Dear CD Projekt Red, let's talk about shotguns.

+
With respect.....how many games does that even leave? You can forget strategy games like XCOM for starters. The shotgun in that game? Incredibly short ranged. Versus fighters introduce advantages and drawbacks for characters too. Dark Souls has high damage 2 handed weapons but they're often slow and harder to use.

I'm playing Ghosts of Tsushima at the moment and I can use Heavenly Strike, which is cool, but guess what? It costs an energy (resolve) point. Thing is, if I only have 3 points and I want to use that ability then I'll be left with 2 and I won't be able to use my Revive power if I need it because that needs 3. Damn drawbacks spoiling my fun! ;)

In that last bit you say something that kind of sums up this whole discussion. Limitations and drawbacks are inconvenient and annoying.....to you. But that doesn't mean they're annoying to everyone and in the end CDPR are making a game, doing what they feel works best and hoping to please as many players as possible. Role-playing games often use the strengths and weaknesses system for classes, abilities and weapons to give characters purpose and identity. CP pen & paper might make most guns lethal and more realistic but this is a video-game, and one of the biggest releases this generation to boot. It's gonna have (presumably) a different take. How much I don't know.

Assuming weapons even have distinct pros and cons (I'm not sure how much of a feature that really is yet) then all that matters is how many people enjoy that compared to how many don't. I think the smart-gun has already been said to auto-aim BUT the drawback is that the bullets are slower and do less damage. Are you ok with that? Maybe because it's a sci-fi weapon?

The only differences you seem to want are that all weapons are good and deadly but that, on occasion, some will be even better. I'm with RestlessDingo32 in this regard; that design doesn't seem that interesting to me. It's not bad, I just prefer the other style more.



Again, how many people find it discomforting and how many find it an enjoyable design choice?



I wouldn't feel forced or unhappy, I'd feel challenged. :shrug:

Also, depending on how many weapons the character can take, how do you know they'll even be able to swap out that shotgun? If you can only take one sidearm and one long-gun then the shotgun player won't be able to swap out easily. So they'll be stuck with the shotgun. If the guns were balanced as you desire then guess what? It's not a problem, they'll be very effective anyway. So now the interesting bits of players choice of weapon and planning are kinda redundant. You see what I'm getting at?

In the end, I get the impression you're suggesting that your way of things leaves everyone happy but I doubt it's as simple as that given different people's tastes.
It's not really about "my way", there's a lot of people that really care about finally having a game where shotguns just behave "real" for once. It's been a very frustrating issue for many years in video games. This issue isn't really special or exclusive to myself, since many people have been complaining about it for a long time, and we're always ignored. (not pointing any fingers at anyone, just saying generally in history) Please read my previous post directly before you post, I did some better explaining. I also clarify, I love a good challenge, but do not love obvious and cheap limitations that say to me "no fun allowed".

I hope that clears things up a bit :)
 
If I keep saying that I want the weapons to behave like they do in real life, and all the weapons in real life are different, then how, could it possibly ever be that all the guns in the game would be the same?

I would say it's not a question of whether they'll be same, it's a question of whether they'll be different enough to make them feel substantially distinct from one another - thereby making choice of weapon and skilltrees that much more vital and interesting.

Again, different strokes I guess.
Post automatically merged:

It's not really about "my way", there's a lot of people that really care about finally having a game where shotguns just behave "real" for once. It's been a very frustrating issue for many years in video games. This issue isn't really special or exclusive to myself, since many people have been complaining about it for a long time, and we're always ignored.

I hope that clears things up a bit :)

Yeah, it's no problem, I see what you mean and thank you for all the trouble you've gone to to explain yourself :)

I think it all boils down to what percentage of players CDPR thinks feel this design is fun. My point was that making shotguns (and all weapons) deadly and realistic so that they pretty much work for all the situations in Nightcity isn't going to be a design choice that makes everyone happy, contrary to 'Example 2' you mentioned.

I myself, for example, love the devastating shotguns in Doom and most other games, despite their lack of range, so it won't bother me if that's the case in CP2077.
 
Last edited:
I would say it's not a question of whether they'll be same, it's a question of whether they'll be different enough to make them feel substantially distinct from one another - thereby making choice of weapon and skilltrees that much more vital and interesting.
I don't see any reason why the weapons would feel too much alike, considering how different in real life guns are from each other. I understand what you're saying, but the concern that the guns would be too similar confuses me, since I have no doubts that CDPR made them with the thought of them being good in mind. At the most basic level, I just don't want the guns to be disappointingly silly in how they are portrayed like in other video games.

However, if CDPR wanted to make a gun that was intentionally silly and funny, I would be perfectly fine with that so long as it was distinct and separate from other serious and cool guns that are not silly or funny. Does the potential still exist for my unnatural desire to stuff a rubber chicken into the barrel of the shotgun and fire it at an enemy should the video game allow it, maybe just as an experiment? Sure! But that doesn't mean that I want it as standard ammo for my shotgun lol. But this is very unrelated to the rest of anything I was saying in the entire thread lol.

Yeah, it's no problem, I see what you mean :) In the end, it's down to what percentage of players CDPR thinks prefer things this way. I myself, for example, love the devastating shotguns in Doom and most other games, despite their lack of range, so it won't bother me if that's the case in CP2077.
Shotguns are devastating in real life too, just saying. (and yes I love powerful shotguns in video games, very satisfying and I really like what I saw in the 48 minute demo as well, but we didn't get to see it perform in any range other than close to around medium-close at the maximum to the best of my knowledge) Shotguns will Always be the superior close range "ranged weapon" of course, (But I will be using the katana a lot too as one of the best close range "non-ranged" weapons) and I could see a shotgun doing way more damage up close than it would at distance, but I could still see it being effective at somewhat of a distance with buckshot, but assuming the game allows the use of slugs instead of buckshot, in that case with that ammo I could see it used at a higher range as well, but only when using the slugs.

Buckshot though, I hope goes as far as it does in real life since most video games disappoint in that department, but I guess what I mean to say is that the Shotgun is always going to be a players best friend in a close range situation in the game unless some other factor is happening, so shotgun lovers have nothing to worry about. In essence, a huge amount of shotgun lovers are technically coming together in this situation. Everyone wants the shotguns to be good of course, and everyone wants all the guns to be good of course. I think, that maybe If I'm not wrong here, we can all agree that we have passion for the shotguns ability to make things turn into cherry flavored gelatin dessert. Up close? big splatter. At a distance? Maybe less damage, but still a very good amount. very very long distance? Okay maybe it reaches and hurts the enemy but much less, but still actual damage, just nothing compared to the damage they would receive up close, right?

I'm just very rightfully afraid of compromises (where everyone slightly loses, as these things are extremely common in video game weapon balancing) :(when I know very well we can achieve great and excellent solutions. (where everyone really wins) :)

example: I remember loving the port valdez multiplayer demo of battlefield bad company 2. That demo itself was the best. Then the full game came out. Wasn't as good. It had supposedly been playtested too much and rebalanced to death. Then people complained on the forums for a few years until EA and DICE had supposedly essentially nerfed or weakened every single gun in multiplayer until the point that they all felt equally weak and boring. In the end all the weapons felt the same to me, and I found myself constantly switching between all the different weapons because none of them satisfied me anymore. I wanted to use a gun that the game simply did not offer anymore and I couldn't find it no matter how many times I switched around between all the options. I wanted to choose none of the options, and it was a very sad thing when I finally quit the game and I just didn't look back. I never went back. :( It made me extra sad because it way my way of trying to get away from Activisions Call of Duty games (basically a meme at this point lol 360 no scope DUBSTEP MUSIC) which also never felt right for me. I had some level of hope for the battlefield series but it never made me feel the way I hoped it would.
 
Last edited:
Based on what data? Based on who? I never limit my weapon choices to only damage ratings alone. I always factor in everything I know about the weapon before making my choices. Guns in real life are all deadly and dangerous, so if the guns were to be designed in respect of their real life counterparts, or at least only inspired by (since it's a video game) It would be a solid guarantee that they would all do at least some good damage to enemies and the environment in the game.

Based on my own personal experiences. It's not particularly scientific or much to go on, admittedly.

An example would be something like weapon weight, ammunition weight and the dimensions of the weapon itself. It's a lot easier to carry around a small stick compared to a big stick, for instance. Most games don't account for this at all. If they do it's usually in a rudimentary form where the big gun makes you run slower or something. They don't typically account for rounding a corner with a big gun vs a small gun.

Going back to the earlier example involving police officers, lethality, the weapon/ammunition profile and things of this nature don't usually matter in video games. In a video game you don't really care if your souped up assault rifle using AP rounds can potentially pass through a target and hit a random civilian behind them if you were to shoot this target. Either this cannot happen or the gameplay doesn't provide much incentive for you to care. You can spray and pray everywhere and destroy property all around you and just be like, "Okay, I guess someone somewhere will fix all that damage.".

Games rarely include these little things. Little considerations you might have in real life. If they do not include them then they don't matter. Games usually simplify it all down to fire rate, damage (DPS, damage per hit, etc.), recoil (maybe), reload speed (again, maybe) and range.

Clarifying The Outer Worlds example might help. In this game plasma weapons generally have much lower DPS compared to traditional rifles (aka, normal... ballistic rifles). They do more damage per shot though. They also have charge up functionality. Well, if I remember correctly one of the plasma rifle variants has it (don't think the carbines do). Basically, you can use them as low rate of fire murder cannons. The difference is they aren't highly hampered by range limitations. They could be looked at like a long range version of a shotgun found in most games.

I realized this was the case very early into playing this game. The effects were kind of interesting here. I spent most of the game with some form of plasma rifle with a charged shot function. Why use the higher ROF weapon, or the typical rifle, with the higher DPS when I could duck behind cover, charge up a shot, pop out, vaporize a bad guy, duck back behind cover and rinse/repeat?

In fact, I found this type of plasma weapon to be more effective against creatures and enemies resistant to plasma. Mantiqueens come to mind. Yep, as the name implies these were big bad, terrifying... creatures. If memory serves, they were resistant to plasma. Still, I found one of the better approaches was to charge up a shot really far away, fire at them, and rinse/repeat while it slowly approaches. The damage type wasn't ideal here. Yet, it's a long range massive damage per shot murder machine. Why not?

Eventually I figured out the pro tip for Mantiqueens was the Shrink Gun. That big bad, terrifying creature was far less big and bad when you made it tiny. Then it was a tiny, cute little creature. So much so you could reach out and pet it before instructing your trusty, hammer wielding sidekick to jump in the air and smash it.

This brings us to the benefits of making certain weapons good at specific tasks but not others. They become specialized. The Shrink Gun has a niche. A set of circumstances where it offers a unique advantage. Building my character toward science weaponry has it's perks. Not in every situation but in some of them. Hey, my character is good at certain things but not at others.

By the way, I'm not disagreeing with your main points. Yes, it'd be great if the weapons in a game setting based on a future version of our current reality make an attempt to exhibit realistic properties. Unfortunately, I don't have my hopes up. The expectation is they are going to behave like weapons in most video games. Under these circumstances I don't think it's a big deal for shotguns to be placed into the typical short range murder machine niche. After all, even when limited like this most of the time shotguns are generally highly useful in video games (arguably too useful in some cases).
 
I never meant for this thread to become a fight.

Heh, I think it's all good. I can't speak for others but I think the discussion here has been fine! I certainly don't consider myself to have had a fight with anyone :)

Anyway, the other thread about news and articles mentioned that the upcoming August 10th Night City Wire will talk about, among other things, the weapons. So we might get a glimpse of what shotguns are like and the variety they'll have. Cool.
 
Yes! This is what I have been saying! :facepalm::shrug: There are many different kinds of guns in real life, all with their own roles. There is no reason to overly limit or modify or mess around with these already pre-existing roles. The only thing that happens is that now a shotgun fires with less range than it does in real life, which has absolutely no benefit to the game play and just diminishes shotguns. Are they still best close range compared to others, in some or most situations? Yes! just like in real life. (only to the best of my knowledge. I may be wrong)
I'll disagree with "best", personally I'd prefer a large caliber (.45ish, I'm NOT a 9mm fan) SMG with a single-shot selector for close-range. Because of some of the downsides of shotguns I've mentioned elsewhere.
 
NCW2 had a lot of shotgun gunplay. Like, a lot. what did we think? That Kung Tao 8 barrel independent targeting shotgun made me laugh very loudly because it's such a "why the fuck not?" weapon. and in this video game, yeah, that tracks XD
 
After seeing episode two of Night City Wire, I am less apprehensive about shotguns in Cyberpunk 2077, and I can't wait to get my hands on the Budget Arms Carnage. That thing looks like a BEAST.
 
I'm not working on the shotguns (being a quest designer), but I remember as a big fan of older Bungie titles (Halo 1 has one of the best shotguns of all time, fight me), walking over to the gameplay team one day and just congratulating them, because I had so much fun using the shotguns. My favorite one hasn't been shown yet ingame, so you'll have some cool stuff to look forward to! :D
 
We need guns... lots of guns.
g*d if Johnny Silverhand doesn't ironically-unironically say this at some point i feel like such an opportunity will be missed. it's such a good meme. i dont care how overdone it might feel. give me my cringe memes XD
 
As I said before, it seems like a tremendous amount of effort to make to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist in the first place. You mentioned the close range sniper example and the concern that it may be favored by players over the pistol, but I would argue that pistols in real life are known to be very lethal just the same. If pistols were ineffective, police wouldn't carry them as their main weapon 99% of the time. The fact that they do is proof that pistols stop criminals and make them go down very effectively. Because of this, I am sure that many players will still favor pistols, even if they know it's possible to close range sniper enemies, since pistols have a faster reload in real life than snipers, depending on the reload style and how many shot can be fired before reload.
Handguns (i.e. pistols) are generally considered a "militarily ineffective" weapon because in general the military doesn't fight at close quarters. Police use them primarily because 99.9% of the time their job doesn't require the use of deadly force and a handgun is a LOT easier to carry around then a SMG or rifle.

So it's not only the effectiveness of the weapon but the day-to-day activity of the user that determines what weapon is best suited to a particular situation (i.e. carry + use + effectiveness). This "little" issue is generally ignored in video games as all players look at it is DPS.
 
Law enforcement are also one of the primary use cases for SMGs and shotguns. Pistols are useful for patrol officers because the pack an effective round in a package you can carry all day without it getting in the way or unnecessarily scaring nearby civilians. Putting that effective round in and SMG boosts range, rate of fire and magasine size when you are in situations where it is very likely you will need to use deadly force. Shotguns fill much the same role, but can fire a lot of versatile rounds. Both also have limited penetration which is handy for avoiding collateral damage.

Most SWAT like teams outside the US don't rock assault rifles, mostly because they are not likely to go up against body armor. Snipers of course have rifles for long range engagements, but mostly police shootouts are short ranged affairs.

Also, for fun memories of overly effective videogame shotguns, I fondly remember Battlefield (2?) and its slug rounds. In a pump-action shotgun they would outshoot a sniper-rifle, and though you did not have a scope to aid in aiming, the slugs could pull off cross-map one hit kills.
 
Last edited:
Handguns (i.e. pistols) are generally considered a "militarily ineffective" weapon because in general the military doesn't fight at close quarters. Police use them primarily because 99.9% of the time their job doesn't require the use of deadly force and a handgun is a LOT easier to carry around then a SMG or rifle.

So it's not only the effectiveness of the weapon but the day-to-day activity of the user that determines what weapon is best suited to a particular situation (i.e. carry + use + effectiveness). This "little" issue is generally ignored in video games as all players look at it is DPS.
So should pistols be removed from Cyberpunk2077 because they are "militarily ineffective", or should they be made to be as good as they could possibly be, along with every other weapon in the game? :shrug:
 
I said this in another thread, my version: We need clothing... lots of clothing!
Maybe I can have clothing, made OUT of shotguns? :think:
Post automatically merged:

I'll disagree with "best", personally I'd prefer a large caliber (.45ish, I'm NOT a 9mm fan) SMG with a single-shot selector for close-range. Because of some of the downsides of shotguns I've mentioned elsewhere.
A .45 SMG......? WHOA..... NICE! :love: (y)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom