If I was a game developer, I would ask myself what does my game do differently or better than other games.I think we know 95% of the game systems already:
-skill tree was shown (not in every details but it's mainly passive bonuses)
-looting was shown (whether we'll see the same weapon in both legendary and common versions we don't know)
-levels and bullet sponges were shown
-stealth and hacking were shown
-dialogues were shown
-techie was not shown but they said it's mainly using bots
-people who watched the behind closed door demo also saw that driving, gunplay and AI are far from excellence. Very far.
except for the last ones, the rest won't change for sure.
crafting = true, but I think it won't be much different from TW3: loot some trash and make bombs.There is still crafting, item customization, implants and body modifications to be presented.
100% agree, in particular to hateful loot-gathering and interest for deep mini-games (the more interactions I have in a videogame, the better)If I was a game developer, I would ask myself what does my game do differently or better than other games.
It's 100% guaranteed the game wont be better in shooter aspects than pure shooter games, so thats not something we should count on. That's not to say that CP can't HAVE shooter aspects, just that they shouldn't be the main focus. We should focus on the aspects that are 'special', like the fact that we have dialogue and deeper, more complex interactions with the 'vendors'; or the tech tree abilities.
Crafting is also somewhat 'par for the course' at this point in CRPG development, and in my opinion quite uninteresting. It also brings with it the danger of excessive loot-gathering which annoyed me in Witcher 3. I would honestly like to see some deeper minigames related to tech-tree than bog-standard crafting. Or at the very least let us craft something properly cool, instead of just ammo and stuff.
I'm somewhat worried that so many parts of the skill tree are dedicated to combat, even if the game will be combat-focused. Maybe it means that the more special branches of the tree like tech, are meant to be always present (its easier to invest in one tree than investing in 2-3 trees). But if you are always expected to take certain tree, why is the option even there? Why not simply make it freely available to everyone?
So if I understand this correctly, you would like to have a minigame for a gun reload? So every time you would like to reload a gun, you will have to play a mini game? Wow...Doing it in an twitch gameplay minigame way instead of just letting your character do it for you.
I remember that and they’ve implied there’s some kind of accuracy thing going on before that too. But my question has always been: ”To what extent?”Miles Tost even came on these very forums some time ago and said that they plan to make weapons get more accurate over time, and handle better, etc. I can try to find his specific post, but I'm certain you were there when it happened, so perhaps your memory is more reliable than my own.
Agreed, not minigames, just game mechanics. And as such they can be based on either player or character skills, in all cases CDPR has apparently decided to base them on player skills. This then defines the genre of the game ... action/shooter.I agree with Rawls here; none of those are, in my opinion, minigames based on what has been shown. And I seriously doubt that's going to change.
A regular action adventure, more like. I don’t think shooter part will be much more prevalent than walking around and clicking on dialog options.Agreed, not minigames, just game mechanics. And as such they can be based on either player or character skills, in all cases CDPR has apparently decided to base them on player skills. This then defines the genre of the game ... action/shooter.
This is being optimistic, nothing has suggested it so far.Well, the crafting will be heavily connected to the techie skills, so it cannot be as simple as the W3 one.
item customization can either be at vendors or directly from V. I don't see any troble in that, or unicity.tem customization will have at least one, quite unique feature - changing appearance of a gear to match the visual style the player prefers, and we don't know how this will be solved. The same with implants and cyberparts - we know that they are in the game, but we don't know how they will be handled.
I tend to agree, that's why I always suggest stuff that is already in other games. Not necessarily recent ones.Also, my opinion on "If only the devs would listen!" community ideas - 99% of the time they look good on paper, but are unworkable / broken / bad if implemented.
And nothing new was ever created...I tend to agree, that's why I always suggest stuff that is already in other games.
Stuff that already exist and has proven successful.
Considering pen & paper RPGs such as D&D tend to have hard prerequisites for perks I don't see a problem with this in CRPG.Not that I like it, in particular the concept of hard-gating perks behind the stat number and how distriuted this stuff is.
Never said that what I do is the best approach or the only viable one. Also, "I tend to agree" doesn't mean "I totally agree". At least not in my language. My opinion is that once a game is in late stages of development, there's not much room for revolutionary ideas unless very simple. So I was not here in 2018 (knowing the game was supposed to be released in less than 2 years) saying "CDPR should scrap all we saw in the demo and make a new game". I saw a very "TW3 approach" and said "at least CDPR should fix TW3's flaws instead of using the same mechanics, here are some examples of games which did that specific thing better and shouldn't require millions of hours to be implemented, and are not very risky since already seen, so totally viable. it doesn't mean all of them would fit in CP77, but please consider them, you can change some things in 2 years".And nothing new was ever created...
A lot of forum suggestions are actually pretty bad, and that’s true on about any forum. But how do you (not necessarily you specifically) define the workableness or brokenness or what ever negative assumption of a suggested feature if you think it ”sounds good on paper” but you haven’t seen it in action?
I don't like that if I have 8 in strenght then my shotgun deals 20% more DMG. Like I pull the trigger with more strenght and bullets fly faster. And that I can't get +30% DMG until I get to 9 in strenght.Considering pen & paper RPGs such as D&D tend to have hard prerequisites for perks I don't see a problem with this in CRPG.
What I find ironic is that attributes gating skills which in turn gate feats in the manner we saw is way more Shadowrun than Cyberpunk 2020/Red.
Well there is not that much to do here with weapons. Cannot reduce accuracy via skills too much as this is action game and not XCOM and it will feel bad. Cannot introduce crazy feats for guns since these are part of the weapon itself or something to come from cyberware (e.g. time slowdown). So what is left is just +dmg%, faster reloads and stuff like that.I don't like that if I have 8 in strenght then my shotgun deals 20% more DMG. Like I pull the trigger with more strenght and bullets fly faster. And that I can't get +30% DMG until I get to 9 in strenght.
Not necessarily.That's true to a point. But one has to keep in mind, that V is also... 19, was it? Barely out of his teens anyway, and just an upstart merc in NC, so it's also kinda unreasonable to expect him to be a full on combatant by nature (if the player happens to be a pro at FPS gaming).