That's really the key to it. No game is ever going to have every feature YOU want to see in a game. So it's a question of "Are the features you don't like tolerable?"
- Status
Yep. And recently, it's been used to attract people by the Flash-Bangs and not the writing, development and gameplay. For me, it really does matter what the story is as much or more than how it's told.
I didn't finish Wasteland 1 - but i played it again. And I've played fallout 1, and 2 and 3 and torment and Bloodlines lots more than I'll ever play Gears of War or Halo or Call of Duty.
Recently, technology has definitely made pretty-pretty more of a thing than it did back in the day of isometrics and text adventures. Which is a pity.
But we stray, sort-of, from the viewpoint/perspective question if we head on into the console/high-powered graphics question.
Sure. And it's not a problem. It's not necessary to be able to interact in depth with all NPC's around (unless that's part of the intended design). I used that as an example of [potential] scale.
Last edited:
It's the same to me, but a great writer or a great director can take a very mundane setting and make it interesting. He makes you care about the story even if the story is not something you would normally consider. He will take a story he wants to tell.
The other way around is fan service. And fan service is bad, mmmmkay?????
It's true that gameplay has been dumbed down since 2003, but graphics are not the culprit.There's no budgetary reason why for example, Red Storm Entertainment dumbed down Rainbow six to an arcadey cover shooter. Or why Blizzard dumbed down Starcraft II's story. That was a conscious design decision.
I do like the purty. Plz no take away the purty.
You could draw a bridge from the fact that close up perspective requires closeup detail (it is common for people to complain how all NPC's look and feel very samey) whereas with topdown or high up isometric it is often enough to use more archetypal visual design even if the game used the latest tech (and then you could "wow" the player with those close to photorealistic faces you see in GPU card presentations for key NPC's - like Fallout did) - I would guess the latter would be more cost effective and allow for more stuff on screen.
And then there's the thing that you only need models as detailed as required for them to look good from the decided distance. And the layman would once again think that the memory and computing power saved from the models, facial animations and such, could be put in better use elsewhere if it was the intent to reap all the juices from a high end rig.
Last edited:
Oh, I don't think that's going to be a problem.
Also a pretty solid testament to CDPR's plans - they like the pretty AND a good RPG.
Yeah, I seriously doubt CP2077 will lack for either story or graphics quality.
To my mind the question will be gameplay. Since it will be primarily firearms rather then melee weapons will it be FPS or TPS (I'm sure we can discount any possibility of overhead view) and how much will player vs character skill determine combat effectiveness.
To my mind the question will be gameplay. Since it will be primarily firearms rather then melee weapons will it be FPS or TPS (I'm sure we can discount any possibility of overhead view) and how much will player vs character skill determine combat effectiveness.
Indeed.
Although, depending on its structure and the way it is delivered, you could consider the story as part of the gameplay too.
In all likelyhood yes, overhead might be out of the question (sadly so...). But there's this quote from Iwinski (I think it was him) that puzzles me: "This game will not be for everyone". It raised my eyebrow because there's absolutely no point at all to say that if you mean the few more minor groups outside of the mainstream (like the oldschool RPG crowd) who are - aside from few special cases - neglected by default because the games they play aren't top sellers; it'd be just stating the obvious. Then there're the statements about "not being a multiplayer shooter" (single player shooter then? perhaps not a shooter at all?) and "true RPG" (what does that mean to them?) coupled with the somewhat contradicting "dicerolls are superboring" and "we try to avoid having stats affect combat much at all"....
All in all this paints a bit of a confusing picture about what to expect or hope for. Can't read too much into these sorts of statements, but there's a tickle in the back of my head that there is a faint possibility that they might be cooking something a bit different than a popularesque (here and elsewhere) 1st/3rd person shootery RPG lite with a branching narrative and pompous visuals (something that't be the safest bet looking at the industry as it is).
Last edited:
IMO, the game will be closer to the witcher about how it "feel" (3rd person, probably 1st person too), with new mechanics for guns, cybernetics, bullets damages, different kind of bullets, martial arts, etc...
It's the same engine than The Witcher 3 so, you can expect something in the same lines.
The "It'll not be for everyone", sounds, at least to me, more like "We'll take you in a dark and grim world, that I doubt most of the "Medieval RPG fans" will dig, with a lot of social critics and all", which is true if it stays close to the source material, Cyberpunk 2020 describe a fucked up society from head to toe, without any kindness for the squeamish or faint-hearted (Just read the fake-interview of a gang leader in the source book, it's pretty hardcore "Life is suffering, if you don't want to suffer then, you die", before the whole gang beat the leader's own brother to pulp), nowadays games are so bland and filled with "happy pills", that I can understand what he means.
Take Mass Effect (which a lot of people, not aware of the Cyberpunk's background, relate it to), even if the game is cool, it's nowhere as disturbing as the Cyberpunk's world, even The Witcher will look like a kiddie game (which just have some blood, scars and sex, VS drugs, and all those shits, dealed in a realistic and grim way).
I feel it was more like a "This is not some happy sci-fi, some people will not like what we are going to show you", more than "It's going to be an old-school RPG", or else, I think they would have said it at first.
Just my point of view tho.
Last edited:
Also I suspect your character won't be a "hero" saving the world from some catastrophe. More likely a victorious game end will be along the lines of - still alive, not in jail, better equipped, and hopefully a bit richer then you were when you started the game.
Some folks probably won't care for a game where you don't wind up a super-rich super-powered super-star at the end.
Some folks probably won't care for a game where you don't wind up a super-rich super-powered super-star at the end.
Could very well be. Though I very much hope they don't just repaint The Witcher to suit the setting.
It's a common thing to see... Every Rockstar game is an iteration of GTA, every Bethesda game is an iteration of The Elder Scrolls formulae, and so forth....
I hope that CDPR as an ambitious company that has done only one type of game has the versatility to strive towards more unknown territories, rather that merely reiterating the existing and unrelated.
It is possible. But I have some reservations since as far as I've gathered, 'grimdark' has been "the new shit" for quite a while that everyone wants and tries to strive for. Witcher being one of them.
Last edited:
CDPR has yet to ape themselves. They're one of the few devs who takes enormous creative risks and I feel the strongest resemblance to Witcher will be in the story telling, as both universes have more in common than you'd think. I'm guessing the 2020 ruleset will be bible for them and gameplay will be vastly different than Witcher. As for the view, one of the reasons I want it in TP is the melee animations for both Witcher games are second to none and I'd love to see their mo-capped version of the martial arts in '77.
Last edited:
As much as I goddamn love Kenji, running him in Friday Night Firefight would be tough for a few reasons:
1) Kenji is a freak - his speed and coordination are on-par with heavily cybered individuals. In 2020, reflex boosting and combat sense mean you can have his speed and agility...and a gun. Arasaka security does. Smartguns, COT sights...it's pretty easy to hit someone at less than 100 meters. CDPR may override the FNFF rules on this, but that would be different.
2) Kenji loves ambushes. His skills are quite high in that regard and he uses them a lot. This is totally doable in FNFF! Except any half-geared soldier is running thermals, motion detector, even personalized radar. In 2020, Kenji would have to augment his skills with more tech than we see in Eden.
3) A lot of the full borgs Kenji fights also like melee! This is cool! But an Enforcer or Dragoon, SP 20-40, SDP 50+ in the limbs, etc, would a) ignore his knives and b)burst the hell out of him with something horrible and built-in. To compensate, he'd need special weapons and armour. Dodging in FNFF is much harder...dodging bullets isn't really doable. Melee, yes...but your opponent can jump backwards and up 10 feet, firing as he does so.
Honestly, in 2020, Kenji would use his guns a lot more. I've seen a lot of people build melee monsters, even borged ones...if played cleverly they do okay, but the same cleverness and a good rifle means you live longer.
In 2020, armored clothing is quite common, clothing capable of slowing and/or defeating knife attacks. Why? Because NIght City is a violent place and people are aware that a guy with a knife could happen any day. Awareness/Notice is a very common skill - and sees a lot of in game use. Paranoid culture, armed and borged. Worse than today. Dark Future,
Ah..viewpoint? Yes. Third person would be better for this kind of melee fighting...because video games like to give you a loooong list of advantages you don't get in real life. Melee/HtH in real life is confusing, scary, more confusing and if you are flanked or someone gets behind you, yi.
Last edited:
@Sardukhar
I agree with you 100%. My point is not to make melee fighting on par with ranged combat. I just don't like the notion that melee is useless. I'd say that Kenji's biggest "super power" was situational awareness. He always seems to be few steps ahead of his foes (like with guy armed with polearm). He know where and how to fight with a knife to get an edge in combat.
So in CP2077 I'd would see a melee as valuable and dangerous "last resort" fighting style in augmented (hidden/extending arm blades and such), and unaugmented form (knives, batons, and such).
I agree with you 100%. My point is not to make melee fighting on par with ranged combat. I just don't like the notion that melee is useless. I'd say that Kenji's biggest "super power" was situational awareness. He always seems to be few steps ahead of his foes (like with guy armed with polearm). He know where and how to fight with a knife to get an edge in combat.
So in CP2077 I'd would see a melee as valuable and dangerous "last resort" fighting style in augmented (hidden/extending arm blades and such), and unaugmented form (knives, batons, and such).
Last edited:
Very true ... if you can convince or somehow deceive them into letting you get close enough before hostilities begin.
Never useless, just not a fighting style I'd rely on.
Last edited:
Same. Absolutely. I think we all agree combat is unpredictable. I absolutely think anyone putting themselves inharm's way - or being put there - should have a backup that doesn't require more than minimum tech and prep.
See my above.
It would take a good dose of disbelief if guns are the primary ways to deal with conflict even in the very dark future.
After all, commerce must still happen. Cash must still change hands. Baring military action, even in 16th century Japan or the wild west, I'm pretty sure non-lethal H2h was the weapon of choice over more lethal means to settle differences.
But of course, video games are video games.
After all, commerce must still happen. Cash must still change hands. Baring military action, even in 16th century Japan or the wild west, I'm pretty sure non-lethal H2h was the weapon of choice over more lethal means to settle differences.
But of course, video games are video games.
Last edited:
- Status