), or several shots taken as the targeting circle was not even over the enemy. And the biggest reason why it seemed like some of those shots missed even though the targeting circle was compleatly over the enemy, is because the player did not do enough damage to the target for it to die (you see the enemies healthbar go down after all). And by the way the aiming circle moves around I am asuming that the player is using a controller as well, which is never an optimal way to play any game where part of it is down to aiming (no matter what one might think).
Actually Alpha Protocol has a simmilar type of weapon skill + circle aiming as Mass Effect does. Man, your making me want to play Alpha Protocol again, it's an awesome game. XD
*chuckles* Your calling stat based aiming "carebear"? Your the one who seem to want to make the game easy... FPS gamestyle is easy, there is no challenge in it really... it's virtually just point and click. Where as statbased aiming will punish you for not building your character right, not properly using your weapons/equipment/character, etc. "Carebear"? Yeah, right.
Of course... they might make the game FPS... and sure, that's fine... I would still play it. But seeing as it's based on an acual pen and paper roleplaying game, it would be much more propper to make the combat based on the characters stats and weapon skill.
It makes no sence to me that a character you create in an RPG where his skill in talking is what is going to get him through the missions, and has never even touched a gun, now suddenly have the leet skillz of a soldier who has trained his whole life with weapons... just because the player happend to be a grandmaster FPS gamer or something.
If anything, using stat based accuracy is a lot more realistic (in the sence that some people are close to actually not being able to hit the inside of a barn even if they stood in it, where as some people could do it blindfolded and standing on the outside of the barn... with their backs turned.. or something). Not to mention it takes a lot more of tactical thinking then FPS does, you have to consider every single aspect of it.
So on top of the normal tactical thinking you get in normal FPS games, where you have to think about what weapons your using, what type of body armour you have (if any), other type of equipment you have with you, your enemy and his equipment, your surroundings, etc... your have to also consider your characters stats and skills, what your character is actually capable of. Which means that you add another layer of tactical thinking, where you get to really look at the situation and decide what would be the best option for your guy if he happends to be unskilled with weapons.
I mean as much as I love Farcry 3, it's one of my favorit FPS games (together with Crysis and a few others), I found it a bit ridiculous that from the moment he picked up a gun he was pretty much an expert at it. But that's what you get with FPS games, the player character (no matter how unskilled the character is supposed to be with weapons) can basicly become a master in seconds due to who the person who plays it is. Makes little sence really. I mean sure, some people are more naturals then others with things like this, but FPS games tend to take it to way to far in that sence.
What is there to explain?
We've been at it for 5-6 pages already over several threads.
There's just no two ways to put it elegantly. It sucks.
Grinding sucks.
Glorified 4th grade number crunching sucks.
People are acting as if they are battling Deep Blue when playing. They're not.
It's just the same people want to bash in the same point over and over again.
And then this whole circus is repeated by new people entering the fray and they're repeating the same crap (via wall of text) that was said three pages ago!
Because CDPR is a business.
There's a reason why they went for a more action-oriented combat system in Witcher 2.
If it were your money on the line, you'd do the same thing.
Last edited:
Not really. Calistarius is on point here.
Actually I put my money into something more interesting than "this is popular". There are more interesting games out there (or interesting ideas for them) than "let's repeat what the whole industry is doing" or "do what these guys did". We've enough such games - and such developers - as it is. That's why I expect from CDPR to be more bold than that with CP77. Should CP77 do something that's popular but not interesting I will put buying it on hold.
The reasons I would like stat based accuracy for a game like CP77 is not because of math or anything. It has got everything to do with the fact that it is an RPG, and ESPECIALLY because it is based on an actual pen and paper rpg.
And sure, grinding can be boring. And some dislike it more then others... compleatly depends on their patience. I happend to be one of those people who have huge levels of patience, and I don't mind grinding all to much either. I mean I naturally tend to grind anyway. I would not be surpriced if something like 20-25% of all of my game time is "natural" grinding, and with "natural" I mean that I don't even notice that I am doing it. You should see me when I delibratly grind...
But really... having to take 2-4+ more shots befor the enemy goes down, because your character sucks at weapons? That's not grinding... not one bit. We are talking about a handful of seconds here. Because this game, as far as we can tell will be a real time type of game... so you can fire of those shots within a handfull or two seconds. Now if we where talking about a turnbased game... that would be slightly different... but we are not. Of course I would still accept that in a turn based game, especially if I created a character with no skill in weapons.
The thing is... there is a VERY easy way to solve your problem with stat based accuracy... it's really simple you know.
You take your character creation points, and put as many of them as possible into the stats that effects accuracy (it's often called dexterity in many rpg's, but there are other names to), and then as many points as possible into your selected weapons as well! See, problem solved... mostly.
Sure there will be a chance that you miss, because we can't really expect a new character to be awesome at combat in the start... but you will probably have something like a 75% accuracy from the start. Which should meen that your almost sure to hit with every second shot. And with a little bit of gaming, earning experience for your character, and more points to add to your character, you can do the same, add those points to Dex and/or your choicen weapons.
You will probably never have 100% hit accuracy (unless there are special circumstances). But it's the same in regular FPS games... I mean do you remember all those times where you where playing an FPS game where you took a "sure to hit" shot... and it misses? Where your maybe a bit angrily gesturing at the screen, where you go "the enemies hit box must not be propely optimised!"... or maybe just a string of explicit words... or something simmilar? That's exacly the same as why you might have at best a 95-99% hit chance, with pretty much always a 1-5% chance to miss.
Of course... building your character this way will cause problems for your characters on other ends. Poor people skills, where everything your character says comes out as 80's to 90's action movie hero one-liners... funny at times yes... but utterly useless for talking your way in to the bar where your mission is supposed to take place. Shit with sneaking around, where it seems like your guy would be noticed by just breathing in a fully soundproof room. Not to mention compleatly useless with locks and security systems, where he would be unable to break intoa pill bottle... which is not even childproof...
But I guess that's the problem here... most people seem to want all the benefits of being able to rock in combat, but are not willing to take the consequences of it by being severely gimped on every other aspect of the game.
Edit: As for my "wall of texting"... that has got nothing to do with that I am passionate about an RPG game having stat based accuracy. "Wall of text" is my natural tendency when I write... I am just built that way, and I am have been totally aware of it for the past 22 (out of 35) years. I even go out of my way and spend something like 2-5 more time on trying to edit down my posts as much as possible, then how long it actually takes me to write my initial "draft" of it. So far I have gone over this particular post 3 times, reading the full thing of it every time, looking for misspellings, things I can remove to make it smaller, etc. So yeah... you would see me "wall of text" on allmost any subject... be it about my absolutly favorit things... or about the meal I had yesterday if I am going to exaggerate it a bit. So be prepared to almost always get text-walled by me... then if you decide to read it or not? Not my problem really... I already do what I can to reduce it as best as I can.
Last edited:
I'm not a fortune teller, but there are some signs around that aren't very promising.... the (at least initial) intent on more reflext based action combat (and before a due mummy reference, I my reflexes are fine, I just don't like that sort of combat in an RPG...), and Nars telling me earlier in this thread that a non-combat character is implied to not be a viable choice because there wiil be mandatory fighting (from some interview I've missed).
In any case... It'll be interesting to see whether any of these discussions are heard and taken heed of by those that matter. Whether there will be anything that caters to the... let's just say "stats-crowd" that would at the very least make the combat more interesting for them and preferably all around less about flailing around furiously and taking pot shots with my über m/kb skillz.
In any case... It'll be interesting to see whether any of these discussions are heard and taken heed of by those that matter. Whether there will be anything that caters to the... let's just say "stats-crowd" that would at the very least make the combat more interesting for them and preferably all around less about flailing around furiously and taking pot shots with my über m/kb skillz.
Poet is a consoleporn addict, so to him anything that's not fast and furious is boring, stupid, and worthless.
The rest of the world can envision some hybrid system that incorporates stat and FPS systems. Will it be "as good" as a purely tactical or a purely FPS game, no, because there will have to be tradeoffs. If the "purest" minority (both turn-base and FPS) don't like it fine. The other 95% of the people that buy the game will probably be quite pleased because it's NOT one or the other.
The rest of the world can envision some hybrid system that incorporates stat and FPS systems. Will it be "as good" as a purely tactical or a purely FPS game, no, because there will have to be tradeoffs. If the "purest" minority (both turn-base and FPS) don't like it fine. The other 95% of the people that buy the game will probably be quite pleased because it's NOT one or the other.
We
Are
Watching.
Gang, stay polite and stay friendly.
The idea here is NOT to convert the other guy to your point of view. It's a forum and that thinking tends to lead to confrontation.
The idea is to explain your point of view and explore others', then use that to re examine your own, if you'd like.
So it's okay if we go over the same ground with new people, or even each other - sometimes we repeat ourselves and someone chimes in with something new.
Some times we refine our argument or clarify it for others.
Regardless, let's avoid terms like consoleporn and carebear - they are mental shortcuts and rarely as accurate as they are insulting.
Try not to gang up on a minority view too much -it isolates other people and builds resentment. Either chime in with your own twist or raise a new point, don't just group-echo each other and smack the other guy into muck.
Lastly, for now, although a long text speech/monologue may be convenient for you to write, ( I should know this - stop smirking!), it is less convenient for others to read and parse. A lot of your ideas will be missed. Consider building tighter arguments or focussing on key points.
It's not a fight - you don't have to counter punch each "attack", especially if someone else already has.
Now, I must return to the Real World. It's ugly and sharp but hey, at least it has cake.
Are
Watching.
Gang, stay polite and stay friendly.
The idea here is NOT to convert the other guy to your point of view. It's a forum and that thinking tends to lead to confrontation.
The idea is to explain your point of view and explore others', then use that to re examine your own, if you'd like.
So it's okay if we go over the same ground with new people, or even each other - sometimes we repeat ourselves and someone chimes in with something new.
Some times we refine our argument or clarify it for others.
Regardless, let's avoid terms like consoleporn and carebear - they are mental shortcuts and rarely as accurate as they are insulting.
Try not to gang up on a minority view too much -it isolates other people and builds resentment. Either chime in with your own twist or raise a new point, don't just group-echo each other and smack the other guy into muck.
Lastly, for now, although a long text speech/monologue may be convenient for you to write, ( I should know this - stop smirking!), it is less convenient for others to read and parse. A lot of your ideas will be missed. Consider building tighter arguments or focussing on key points.
It's not a fight - you don't have to counter punch each "attack", especially if someone else already has.
Now, I must return to the Real World. It's ugly and sharp but hey, at least it has cake.
Last edited: