Cyberpunk 2077: The Perfect RPG

+
Which leads me to Cyberpunk 2077, we have all seen the demo. Right from the get go we saw a shit ton of character creation/customization options. Then in the rescue quest we heard V as a voiced protagonist, shooting mechanics and amazing levels of immersion. After that starting from V's apartment we were thrust into the strong story and breathtaking world with so much detail and atmosphere. Then with the Corpo quest we witnessed the high non linearity of the game.
I agree, the main problem with RPG's is they can't usually sync storytelling with liberties. A game is worth it if I can get at least a month of gameplay out of it and I'm pretty sure this'll be the case. :)

The only thing that most newer RPG's don't have, that I sorely miss, are randomly generated dungeons. Those are my fav!
 
How fast "They didn't showed much RPG mechanics" changes to "They didn't really show us any rpg mechanics" :confused:
This video managed to show more about gameplay than 48-minute demo:


Skill gating, for example. Granted, CP77 seems to be earlier in development and systems weren't finalized.
 
I don't remember it showing how it works.
And you still complain about something. Just because you haven't noticed something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I'm amazed how many people don't notice the details and then complain that those details aren't there.
 
And you still complain about something. Just because you haven't noticed something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I'm amazed how many people don't notice the details and then complain that those details aren't there.
OK, bro.
 
The Witcher 3 format is unsuitable and harmful for CP2077,they're basically different games

Yes different games, and bar first person perspective, still very similar from what we saw in the trailer, your whole if it's not stat base dialogue or some other in game RNG based activity than it's not an RPG is void. RPG's aren't just what they used to be 20 years ago, Coca Cola dosen't taste the same, and Mercedes used to actually make durable cars, times change, games evolve.

Cyberpunk 2077 is advertised as an RPG with blank-state protagonist, advertised as an RPG based on a PnP and borrows systems from it

Like.. the street cred system or the hacking or engineering? It is NOT a cRPG - Baldur's Gate copy paste PnP to PC gameplay game. It was never advertised as such.

If it tries to pull of cinematic story-drived Witcher game in Cyberpunk shell, then it's ironically nods to Far Cry for lack of better example (none of you guys played Xenus that is)

Hold up, hold up.. Wouldn't it nod to.. you know.. The Witcher? or idk Deus Ex: HR/MD or maybe Mass Effect? or are you also too hung up on the perpective you can't distinguish anything else?
 
Coca Cola dosen't taste the same, and Mercedes used to actually make durable cars, times change, games evolve.

Yep, and just like with Coke and Mercedes, it is useful to point out if the change is actually going for the worse and if the "evolving" starts to remind a harmful mutation rather than building up from the previous.
Post automatically merged:

Instead, we can talk about the specific mechanics we want to see that would make it better as an RPG.

Yes we could. Even for the umpteenth time, I don't mind. It just doesn't seem to go anywhere anymore (looking at the more recent past). Especially now that we know the baseline from which things are said to probably change a bit one way or another, for better or worse, (or not, nobody knows). Things are just as polarized as they ever were, where a little bit of discussion is had, but now one party (more than like the majority to whom the game is aimed for anyway) already has all they desired, and they aren't too willing to let go of it (I likely wouldn't either, if I was in that group) for a compromise that'd be harmful from their point of view. And not that that would even matter, the game isn't designed based on what we talk about here.

There's also only a handful of people actually interested in mechanics anyway, to the rest they are "peripheral" and "secondary" to the experience.
 
Last edited:
Yep, and just like with Coke and Mercedes, it is useful to point out if the change is actually going for the worse and if the "evolving" starts to remind a harmful mutation rather than building up from the previous.

Well Coke doesn't taste the same doesn't necessarily mean it tastes worse, and Mercedes making cars like they used to would have them bankrupt pretty fast.

I don't know what you mean by "harmful mutation". Nothing i've seen so far looks harmful, for the devs or the players, on the contrary the vast majority of feedback has been overwhelmingly positive of the direction they took. I agree with what you said about building up from the previous, that's why i expect it to be nothing less than the Witcher 3 was.
 
I don't know what you mean by "harmful mutation". Nothing i've seen so far looks harmful, for the devs or the players, on the contrary the vast majority of feedback has been overwhelmingly positive of the direction they took.

Harmful for the concept of being an RPG. That is why you get the Far Cry, CoD and GTA, etc, comparisons from left and right, and the game being labeled a scifi shooter all the time. People like those games and people like shooters, so of course the reception is positive. But that kind of positivity and feeding it (because why not, positivity towards your work feels great) tends to overshadow and ultimately neglect the game having been intended to be an RPG.

I agree with what you said about building up from the previous, that's why i expect it to be nothing less than the Witcher 3 was.

Well, contextually I don't consider Witcher 3 to be the "previous" of Cyberpunk 2077 (even if it is physically for CDPR); of Witcher 4 it would be. Different franchises ought to be allowed to be different (that's why I dislike that every Bethesda game is a TES game even if not called that, and every Rockstar game is a GTA even if not called that, and so on). Being a first person Witcher clone would be (and is from the general look of things) harmful from my perspective. I consider Witcher 3 to be a borderline RPG at best, anyway. It plays much more like a narrative driven action adventure.
 
I don't understand why some people consider table-top experience is an REAL RPG and so obsessed some kind of rules and numbers.

RPG is about being another person. RPG is about immersion. That's it. Rules and numbers are just tools for preventing the game to be mess in real life. Computer RPG itself already has so many rules and restrictions, and that TRPG-ish rules are no need to be an RPG I think.

Personally I felt more immersion playing witcher 3 than any other rpg. Because all dialogues are open and it felt more like the game asks to me 'How would you act if you are in this situation?' than 'Let's see how you built your character.' And consequences of my choices were real.

I remember the article interviewing Chris Avellone. Because his philosophy about rpg was very similar to mine

Here, his saying

“What’s important about Witcher 3 is that it allows significant choices,” Avellone says. “And what’s even better about it is that the questions it asks of you are ones where there isn’t a clear answer — so it’s less about what the game can tell you, and more about asking yourself what you would do in that situation, as a player."

"What I mean is this: suppose you are presented with a decision, but exploring the game world has told you that choice X is Chaotic Evil and choice Y is Lawful Good. That’s less of a role-playing decision to me, versus when it’s not so clear-cut, because you have to do more searching of what values you have as a player, and what risks you might be taking in making a decision — even with how much you trust what you’re being told by the person you’re talking to. The Witcher 3 presented that world. It had a lot of complexity and made you give a lot of thought to your decisions – for that, I thought it was a great RPG.”


http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/30/does-role-playing-game-mean-what-it-did-a-decade-ago
 
Last edited:
The gameplay suggests the dialogs work the VN-way - not gated in any way.

And it may be a problem:

Imagine that you wants to make a sharpshooter, but the game decide for you that your character cannot shoot straight, and there is no stat, no skill that you can improve to make you a better shoot, how would you feel? (The opposite would kinda works too).

Currently (well, based on what we saw in the demo anyway, hope it will change and that the social system just wasn't ready at that time) that's not different with dialogues if there is no character stats for social: you know that your character is a failure and that you can do nothing about it.
 
I don't understand why some people consider table-top experience is an REAL RPG and so obsessed some kind of rules and numbers.

RPG is about being other person. RPG is about immersion. That's it. Rules and numbers are just tools for preventing the game to be mess in real life. Computer RPG itself already has so many rules and restrictions, and that TRPG-ish rules are no need to be an RPG I think.

Personally I felt more immersion playing witcher 3 than any other rpg. Because all dialogues are open and it felt more like the game asks to me 'How would you act if you are in this situation?' than 'Let's see how did you build your character.' And consequences of my choices were real.

I remember the article interviewing Chris Avellone. Because his philosophy about rpg was very similar to mine

Here, his saying

“What’s important about Witcher 3 is that it allows significant choices,” Avellone says. “And what’s even better about it is that the questions it asks of you are ones where there isn’t a clear answer — so it’s less about what the game can tell you, and more about asking yourself what you would do in that situation, as a player."

"What I mean is this: suppose you are presented with a decision, but exploring the game world has told you that choice X is Chaotic Evil and choice Y is Lawful Good. That’s less of a role-playing decision to me, versus when it’s not so clear-cut, because you have to do more searching of what values you have as a player, and what risks you might be taking in making a decision — even with how much you trust what you’re being told by the person you’re talking to. The Witcher 3 presented that world. It had a lot of complexity and made you give a lot of thought to your decisions – for that, I thought it was a great RPG.”


http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2018/05/30/does-role-playing-game-mean-what-it-did-a-decade-ago
TW3 is about Gerald, C2077 is about a character you make, nicknamed V, which aside from being a bland mercenary is supposed to be a blank state, that's a whole lot different.
 
RPG is about being other person. RPG is about immersion. That's it. Rules and numbers are just tools for preventing the game to be mess in real life. Computer RPG itself already has so many rules and restrictions, and that TRPG-ish rules are no need to be an RPG I think.

+1

Dice rolls are a way to advance the story. In no way are they the purpose themselves like some here would like to make others believe.
 
+1

Dice rolls are a way to advance the story. In no way are they the purpose themselves like some here would like to make others believe.

Stats are a way to define a character while a game is about choosing who you plays.
Even diceless, minimal systems use stats.
 
TW3 is about Gerald, C2077 is about a character you make, nicknamed V, which aside from being a bland mercenary is supposed to be a blank state, that's a whole lot different.

I don't think It's fundamentally different. In Witcher 3, I roleplay as Geralt, and in CP77, I roleplay as V but much less previous relationship and personal lore.

Maybe stats could affect environmental intetaction as gameplay, it's fine. but if they block some dialogues in significant moment, it would be not good for me..
 
Last edited:
I don't think It's fundamentally different. In Witcher 3, I roleplay as Geralt, and in CP77, I roleplay as V but much less previous relationship and personal lore.

Maybe stats could affect intetaction environment but if they block some dialogues in significant moment, it would be not good for me..

I think you misunderstood what fixed, already defined stats in dialogues means: it doesn't mean, like it seems you think, that dialogues won't be blocked, it means that you may autofail social interractions no matter how hard you try because you have no way to make yourself better at it. It's like those dialogues options you fear to be blocked won't even be there, because there is no way for you to access them, or they may just autofail.

Besides, once again V is supposed to be an almost blank state to permit players to make V their own. Limiting that to "how you can resolve jobs" would destroy that purpose.

Currently I hope that Mike Pondsmith once again said something false and that CDprojekt used the Cool stat as a mix of the different social stats.
 
Last edited:
I think you misunderstood what fixed, already defined stats in dialogues means: it doesn't mean, like it seems you think, that dialogues won't be blocked, it means that you may autofail social interractions no matter how hard you try because you have no way to make yourself better at it. It's like those dialogues options you fear to be blocked won't even be there, because there is no way for you to access them, or they may just autofail.

I think he's saying he dosen't want stats in dialogues, hidden or otherwise. Besides, those hidden/skill gated dialogue options rarely changed much if anything that couldn't be achieved through other means. It was always about the illusion of choice, at least in video game RPG's. I'd rather have two or three meaningful options than a dozen or so that lead to the same exact place, that's why The Witcher is more RPG than alot of so called "true" RPG's out there, at least in that particular way
 
Top Bottom