Combat system

[metalmaniac21]

Why so many people afraid of mentioning STALKER? When it works, (and it was fixed) it basically nails the gunplay (now even more realistic,with bullet drops and shit) and enemy AI. Enemies actually try flanking you and behave rather sneaky. I also fond of how GSC nailed the bandits', these bastards actually use slang to mislead the enemy (guess what's CHEEKI BREEKI I V DAMKE for). CDPR should pull something like this off too for CP2077.

BTW, Bobo, this shitpost-worthy meme of "VTMB has combat made of fail" is really old and one step into the grave. It's the AI that is poor.

 

[Suhiira]

Becoming more action oriented also made them more popular, but also improved some of their aspects, which too often are overlooked.

It's not really an issue to which "crowd" it caters to, but what type of gameplay is best suited for it. There is a reason why so many isometric games are known for turn based combat system, as those in third person ( especially modern, given the improvements in animation technology) are more action oriented.

Perhaps some players prefer tactical planning over action?
Perhaps some players prefer to play a character with skills that differ from their own and want the game to provide "lightning reflexes" and "deadshot aim"?

And yes they are a "crowd", different types of games appeal to different types of players. Sure many folks play more then one type but everyone has their favorite style.

I for one don't play FPS or actions games, but unlike many FPS/action players you don't see me demanding every game be a non-FPS/action because that style of game doesn't appeal to me. I prefer game dialog choices beyond "Yes", "No", "Sarcastic" (which often means yes or no but you don't have a clue which), and "More Info".

Yes older RPGs had their problems ... so did every other game in every other genre. Things have, and with luck will continue to improve. To claim a modern game is "better" then one that's 10 years old is meaningless.

Problem is when you make an action focused RPG and you start streamlining character skill and stats ...

Is not subjective that RPG are being dumbed down with plastic elements for get a wider audience... Look at the witcher [3] that is still a marvelous game ...

And all of this was a design decision to keep the combat fluid (cd project words not mine) so in this the game been dumbed down in this aspect to favor the action smoothness...

And i repeat it again...
We have enough fps in high tech setting.. and we have also a first person action rpg like called Deus ex.... I don't need another deus ex.. i don't need another shooter

Pretty much nails it.

The FPS and action game crowds have tons of games to choose from, us RPG types get maybe ... maybe ... one every two or three years. And given recent offerings I don't really expect to bother with Fallout 5 or Dragon Age 4.

This is why I follow CP2077 so closely and argue so strongly against turning it into GTA2077 or Call of Duty 2077 or Fallout 2077.

 

[227]

Becoming more action oriented also made them more popular, but also improved some of their aspects, which too often are overlooked.

You should look up the sales numbers for the older Final Fantasy games compared to action-based games of the time. Or even those of the first two Witcher titles.

Seriously. The idea that modern games sell a ton because they have action-y combat and not because they suddenly have 50+ million dollar marketing budgets and hype campaigns backing them is confusing correlation with causation on a comical scale.

 

[Grotesque]

if you want to make money big time, you must sell a ton of copies;

to sell a ton of copies, you must make a game which appeals to lots and lots of people;

these lots and lots of people have different tastes so you must make a game that caters to a common denominator;

making a game like that intrinsically is less complex and shallower than a game targeted for a specific audience with higher expectations

 

[Suhiira]

if you want to make money big time, you must sell a ton of copies;

to sell a ton of copies, you must make a game which appeals to lots and lots of people;

these lots and lots of people have different tastes so you must make a game that caters to a common denominator;

making a game like that intrinsically is less complex and shallower than a game targeted for a specific audience with higher expectations

If your only goal it so make as much money as possible then you're 100% correct.

There are however people out there that make games they like, why we have Kickstarter.

 

[yyb0568]

It's time to stop these arguments, CDPR already clear said the this game will has heavy action elements

. So discussion what they will do is more meaningful than whether it is a "traditional RPG" or not

 

[AdamTaylor]

Damn. So it's yet another a shooter. That's disappointing.

 

[Meccanical]

It's a game with guns in it.

 

[AdamTaylor]

It's a game with guns in it.

So are Fallout 1 & 2. They're not shooters.

 

[jukkis_]

No it's not, if it's done correctly. Fallout 4 is good example of failing with that, stripping off everything that made Fallout games so fun and turning it to generic casual shoot & loot exploration game. If focus on Cyberpunk is not on shooting i don't see it having guns as a problem.

 

[Sardukhar]

It's time to stop these arguments, CDPR already clear said the this game will has heavy action elements

. So discussion what they will do is more meaningful than whether it is a "traditional RPG" or not

A) it's never time to stop these arguments, unless people get nasty. Or I get bored.

B) It's been years of quiet development and nothing concrete about CP2077 has really been released that isn't subject to change. It's all subject to change. That's part of why the Reds read these forums. They don't generally have time to be bored.

So don't assume what elements are in or out.

C) You are right that the discussion of what is a traditional RPG is, is a side topic. IT related, but everyone try to relate it to CPunk please. Not a back and forth about making a game you like. CDPR only makes games they like. Whether they like action elements enough to put them into CPunk, good question.

 

[227]

It's time to stop these arguments, CDPR already clear said the this game will has heavy action elements

I see "modern action" with zero mentions of heavy. The modern part might be a bit troubling, but action has been used to describe numerous things throughout the years. Here's a 2003 interview with the developers of the first KOTOR where it's used to describe their round-based combat, so that could really mean anything. Still, a little worrying. Surely no one wants a Syndicate reboot-style game where everything that makes an IP interesting is stripped away to make way for a generic action game.

Side note/question: Does anyone know what "canonical solutions" means? Kind of hoping that it means "a default way of solving in-game problems though many exist," but dreading that it means "making something completely standard in every way to avoid the costs of developing something innovative."

As for what I'd like to see from combat, I think they could do something really cool that combines action and the careful planning of turn-based. Valkyria Chronicles would be a great place to draw inspiration because it has one of the most unusual, amazing combat systems ever devised; it's technically turn-based, but enemies attack in real time while you move characters. Something completely out of left field like that would be amazing.

 

[Meccanical]

There was a picture from a long time ago with this poster poster CDPR has of the "key points" for CP77.

One of the points was a "tactical mode".

Who knows what it means, there are many ways you can design a system that is "action-oriented", and still be "strategic".

Game design is not an exact science nor have we seen everything that can ever be done.

We still have room for much more, successes, failures, imperfections and innovations. The future is limitless. I will not be so presumptuous as to say "action-heavy" has to mean this, or "strategic" has to mean that.

 

[Mebrilia]

They claimed to want to deliver a cyberpunk that has the cyberpunk spirit... In order to do so they have to stick to the pen and paper rules or adapt them in real time....
If they make just an action game... call it how you want it but will be not cyberpunk.

This discussion is not on what is or what is not an RPG

More like what cyberpunk is... And what they want deliver...

How we can preserve the cyberpunk spirit in the combat mechanics?

If you see the posts you will notice a lot of constructive criticism on that...


You can't just stick a picture and lining the word action then after dismiss all that being discussed...


Cd project told countless time they want deliver a cyberpunk R_P_G not a shooter or an action game... The game of course will include action but to avoid to break the cyberpunk spirit fighting must be dangerous... and your last resource... A bullet a single one can kill you in cyberpunk...

If they miss to deliver that and adapt the pen and paper rules... They miss to deliver the cyberpunk spirit.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Damn. So it's yet another a shooter. That's disappointing.

I've been having my fingers crossed that that has changed at least to some degree since that picture was new. We have a fuckton of "modern action games" coming from all directions all the time, all just alike eachother. Who really needs more? Is there really no call for anything else? Has the RPG industry really nothing else to offer?

 

[AdamTaylor]

I've been having my fingers crossed that that has changed at least to some degree since that picture was new. We have a fuckton of "modern action games" coming from all directions all the time, all just alike eachother. Who really needs more? Is there really no call for anything else?

Wasteland 2 & 3, Pillars of Eternity, Shadowrun Returns, Torment and other classic RPG's all getting huge amounts of crowdfunding. So, yeah, there's a massive call for something else. People want "old school" RPG's. Big companies spit out cookie cutter shooters that they call RPG's yet the gamers throw tons of money at Kickstarter and such places to fund turn based RPG's. So the demand is there.

 

[Tarathelion]

Wasteland 2 & 3, Pillars of Eternity, Shadowrun Returns, Torment and other classic RPG's all getting huge amounts of crowdfunding. So, yeah, there's a massive call for something else. People want "old school" RPG's. Big companies spit out cookie cutter shooters that they call RPG's yet the gamers throw tons of money at Kickstarter and such places to fund turn based RPG's. So the demand is there.

Huge amount of crowdfunding being few million dollars. Compared to hundreds of millions spent on fallouts and skyrims (close to billion dollars in revenue for each)

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Wasteland 2 & 3, Pillars of Eternity, Shadowrun Returns, Torment and other classic RPG's all getting huge amounts of crowdfunding. So, yeah, there's a massive call for something else. People want "old school" RPG's. Big companies spit out cookie cutter shooters that they call RPG's yet the gamers throw tons of money at Kickstarter and such places to fund turn based RPG's. So the demand is there.

The demand is definitely there, and has always been (insistence on massmarket, mass appeal broader audiences has just blurred the big picture), and there's been no AAA RPG yet to try and monetize with it (and bring proper RPG's back to the foreground of the market). Cyberpunk would be an excellent opportunity to introduce something new (well, old-new) to the market.

Huge amount of crowdfunding being few million dollars. Compared to hundreds of millions spent on fallouts and skyrims (close to billion dollars in revenue for each)

Gotta understand that what you have there is few more or less obscure studios (InXile, Larian, Harebrained Schemes, even Obsidian) testing the waters with very small budgets and little to no marketing campaign (and the market knows both). There's no data on what would happen if a well known high end studio tried to do the same - or something similiar - with bigger budet and proper marketing.

 

[Mebrilia]

The point is not that... The point is they can still gather at the different crows sticking with the original pen and paper stats or skill...How?..

Accurance will change depending on your stat skill... ((for smoothenes lovers this could be addressed by widening the weapon recoil and spray and having the aim less trembling and more steady depending on it just like work in real life.. i can guarantee that if you fire a gun on a target for the first time you will not going to hit nice scores..))

Action will be present ((but in realistic doses... and with consequences... if you are going full cowboy mode you should not only alert all the hostile on the area but depending on the zone even the police))

Deadly combat ((if you get it it must preserve the same feeling that the pen and paper game haves... Being wounded can be deadly...A bullet in your head can even instant kill you...))

Keep the pen and paper stat and abilities adapt those skill that can't work well outside turn based P&P in the manner i suggested about the gunplay line.. Key points like that would be enterely possible and you don't have to turn the game in a GTA/call of duty clone....

Third person and First person toggleable

If not only third person

This is an rpg after all and cd project already claim to archieve to a lot of customization and have all this potential customization freedoom and being forced to a first person prospective will be pretty much like have a painting and observing only the square of it..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALd0ILisKvI&t=107s
No thanks

 

[Tarathelion]

The demand is definitely there, and has always been (insistence on massmarket, mass appeal broader audiences has just blurred the big picture), and there's been no AAA RPG yet to try and monetize with it (and bring proper RPG's back to the foreground of the market). Cyberpunk would be an excellent opportunity to introduce something new (well, old-new) to the market.




Gotta understand that what you have there is few more or less obscure studios testing the waters with very small budgets and little to no marketing campaign. There's no data on what would happen if a high end studio tried to do the same with bigger budet and proper marketing.

You have to consider different platforms as a factor too. Turn based games don't work that well on pads. The reality is, games that do very well market them to very diverse audience. Skyrims, Fallout sell well because they go after shooter and open world actions games audience. The core traditional rpgs crowd is not that big. You have example of very good games like Xcom trying out consoles and it wasn't a big success despite really good review. It was excellent game with decent marketing (not close to big boys of course but still visible one). Look at Dragon age Origins. The combat was hated by console gamers (thats why they changed it in second game) but loved by pc crowd. Inquisition tries to cater to both crowds with mediocre results. The are things that you cannot change.

---------- Updated at 01:33 PM ----------

Btw, I don't think anybody here wants a pure shooter