No. They make you pick the obvious good choice or bad choice so you hit the extremes. It really ruins the game.
We won't do an arbitrary morality meter for Cyberpunk. We try to handle these things in a more organic way, by tracking choices you make, and how they affect the people you interact with.
So a ganger on the other city of the city won't care if you told a fixer to fuck off, but the fixer might remember (or maybe they know each other, so now you got a whole new situation on your hand). Basically, we try to keep it as true to life as possible.
So a ganger on the other city of the city won't care if you told a fixer to fuck off, but the fixer might remember (or maybe they know each other, so now you got a whole new situation on your hand). Basically, we try to keep it as true to life as possible.
In the same way Fallout makes you a slaver or a guardian. In other words, no true. It's up to you.
Realism in storytelling can also be a fun weapon to turn against the player character. Look at Postal 2, where the scenario is literally you who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (every time) and groups of people want you dead even though you did nothing 
I think some random (or scripted) moments like that would be required sometimes to push the player out of his/her comfort zone, see how the player reacts to this. Avoid the fight ? Defending oneself, thus pouring oil to the fire ? That would be thrilling and fun IMO.
I think some random (or scripted) moments like that would be required sometimes to push the player out of his/her comfort zone, see how the player reacts to this. Avoid the fight ? Defending oneself, thus pouring oil to the fire ? That would be thrilling and fun IMO.
A morality meter is not cool only if it forces you to do something every time you reach a certain moment in the game. Otherwise, it is OK, if created properly...
Same here.
TW3 and GTA4 did that. Probably many other games as well.
Luckily CDPR has decided not to use the morality meter.
when did gta4 do that? i remember clearly the guy on the roof that u saved came back and assisted u..
Clarence and Eddie Low.
damn its been a while since i played that game. i think i picked the other guy older guy over clarence from the getgo.
and eddie low i think i missed him completely. thanks though. but its very common in games that u save someones life and then they assist you. i would like a guy that u save and he comes back and u save again and he comes back stronger each time it would be a funny thing maybe even an achievement attached to it when he comes back in his "final form" lol.
Yeah, soemething I don't like about RPGs is that 99% of cases you are never really punished for completing quests, even if your actions lead to a negative result, you still get experience points, loot or money. I want to feel the thrill when I accept a mission, not thinking "oh, well, worst case scenario I'll get some exp./loot/money anyway".
P.S. I've played GTA4 sooooo many times, I remember a lot of it.
Yeah, soemething I don't like about RPGs is that 99% of cases you are never really punished for completing quests, even if your actions lead to a negative result, you still get experience points, loot or money. I want to feel the thrill when I accept a mission, not thinking "oh, well, worst case scenario I'll get some exp./loot/money anyway".
P.S. I've played GTA4 sooooo many times, I remember a lot of it.
That's a game mechanics issue. Basically, "exp." was meant to reflect you learning something in TTRPGs, particularly in DnD; even making the world an objectively worse place involves learning something from what you did. But because of how leveling mechanic and tied-in challenge ratings work in DnD and similar games, gaining too many levels without enough wealth makes the game unplayable; thus, to keep from having to constantly restart (because humans are, frankly, terrible at learning from past mistakes at best and often only learn the worst lessons possible), you have to reward with wealth and items to keep them from falling too far behind.
That's true, but that's due to the strong connection between exp and levels. I don't have any big problem with levels themselves if they are just an indication of how "strong" you are. I don't like when a level blocks you from doing something, like wearing armor, holding weapons, starting a quest or unlocking perks: I don't see why I need to be level 15 to learn how to do an heavy attack (e.g) in particular if I imagine a game like CP2077 where you could just buy a better augmentation to unlock perks with no need of levels at all. Street creds, if considered as a reputation system that unlocks vendors or quests, would make absolutely sense to me. But that's just me and I think we're going off topic :/
P.S. Of course we don't know for sure how the level system is implemented in CP2077 yet
That's true, but that's due to the strong connection between exp and levels. I don't have any big problem with levels themselves if they are just an indication of how "strong" you are. I don't like when a level blocks you from doing something, like wearing armor, holding weapons, starting a quest or unlocking perks: I don't see why I need to be level 15 to learn how to do an heavy attack (e.g) in particular if I imagine a game like CP2077 where you could just buy a better augmentation to unlock perks with no need of levels at all. Street creds, if considered as a reputation system that unlocks vendors or quests, would make absolutely sense to me. But that's just me and I think we're going off topic :/
P.S. Of course we don't know for sure how the level system is implemented in CP2077 yet
It's because of certain old myths and legends, of the nobody who was slightly skilled becoming a hero of renown. Basically, the King Arthur story in mechanics form.