Accepted.
I'm sorry if you got the impression I believe chasing realism somehow improved any and all games.
No.
CP2020, which CP2077 is based on, and much of what we know of CP2077 is based in Science Fiction (i.e. what is possible/probable) not Science Fantasy (i.e. ummm ... Star Wars) thus in the case of THIS PARTICULAR GAME realism and immersion go hand-in-hand.
IMHO should as much as possible consistent with the fact that it is a game so let's not take it to far.
And even the "fun" elements should take realism into account whenever possible.
Given the Black Market (hell, the normal market) in Cyberpunk you can get any weapon, or other item, you desire and can afford any time you wish. Level gating items would be one of the most idiotic and "gamey" things that could possibly be done. It's totally and completely counter to the "tone" of Cyberpunk.
Last edited:
Generally I don't mind weapon/armor degradation but I find that in most games the rate at which these items degrade is too much.
I've yet to see a game get item degradation right.
Yes, things need maintenance, and as pointed out armor in particular "breaks" when used.
But most games take it WAY TO FAR.
I'm 99.99% sure it's included in most game because:
1 - It's kewl
2 - It's a money sink
Neither of these is a good reason for including it in a game.
What games?
I mean, you'd think it'd be that easy but I cant tell you how many people I've seen at the range fail these basic tasks even after repeated instruction.
I'm sure you feel justified in knowing about my personal life, but it's none of your business.
I'll share as much, or as little, as I care to.
But in answer to your question ... I have NEVER directly worked for a game developer so if you plan to look up my real name in the game credits in most cases you won't find it (in most cases).
However:
D&D
Star Fleet Battles
Squad Leader
HarnMaster
The Morrow Project
Steel Panthers
Was I primarily responsible for any of these games?
No.
Did I provide input and/or game systems that were (are) incorporated into the games.
Yes.
*Has flashbacks of STALKER- there were more pies in my inventory than bullets*
I don't want a survival sim. I play games to escape the mundane, and most of them make it seem like you have multiple intestinal parasites- unless you eat every 10 minutes you die.
And I agree that food = healing is a dumb idea- in other games. in CP2077 it could actually work. it's not so much sustenance as substance, raw materials for the nanobots to use to repair you.
I don't want a survival sim. I play games to escape the mundane, and most of them make it seem like you have multiple intestinal parasites- unless you eat every 10 minutes you die.
And I agree that food = healing is a dumb idea- in other games. in CP2077 it could actually work. it's not so much sustenance as substance, raw materials for the nanobots to use to repair you.
Sure, some people can't tie their own shoelaces, but let's stick to the average Joe not the idiots.
dude I don't care about you or doxing you. I'm just asking to see exactly how much weight your "I worked on designing and publishing war and RPG" games carried.
which is to say...
not that much, in my books.
Yes that's an impressive stack of tabletops. Granted, ignoring the fact that apparently you just seemed to have been around the designers more than being actively involved (still cool), those are just that: tabletops. You have one actual video game that you were even remotely involved in and it's an RTS from the early 2000s.
Which is to say, no, that has very little relevance on whether you understand game mechanics at all. Because the context here is a video game, and a modern RPG, not an old RTS.
Tabletop systems are intrinsically different from video games. They don't translate directly in either direction and you know this. I honestly wouldn't say any of that experience qualifies as you having more understanding of VIDEO game mechanics than anyone else here. If we were talking CP2020 then yes, I would absolutely defer to you. But we're not. we're talking CP2077.
And you have more?
But you're wrong. The basic principals of game design are independent of the medium. Any developer will agree with me on this. (( Don't expect anyone from CDPR to chime up tho, they have to maintain their neutrality. ))
Are there differences in the details and in many cases how they're implemented, of course.
You're basically trying to claim that since a person is a truck mechanic they know nothing about automotive mechanics.
Cyberpunk's food restoring health.
That's ironic.
At least, Alanis Morrisette would call it ironic
That's ironic.
At least, Alanis Morrisette would call it ironic
no. we both have zero relevant experience to the discussion. tabletops have DMs that restrict the access of gear. totally different.
sure, but we're past these basic principals already and talking about certain specific mechanics. These are also things you can learn about through playing the games, they don't necessarily require actual design experience.
No, i'm saying that an experienced essayist probably doesn't know how to write a screenplay. both can be good writers, just one person's experience isn't terribly relevant.
1. It's not kewl
And 2. money sinks don't matter in a single player game.
I've never liked the idea item decay myself. If it is to have a meaningful impact in the game, it has to be way to fast to be plausible. Realistic decay might not as well be there as it takes too long to be noticeable.
Now having the items take damage as the result of combat on the other hand- it's plausible and rewards good play.
And 2. money sinks don't matter in a single player game.
I've never liked the idea item decay myself. If it is to have a meaningful impact in the game, it has to be way to fast to be plausible. Realistic decay might not as well be there as it takes too long to be noticeable.
Now having the items take damage as the result of combat on the other hand- it's plausible and rewards good play.
This pretty much captures my thoughts on it. For me it is like a stamina bar, its an interesting idea that could add something to a game, but I've never seen an example that actually does.
I think this mechanic COULD add to a game, especially if the gear isn't just binary good, good, broke. The more armor gets damaged you could just increase a chance that it won't mitigate any damage, a gun could start misfiring or jamming more frequently as durability decreases. When an item does run out of durability it shouldn't just disappear, especially if the item is craftable, it should just have a 0% of functioning and maybe not be repairable, but you could strip it down for parts or something.
My problem with weapon and armor degragation is that it is something that should logically be done "off-screen". For example, in the Witcher 3 we never have to go pee or take a dump, or sleep for that matter. Because these are not adding to gameplay value and logically happens "off screen" so to speak.
I always thought weapon and armor degradation was a waste of development time and only serves as an annoyance to players. In the best case scenario, such an option should be a difficulty toggle imo. In my opinion, I always considered it pointless unless the game balance is heavily balanced AROUND IT. Take Fallout 4 survival mode, having to eat, drink and sleep. That was great, because the gameplay experience and the roleplaying aspect was built around it.
However just adding weapon and armor degregation by themselves just to have it... not a fan.
I always thought weapon and armor degradation was a waste of development time and only serves as an annoyance to players. In the best case scenario, such an option should be a difficulty toggle imo. In my opinion, I always considered it pointless unless the game balance is heavily balanced AROUND IT. Take Fallout 4 survival mode, having to eat, drink and sleep. That was great, because the gameplay experience and the roleplaying aspect was built around it.
However just adding weapon and armor degregation by themselves just to have it... not a fan.
I'd like to NOW GO BRIEFLY OFF TOPIC because I can har har yay and say this is an ACTUAL EXAMPLE of someone admitting they made a mistake and apologizing for said mistake. On the Internet.
Sir or madam I salute you. Have one free SARDpoint. Useful for things.
OKAY NOW BACK ON TOPIC. No more fighting each other's credentials.
I watched a video from some Russian guy ( I think it was the same guy who had they had voice a troll in Witcher III) and he mentioned, along with everything we've already heard ( elsewhere), that player would be able to make his own drugs, then put into syringes, etc.
He seemed sincere, but it's surprising no one ( and I watched/read a lot of demo impressions) mentioned this.
Not sure how to feel about this. On one hand, not a fan of unecessary crafting if player can acquire the same in the world: it leads to ton of trash gear placed in illogical locations, has negative effect on economy, and usually you end up with ridiculously OP items that makes discovery/challenge less rewarding.
But if they're planning to, I'm hoping they back to Witcher I design, and refine it, add more complexity to it, than something closer to streamlined version of Witcher III ( that imo, misses the whole point of crafting system).
To those who haven't played, you had different base chemical ingredients with primary and secondary attributes, along with base ( alcohol) that combines them. Primary would define what it does, but if you had more than one ingredient with secondary attribute it would make it more potent or add a different effect, depending on what you combine.
On top of this, CDPR could add here tertiary element to interact with two, that changes how the drugs work, like: catalysts ( increases primary effect, at expense of higher toxicity and/or duration), inhibitors ( reduces primary effect, while rapidly increasing secondary), reverse enzimes ( alters the potency of primary and secondary effects, over time), etc.
Imo, the whole point of (good) crafting system is being able to customize, modify item/potion/spell/etc through variety of combinations form different parameters that can completely change end result.
Good example of this is Tyranny's spell crafting: you take a basic element and define basic function, change it's form, change who it effects, additional elements...number of combinations here can lead to wildly different results.
He seemed sincere, but it's surprising no one ( and I watched/read a lot of demo impressions) mentioned this.
Not sure how to feel about this. On one hand, not a fan of unecessary crafting if player can acquire the same in the world: it leads to ton of trash gear placed in illogical locations, has negative effect on economy, and usually you end up with ridiculously OP items that makes discovery/challenge less rewarding.
But if they're planning to, I'm hoping they back to Witcher I design, and refine it, add more complexity to it, than something closer to streamlined version of Witcher III ( that imo, misses the whole point of crafting system).
To those who haven't played, you had different base chemical ingredients with primary and secondary attributes, along with base ( alcohol) that combines them. Primary would define what it does, but if you had more than one ingredient with secondary attribute it would make it more potent or add a different effect, depending on what you combine.
On top of this, CDPR could add here tertiary element to interact with two, that changes how the drugs work, like: catalysts ( increases primary effect, at expense of higher toxicity and/or duration), inhibitors ( reduces primary effect, while rapidly increasing secondary), reverse enzimes ( alters the potency of primary and secondary effects, over time), etc.
Imo, the whole point of (good) crafting system is being able to customize, modify item/potion/spell/etc through variety of combinations form different parameters that can completely change end result.
Good example of this is Tyranny's spell crafting: you take a basic element and define basic function, change it's form, change who it effects, additional elements...number of combinations here can lead to wildly different results.
To a degree it makes sense to have craftable drugs (among other equipment) with a couple of caveats. First, it'd be better if we didn't clutter up the world with stuff in places that it doesn't make sense, like what corp exec is going to have bath tub meth ingredients in his briefcase? Second, we live in a world where some things, especially chemicals, are too sophisticated to be easily crafted, granted in 2077 DIY tools are likely significantly better, but there should be really high end chems, electronics, etc that can't be crafted because to even know what to craft you'd need a team of researches who've dedicated their lives to that subject & a full lab or manufacturing facility similarly dedicated to a singular purpose. I think the stuff that could be crafted should still be somehow inferior or tainted compared to the purchased equivalent to imply the fact that it was jury rigged by an amateur with substandard ingredients.
I doubt this will happen, but I think it would be interesting to give players the capability but to highlight it as a matter of necessity, and not the most effective way of accomplishing this stuff like you see in most games.
I doubt this will happen, but I think it would be interesting to give players the capability but to highlight it as a matter of necessity, and not the most effective way of accomplishing this stuff like you see in most games.