Everything about weapons

+
It seems I am stepping into the old, familiar territory of "What is better: Guns or melee weapons?" The answer is, it depends on the circumstances....and there are an INSANE amount of possible scenarios connected with this question. If you want a weapon that is usually pretty quiet and won't run out of ammo, a good knife or a strangle wire is probably a good choice...provided you are A.) Skilled enough to use them proficiently and 2.) You are sneaky enough to get away with it. A gun against a knife or other melee weapon in a toe to toe fight is probably not a very good idea, unless you have some sort of death wish. But under the right circumstances such as taking out an armed sentry without causing an alarm, a melee weapon may not be such a bad choice. Also, consider your options if you are in an area where the legality and availability of firearms might be dicey...Such as Japan, for example. (True fact: The number one weapon used in a majority of homicides in Japan is...a butcher knife...No joke, look it up yourself.). So, in conclusion, it would behoove any prudent character to have at least SOME skill in using BOTH. Another thing to consider: Let us say for sake of argument, your character starts out FLAT BROKE. Guns tend to be pretty pricey, but melee weapons are EVERYWHERE and are either FREE or relatively inexpensive...some creativity MIGHT be in order here. Now, if you somehow find yourself in such straits and you absolutely MUST have a gun, NO PROBLEMO. Find a lone armed target, creep up on 'em, give 'em the old "Jonnyola" and walah, like magic, you have just scored a piece at no cost to you...Something to think about, no?
 
Last edited:
Snowflakez;n10154482 said:
I saw that a bit ago, I forget where. Some Imgur album of weapons from the trailer, yeah?

I too hope we get some pretty sweet melee weapons in the game, though how exactly they work is up in the air. I guess they could just do a Witcher-like system, but even I'll admit it was a bit too simplistic to be super engaging. I'd like to see something a bit more fleshed out.

God, I'm just now remembering how terrible Fallout 4's melee weapons were...

Oh, sick!....In a good way though.
 
Snowflakez;n10159812 said:
Yeah, the body plating was what I was referring to. I'm very inexperienced with CP lore so I just assumed that was a normal thing, if expensive. You don't think we'll see that in the game to some degree?
Maybe not total immunity (I imagine that much force should still do SOMETHING to the body...), but some sort of armoring to make melee playstyles more viable would be welcome.
Not that I won't use guns. Definitely will. Probably 70-80% of my playthroughs will be gun-focsed, with occasional melee use as needed/when appropriate.
I certainly can't speak for what CDPR will, or won't, do. But assuming a heavy reliance on CP2020 and FNFF a full borg with enhanced strength could probably have such armor (or of course an armored exosuit) ...just don't expect to be able to walk on normal floors because of the mass. Thou you'd probably OK on reinforced concrete.

There's a reason ONLY vehicles are fully bulletproof after all. The limo used by the US President is fully bulletproof ... it also weights in excess of 7 tons.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Snowflakez;n10158672 said:
Aside from that, I agree that from a pure aesthetics/spectacle standpoint at the very least, TW3 was a bit over the top. But screw it, I thought it looked good. I'm all for a more grounded, realistic system of course - not saying no to that.. but I enjoyed TW3's, too, for what it was.

Well lets not forget that CDPR has said they're going to attempt to make the best Cyberpunk video game they can first, even if that means they have to change things from the PnP. I agree with that because they're two totally different mediums and the game shouldn't be held back in certain aspects because of the PnP rules if it just doesn't work in video game. They have to do the best they can on the video game in the end, knowing that a lot of their audience hasn't ever played and might never play the PnP anyway. Just as many people played Witcher long before they knew about the books, and even then things changed in that series when transitioning from book to game.

There's nothing written in stone after all, and I think they should be free to explore new things within the 2077. That is after all what CDPR wanted in the first place, creative freedom.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeastModeIron;n10160152 said:
There's nothing written in stone after all, and I think they should be free to explore new things within the 2077. That is after all what CDPR wanted in the first place, creative freedom.

It would kind of beg to question, then, what on earth did they need the license and Mike for if all they realy want is creative freedom to stray away from the source material.
 
Last edited:

Guest 4149880

Guest
kofeiiniturpa;n10160172 said:
It would kind of beg to question, then, what on earth did they need the license and Mike for if all they realy want is creative freedom to stray away from the source material.

I suppose its what they've said in their reveal videos. They jumped the timeline to 2077 to have the freedom to build the world the way they want, within reason. I'm sure their intentions aren't to completely change the world but to build more of it. What would be the point in building the game based off existing events from the 2020 world when people already know what happens.
Plus, they've said before they're building the game to reflect a future from todays time rather then a future from the 80's which is less retro-future and more modern-futuristic.

As far as gameplay, the PnP has a set of rules built for that type of game, of course the video game might have to change that in order for it allow the game to even make sense in that form.

 
That’s just it. They’re changing the aesthetic feel, jumping the timeline and compromising the core mechanisms (since it will in all likelyhood be more of a modern action thing than a classical adaptation like Baldur’s Gate, ToEE and such). What’s left is a list of names and some background lore for brand recognition to those who know it already. It has puzzled me before already since they don’t need the 2020 property to make a ”cool and supermassive cyberpunk scifi epoch”.

That’s actually something I’d want to ask them if they ever made some sort of QA thing (outside reddit). At the end of it all, what really is (or will be) the role of 2020 in all of this beyond ”inspired by”?
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n10160222 said:
That’s just it. They’re changing the aesthetic feel, jumping the timeline and compromising the core mechanisms (since it will in all likelyhood be more of a modern action thing than a classical adaptation like Baldur’s Gate, ToEE and such). What’s left is a list of names and some background lore for brand recognition to those who know it already. It has puzzled me before already since they don’t need the 2020 property to make a ”cool and supermassive cyberpunk scifi epoch”.

Because they wanted to, I guess? Frankly, I don't know. I'm sure there are plenty of mechanics, bits of lore and miscellaneous other things that they want to pull from the Cyberpunk universe and implement into their game.

Using the CP license allows for the use of all of the classes the tabletop had (many of which are quite unique), possibly some elements of the FNFF system, plenty of equipment Mike & Co. came up with (undoubtedly overhauled to fit the advancements of 2077) and plenty of other stuff I'm not thinking of right now.

In essence, it means a lot less time spent working on basic worldbuilding, and the mechanics and physics of this universe. So many questions the dev team would ordinarily have to spend quite a bit of time answering, are answered for them already. It's then up to them to adapt and build upon those mechanics and systems as they will.

So, less effort, basically. That's my guess. But I'm also sure them being huge fans of the source material played a role in deciding to license it.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
I would like to see almost any weapon, gun or melee be used as a primary weapon fully through in game. As well as a combination of the two, while in a gun fight, an enemy rushes you and use some CQC and deploy an arm blade as a secondary measure.
 
BeastModeIron;n10160852 said:
I would like to see almost any weapon, gun or melee be used as a primary weapon fully through in game. As well as a combination of the two, while in a gun fight, an enemy rushes you and use some CQC and deploy an arm blade as a secondary measure.

Aye. Comes down to player choice. Nobody is saying it has to be the most effective thing in the world, nor is anyone saying it needs to be easy, but the option should absolutely be there IMO. Literally not affecting anyone except the person who wants to use it.
 
I don't really care about what kind of weapons there are (same goes for all other stylistic choices... how things work is more important than the bits of fiction and flare that come with them). The only thing I hope is that there is versatility and leeway the overall gameplay and weapon selection that allows me play and succeed without the all encompassing hunt of the BFG for a Rambo character.

I want to feel that if my character specializes in stilettos or shanks (or that if my PC can't fight at all), the game allows that and lets have fun and varied content through clever gameplay and character progression even if I had to give a pass on stuff that requires higher tier battling.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n10158362 said:
Ohh, I'm not so sure about that. All those somersaults and pirouettes and frantic, almost aimless flailing...

That is why I mentioned it needs some modifications to suit the setting, obviously all those pirouettes and other moves to make the combat look more "cinematic" would make less sense if the enemies have guns, it would end like the famous scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark. It would need to be faster, and most useful in situations like stealth attacks. That is, unless the enemies are also armed with similar melee weapons, then it is a fair fight and can be more Witcher-like (within reasonable limits to remain realistic).
 
kofeiiniturpa;n10163282 said:
The only thing I hope is that there is versatility and leeway the overall gameplay and weapon selection that allows me play and succeed without the all encompassing hunt of the BFG for a Rambo character.
Yeah, I'd be very disappointed if this were the case.
Games have the potential to be far more then combat simulations.
 
Suhiira;n10169392 said:
Yeah, I'd be very disappointed if this were the case.
Games have the potential to be far more then combat simulations.

In RPGs that allow for it, I typically do at least one playthrough focused on bartering, speech, stealth (ACTUAL stealth, not "Stealth action") and avoiding combat entirely. Naturally, most RPGs are combat-centered so my chances to do this are incredibly limited, but if CP2077 caters to that just a little bit more than the others I'll be very happy.

Of course, stuff goes wrong even in real life - not every situation can be talked through, and not every situation can be fought through.
 
Snowflakez;n10169722 said:
In RPGs that allow for it, I typically do at least one playthrough focused on bartering, speech, stealth (ACTUAL stealth, not "Stealth action") and avoiding combat entirely. Naturally, most RPGs are combat-centered so my chances to do this are incredibly limited, but if CP2077 caters to that just a little bit more than the others I'll be very happy.

Of course, stuff goes wrong even in real life - not every situation can be talked through, and not every situation can be fought through.

True that!
 
Snowflakez;n10169722 said:
Of course, stuff goes wrong even in real life - not every situation can be talked through, and not every situation can be fought through.

Yeah, this is a theme I'd reaaaaaallllly like to see in, well, nearly any game. A can't-win scenario that isn't just a cut scene, forcing the player to retreat or adapt.

I know some games do this by levels, but I'd like to see a game where you are just outnumbered or outgunned and can't savescum or AI-exploit a win anyway.

 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Sardukhar;n10170012 said:
I know some games do this by levels, but I'd like to see a game where you are just outnumbered or outgunned and can't savescum or AI-exploit a win anyway.

That's an aspect of the game I'm certainly curious about how they intend to implement a death and save system. More then likely nothing will change as it will probably be traditional, when player dies, reload last save, and many players of course use the save scum method when things go wrong.

It would be interesting to see a system that couldn't be reset, a sort of constant background auto save system so choices are permanent.
 
BeastModeIron;n10170062 said:
That's an aspect of the game I'm certainly curious about how they intend to implement a death and save system. More then likely nothing will change as it will probably be traditional, when player dies, reload last save, and many players of course use the save scum method when things go wrong.

It would be interesting to see a system that couldn't be reset, a sort of constant background auto save system so choices are permanent.

Yeah, a Hardcore mode.

My only issue with this method is that it makes it way harder to explore build options, tactical choices, blow shit up for fun times...not important choices, just what-ifs on a fun level.

Some kind of can't-save-during-combat mode might be doable.
 
Sardukhar;n10170012 said:
Yeah, this is a theme I'd reaaaaaallllly like to see in, well, nearly any game. A can't-win scenario that isn't just a cut scene, forcing the player to retreat or adapt.

I know some games do this by levels, but I'd like to see a game where you are just outnumbered or outgunned and can't savescum or AI-exploit a win anyway.



Sardukhar;n10160462 said:
Pretttttttty sure this isn't about weapons?



https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consistency
 
Top Bottom