I agree. RPG's should be based on character skill, not player skill. As soon as player skill is the deciding factor then it's just another action game. Which we have a billion of. Good RPG's are hard to find.
You are right though that you can play with some ideas of stats affecting shooting mechanics but you can't really do a real time mechanic that does not involve players skill (at least not well) in some capacity (aiming being the obvious one)
If this game wants to be an RPG, player reflexes should NOT be the ones that are important in combat.
If this game will be another shooter on the market, I would be disappointed.
Combat will be in third person perspective. I can bet on it because that's what CD Projekt does.
All that's left is to hope that combat will be a hybrid with enough RPG elements & mechanics so that it will not feel as just another shooter on the market. (like the last Deus Ex which was a glorified FPS)
You want urgency and tension in a turn based combat system?
Make it time constrained so that the player must react to situations and adapt under time pressure.
PS: WATS? Are you kidding me? Kill it with fire.
The more skill based and difficult the combat is the better. The rpg genre imo is filled with awful combat systems including many classics.
The phrase describing Kerenzikov one catched the attenion - "the user must learn to readjust his or her actions to a world that appears to be moving in slow motion"..
If it's all about how well one twitches, they might as well drop the skills out from the equation from distorting the experience of being in control as much as possible. It'd be easier to balance and there'd not be a nulled character system that does nothing relevant. I wouldn't buy that game though, but at least it would be an honest action-story-experience.
No system is going to be perfect, it's really a matter of "does it work reasonably well".The question is, would that be fun? One problem with that is, that when both you and your opponent move at same time, you need to make adjustements as you would behave differently if he suddenly stars charging for example.
My problem with bullet-time is that while it may slow the action it's still a player vice character dependent system.What about Max Payne bullettime? Duration and start determined by initiative and REF? You can turn it off in menu if you want, but slowing down everything a -lot- makes combat much less twitch. Looks cool too.
I think that's more dramatic licence on the part of whoever wrote the description then an actual effect.The phrase describing Kerenzikov one catched the attenion - "the user must learn to readjust his or her actions to a world that appears to be moving in slow motion".
You could but this might be a little too hands-off, lock your target, watch your character fight. This is fine in a tactical wargame where you're controlling units not individuals.You could use a system that's based on locking on to the target where the player does not aim, but simply chooses a target to focus on, locks on to it, and shoots when wanted to at a level of accuracy based on the PC's skill with the relevant weapon and other modifiers (like distance, movement and lighting).
An action or FPS game can certainly have RPG elements, but as soon as player vice character skills and reactions become the determining factor it's no longer a traditional RPG. And I think most of the people that buy CP2077 think they'll be buying an RPG not an action game or shooter.IMO RPGs can also be action games so long as one is still assuming the role of a chatacter and making consequential choices for that character. I feel like sometimes we humans over-categorize things. Action oriented combat is much more fun IMO than turn based combat or combat that is mostly determined by stats. Making the players skill matter makes the experience much more immersive. You feel more like you're there.
Agreed, there's zero need for character skills in an FPS. And like you I won't be buying it because I have zero interest in FPS games.If it's all about how well one twitches, they might as well drop the skills out from the equation ...
If this is important to you buy an action game or FPS, don't expect every game to be an action or FPS game because you prefer them.Pure rpg combat is awful just look at Morrowind or the original Dues Ex. Skill based combat systems are much better than stat based because it rewards player skill(if done correctly that is).
Since you've apparently decided you speak for me you're 100% wrong.RPG need revolution. Action is everything, the market already proved that. 30 years over Final Fantasy one of the most famous RPG in video game history become action driven. People like control real time NOT character build simulator, If someone like character build simulator The Sims is a good choice.
Actually I'm a RL programmer and game designer, and I totally agree a straight translation of CP2020 game mechanics won't work. But that hardly means it has to become an action game or FPS.OK, the game's design director already said it will more action-like, "The game mechanics are totally different on paper, they don't work in video games because they would be super boring" By Mateusz Kanik, thank goodness CDPR has a good leader who knows what's is meaningful thing in video game.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/01/cyberpunk-2077-putting-the-punk-back-into-cyberpunk
Awesome. Hopefully some of our ideas will be implemented into Cyberpunk 2077.Interesting topic guys, has been a good read .
An action or FPS game can certainly have RPG elements, but as soon as player vice character skills and reactions become the determining factor it's no longer a traditional RPG. And I think most of the people that buy CP2077 think they'll be buying an RPG not an action game or shooter..
Why exactly, if you don't mind me asking?
I don't see why some people see here more action oriented combat here as some kind of immediate catastrophe...
You could but this might be a little too hands-off, lock your target, watch your character fight. This is fine in a tactical wargame where you're controlling units not individuals.
Since you've apparently decided you speak for me you're 100% wrong.
The market proves various types of games sell, some better then others, and a good many action and FPS games on the market bombed spectacularly so that's hardly a guarantee of a good and well selling game.
Weellll...probably not. Witcher and Cyberpunk fans are going to be more common than Cyberpunk 2020 fans, I think. By far. So they will expect action RPG.
I do feel you keep hardlining the, "if any player skill is involved, it's not an RPG!" line. But you have no issue with players who are better at tactics or chracter building or intuitive task selection having an advantage over those who get killed a lot because they don't have those skills.
That also seems unfair.
Some players are just better at games than others. Whether they be RTS, TB or FPS. You suck at FPS so you don't want it ( also because you are determined about your definition of RPG and insist it is correct). But some people will suck at TB ( Me! I lack a certain patience) and TB or modified TB or anything involving planning and non immediate perspective will suck for them.
Hey, I die in Torment. Too much wheeee! and then consequences.
The trick is to find a method that works for both you and I and everyone else on both sides of this divide.
I do feel you keep hardlining the, "if any player skill is involved, it's not an RPG!" line. But you have no issue with players who are better at tactics or chracter building or intuitive task selection having an advantage over those who get killed a lot because they don't have those skills.
That also seems unfair.
Some players are just better at games than others.
The trick is to find a method that works for both you and I and everyone else on both sides of this divide.
Yes I do hardline "if any player skill is involved, it's not an RPG!", but you should add the word "traditional" in there.Weellll...probably not. Witcher and Cyberpunk fans are going to be more common than Cyberpunk 2020 fans, I think. By far. So they will expect action RPG.
I do feel you keep hardlining the, "if any player skill is involved, it's not an RPG!" line. But you have no issue with players who are better at tactics or chracter building or intuitive task selection having an advantage over those who get killed a lot because they don't have those skills.
That also seems unfair.
You make the exact same mistake so many game publishers make (*cough* E/A), you assume a game sells well because it's an action or open world game. Nothing could be further from the truth. Games sell well because they are good games, not because of the style of the game. Admittedly some game markets are smaller then others but a lot of this is due to exposure, people like to play games similar to ones they have previously played. Does that make those types of games "better"? By no means, all it means is they sell more copies.Oh really, action not guarantee well selling game, but all well selling game in modern AAA market almost have common element —— action. It's not sufficient but necessary.
Exactly!My main concern is see a nice system turned off completely in favour of action.... This for sure would kill the Cyberpunk feel to me... Fight are supposed to be the last resource and be extremely dangerous... And when you create a separation between RPG mechanics rule in favour to actually Gamepad acrobacy you will kill the pen and paper feel of the game...