Hopes and dreams for Cyberpunk 2077?

[227]

Yeah, that's really all I was saying. A bear should always be fairly tough, while a bandit with exposed flesh should be easy to cut down. That said, I do think that CDPR should aspire to keep "harder" from meaning "damage sponge." It'd have felt more natural if enemies in later-game areas worked together in groups or were otherwise difficult in a more organic way than soaking up absurd amounts of damage. The second game does this really well; Flotsam bandits are easier to defeat than the armored guards you face later on, and toward the end of the game you face larger groups of armored enemies who aren't any stronger than the earlier guards when taken individually. I'm sure CDPR could find a way to accomplish the same kind of thing in an open-world setting.

 

[Garrison72]

Traps, pff.

You have a crossbow now! No need for such primitive frippery.

I'm still bitter about no bloody traps. I'm a big fan of traps in general. Traps in Dishonored...so much fun.

 

[Suhiira]

Going back to Fallout 4.
The level scaling in that game really makes me feel like I'm making zero progress.
At level 5 it took me 10-15 shots to take out something with my 10mm, at level 70 it takes me 3-5 HEADSHOTS with a plasma pistol to take out something. 65 more levels and zero improvement.

 

[moonknightgog]

is this "should be" just because that's how it was in older games?

No. Because compared to other games that use the opposite system (Bethesda games), it was better.
For two reasons:

1) The no level scaling allow the quest designer to keep the player focused on the main quest, expecially if the game is meant to be story driven.
2) Level scaling is a cheap way to balance the game. It breaks any kind of progression system, such as levelling, crafting etc...
Because if enemies scale to my level, then the progression is useless, since I could beat the game at level 1.

 

[lord_blex]

@moonknightgog you failed to reply to any of my points.
I agree though, "complete" level scaling without any thought is bad, for the reason you state. but that's usually not how it works. even in bethesda games some enemies become easier to fight as you level up, while others are still a challenge until you are good enough. areas have a level range, so if you go there too early you get killed, but if you arrive too late (up to a limit) you still get some challenge. I haven't played fallout 4 in a bit (and skyrim in ages), but for f4 I don't remember enemies I encountered previously ridiculously scaling up. once you are high enough level, all basic enemies are relatively easy.

what I want from cyberpunk: scaling enemies that are supposed to be tough. just to bring up my previous example, if I'm fighting a giant, pretty much one of a kind, he slaughtered an entire village (kids, women and warriors alike), then I come along and kill him in 30 seconds, that's not a great experience. if the final boss and big baddy of the game is one of the easier fights in the game, that's not a great experience.
I consider encountering a scaled up basic bandit vs an always level 30 drowner pretty much the same thing. they are both artificially buffed enemies. as a few of us said before, I want the level (and strength) of enemies to actually make sense if I look at them.
and lastly no artificial debuff against "skull enemies". they were really a chore to fight in tw3, not a challenge. (maybe they were not supposed to be a challenge, just a "wall", but I don't wanna see living walls in the game. if you want them to stop me, make them stronger in a legit way.)

 

[moonknightgog]

@lord_blex If I can't easily kill the giant if I'm stronger, why am I wasting my time levelling up?
That's the point of an RPG. The balancement is different from other games. A level 12 giant will ever be weaker than a level 30 character. Because your character is stronger. If I'm stronger, I have to kill that mob in 30 seconds.

If I have hard times fighting an enemy no matter how much I level up, then the game is a completely failure in the character progression system. Because the progression doesn't change anything.

Balancement in an RPG is not "have a constant challange through the entire game". It is a balancement per level. Meaning that you have to compare your character level to a mob of the same level and than see how that mob is strong compared to you.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

If we are in any luck, there won't be any level scaling (I agreed, level scaling is retarded) issues in CP 2077, but that it relies more on clever encounter design.

Firstly, because there are no levels to scale with. And secondly, because you can (if they go by the CP 2020 rules... well, if I remember them correctly) create a character who has all his combat stats maxed out (at the expense of other skills, of course).

If we are in any luck, the player is expected to read the visual cues the game offers to determine whether or not he is able to tackle a situation. Thugs are always thugs, wearing leather jackets and what not (even if they too are lethal opponents), but if one sees a thug with a BFG and some sort of heavy armor or a lot of mechanical augmentations, he can - through what he sees and how his character is built thus far - provided, though, that the character system makes any difference in how the character can perform - assess that there might be a bit more trouble ahead. If he sees a MAXTAC squad, he can rest assured he is going to die if he barges in guns blazing (there's no level 9 MAXTAC squad opposing your level 14 PC, there is just MAXTAC squad).

On the topic, I don't tend to preorder games anymore. I want to know what I'm buying rather than going in with a hunch.

 

[moonknightgog]

If we are in any luck, there won't be any level scaling (I agreed, level scaling is retarded) issues in CP 2077, but that it relies more on clever encounter design.

Firstly, because there are no levels to scale with. And secondly, because you can (if they go by the CP 2020 rules... well, if I remember them correctly) create a character who has all his combat stats maxed out (at the expense of other skills, of course).

If we are in any luck, the player is expected to read the visual cues the game offers to determine whether or not he is able to tackle a situation. Thugs are always thugs, wearing leather jackets and what not (even if they too are lethal opponents), but if one sees a thug with a BFG and some sort of heavy armor or a lot of mechanical augmentations, he can - through what he sees and how his character is built thus far, provided, though, that the character system makes any difference in how the character can perform - assess that there might be a bit more trouble ahead. If he sees a MAXTAC squad, he can rest assured he is going to die if he barges in guns blazing (there's no level 9 MAXTAC squad opposing your level 14 PC, there is just MAXTAC squad).

On the topic, I don't tend to preorder games anymore. I want to know what I'm buying rather than going in with a hunch.

This would be really interesting.

 

[Sardukhar]

If we are in any luck, there won't be any level scaling (I agreed, level scaling is retarded) issues in CP 2077, but that it relies more on clever encounter design.

Sooooo this. It's a real trick.

Re: Fallout 4, @Suhiira, it does depend on your level, I think. I'm only 46 right now, but my Time To Kill is, as always, very short. I have weapons that do very good damage, one of which fires an extra projectile. Outside of VATS, a burst to the chest and it's over. In VATS, a couple hits to the chest or one to the head and it's over. It's been that way for most of the game, since as I level up, I increase my combat skills.

I am in Survival Mode, with a mod that increases enemy damage to me by 400%, in order to compensate for these hitpoints they keep giving me every level. Keeps fights exciting.

Of course, I think most of us hope for the same thing:

No $)(%&&%@*)_@ levelling on Cyberpunk. There isn't any in the PnP, and it's very good. You don't need any in the CRPG. You do not. A .45 will kill a starting character like it will a one-year character.

Gear and tactics and skills make the difference and should. Not )*$&@!&@%% D&D levels. Ugh.

 

[Suhiira]

Re: Fallout 4, @Suhiira, it does depend on your level, I think. I'm only 46 right now, but my Time To Kill is, as always, very short. I have weapons that do very good damage, one of which fires an extra projectile. Outside of VATS, a burst to the chest and it's over. In VATS, a couple hits to the chest or one to the head and it's over. It's been that way for most of the game, since as I level up, I increase my combat skills.

Agreed, it was pretty tough (as expected) till about the mid 20's when we started getting better weapons (and perhaps the perks to improve them), then about that I'd expect till the mid 50's (1-2 shot most stuff, 3-4 for most of the rest). However come about 60 the difficulty scale ramped up tremendously, and now in my 70's (mostly due to building and improving armor/weapons for garrisons) I really feel worst off then I was at 15 (playing Hard mode BTW). I'm having serious problems (again) with ammo ... it takes so much to kill stuff and is so expensive I'm suspecting by around 80 I'll be having to melee.

 

[Sardukhar]

and now in my 70's (mostly due to building and improving armor/weapons for garrisons) I really feel worst off then I was at 15

How appropriate! Kind of like your actual life, then!

Well,it's a brave new 50+ frontier, I guess. Unlimited levels, ho!