In retrospect would V being a fixed character have worked better?

+
I was one of the guys that really poopoo'd the idea of playing a fixed character once rumors came out in 2016/2017 that the protagonist would be a fixed character.
My logic was that if you're playing a fixed character are you actually playing a roleplaying game? I've been thinking a lot about this subject and my opinion has changed.
We all want to have our personality reflected onto the protagonist, go anywhere do anything right? Well that's an impossibility when it comes to vg development and choices will be made that you're not going to like and I feel like having a tailored made character is actually a better solution than having a faceless nameless character where you think you're in full control over but in reality you're not and the devs have already laid down its paths.

I've been thinking about Cyberpunk 2 a lot, and I was thinking maybe having fixed characters is the way to go it makes the experience more personal in a way. I was thinking picking different classes instead of that godawful lifepaths. For instance if you pick Max you're a 22year old Rockerboy, You pick Naomi you're a Max-Tac, Tyrone you're a netrunner. They have fixed personalities, likes and dislikes, you still have choices but you are still bound within their personas. This would actually add real replayability, instead of just playing the 20min intro from each lifepath (no more lifepaths in cp2 pls). Of course in CP2 we will have 3rd person mode as well so we can actually see the tailormade character/classes.

What do you guys think?
 
I mean, it seems like that's what we ended up getting anyways. There really isn't any variance to V. He/she is pretty much as fixed and linear, even more so actually, than Geralt.

Geralt seemed to have more variance in character and choices in Witcher 3 than we were presented with V.
 
I mean, it seems like that's what we ended up getting anyways. There really isn't any variance to V. He/she is pretty much as fixed and linear, even more so actually, than Geralt.

Geralt seemed to have more variance in character and choices in Witcher 3 than we were presented with V.

and this is my point, would have just been better to have a tailormade character.
 
yeah like RDR, just do a fixed singleplayer story then do a separate multiplayer, not sure if it would've been that different from what we got though
 
I find fixed characters very hit or miss... because they are. I like playing female characters, for example, so if the fixed character is male, that's a miss for me. Same for countless other variables. The key I think is to have very robust options for creation so that, even if the character's personality is kind of set by the needs of the story or the performance of the voice actor, you can still feel ownership of your creation.
 
Worked better or not it is how the character is. You get to choose V's voice, genitals, sexuality and background. Beyond that V is a character with their own personality and motivations and blah blah.

I think it would have been less controversial if people had been aware from the beginning, but to get to the question of whether cyberpunk is better having a set character, no I don't think so. You still could have had a voiced character and have the personality be a blank slate, it would have just required a lot more dialogue a lot more story and a lot more voice acting. I wish they had done this but they didn't.
 
Assassin's Creed - Odyssey and Valhalla did it perfect! Good design on the male/female. And player choice on gender, can't ask for more. Even the open world is something to take lessons from. Just because you beat an Assassin Creed, Far Cry and many other UBISOFT titles does not mean it's all done and gone. You can "reset bases" in Far Cry, and the latest Assassin Creed games have never-ending content. It's so organic. But... Cyberpunk 2077 is a DEAD WORLD the moment you done the content. And let's not start about the save game corruption...
 
No. Body modification is part of the lore.

V's attitude and personality are definitely more or less "fixed", but with all the body modification, cyberware and genetics breakthroughs in the lore it only makes sense we get to customize how V looks.
 
"Cyberpunk 2077 is a DEAD WORLD the moment you done the content. And let's not start about the save game corruption... "

That's the thing that bothers me the most in the game ...

I really wanted to understand why they killed the game like that, because they made that decision. :(
 
I think that in this game it doesn't matter for the story, because you don't get to know much about V's past. This game would benefit of a more deep customization. The idea behind the skill tree is nice but it doesn't matter too much, I can one shot people with a shotgun while sliding in slow motion and still 1 hit k.o. them even if I don't level anything related to shotguns. The same can be said for other weapons, specially sniper rifles. So since the beginning of this game the problem is that your choices don't impact too much. That applies to background, story, skills, weapons, etc. So, whatever, in this game a fixed character or not would just suck anyway. The most meaningful choice we can do is our sex and how depressed you want to be in the end.
 
Nope.. Video games can only do so much and if they want to tell a narrative there are going to be endings to that narrative. Doesn't matter how many branches they have in the story or how many endings, it's always going to be a choose your own adventure with a set of linear steps you need to take to get to one of those endings. How you choose to role play your character is ultimately what matters as a video games freedom is all an illusion. It has nothing to do with a set character or a created character as every character will be on the same journey. Take Saints Row, not only can you completely customize your character but you can choose completely different voice sets and yet it's a relatively linear affair. You can choose to role play your character however you want and that gives you a sense of freedom that isn't actually there. So no, a set protagonist wouldn't have changed a thing and it just would have made the game feel more restricted.
 
I find fixed characters very hit or miss... because they are. I like playing female characters, for example, so if the fixed character is male, that's a miss for me. Same for countless other variables. The key I think is to have very robust options for creation so that, even if the character's personality is kind of set by the needs of the story or the performance of the voice actor, you can still feel ownership of your creation.

Games can do fixed characters with a gender choice. That is basically Commander Shepard's deal in the Mass Effect series.

All versions of Shepard are career military with a pro-Alliance viewpoint appropriate for their career background. The player just determines whether Shepard is a ruthless leader (and a bit of a prick) or a more persuasive leader.
 
Nope.. Video games can only do so much and if they want to tell a narrative there are going to be endings to that narrative. Doesn't matter how many branches they have in the story or how many endings, it's always going to be a choose your own adventure with a set of linear steps you need to take to get to one of those endings. How you choose to role play your character is ultimately what matters as a video games freedom is all an illusion. It has nothing to do with a set character or a created character as every character will be on the same journey. Take Saints Row, not only can you completely customize your character but you can choose completely different voice sets and yet it's a relatively linear affair. You can choose to role play your character however you want and that gives you a sense of freedom that isn't actually there. So no, a set protagonist wouldn't have changed a thing and it just would have made the game feel more restricted.
Okay, now to counter that. Take FO NV. New Vegas has a preset character in the sense, that there is a backstory, that defines your task in the world. But how you approach that task is completely up to you, to a degrees, where you can side with either faction of the game and kill the leader of the other. There is no set end, where everything has to come back together in a linear way. No, it just reflects on what you have done, and what that has lead to in the world.

That is the kind of storytelling people were expecting from CP77 same as what TW3 had to a degrees too. But TW3 was a predefined char, it was made around this character with a very specific backstory.

The core principle sth like NV follows is, that it is up to you who you ally with, who you see as a friend and who you dont. The backstory doesnt tell you anything. In CP77 on the other hand, just the intro alone railroads you into becoming buddy buddy with jackie and allying with T-Bug to a degrees, where if you would say "I dont trust Jackie on his decision making" you can not actually do the main quest.

That does not happen in a game like FO NV. Every decision is up to you, you are only handed a task at the get-go of the story.

In that sense though. No I do not think having a more tailormade character would've changed a thing. The character already is tailor made, only thing you can change is visuals, that have no bearing on the story what so ever. Aside of who your character can end up with.
 
I wasn't expecting a fixed character for CP2077. If that is the route they go this would the last CP game I'll play. Pending awesome sales. I play games that have no "end". It just fits my taste. I don't like owning a bunch of titles. Most stories are pretentious nonsense or cookie cutter arcs.

I wouldn't mind if they made games with a fixed character story focused game in between larger open world versions w/ a player made / driven character. The lore for CP seems deep enough for both.

Anyways, CP2077 has a long way to go. I am happy they let us play the beta. It has been a learning experience for everyone. Now we should let CDPR clean house and right their ship. While that is going on, we as the customer, gamer, and enthusiast should support them with heavy but fair criticism.
 
Top Bottom