- Status
Rawls;n9140650 said:
My bet is that they'd include both flying cars and normal cars, but cars with wheels will be way more common, this is because a city with hundreds of flying machines will make the greatest pc to date to run like a toaster.
Last edited:
Ya sounds to me like flying cars are def a part of the gsme. However it sounds to me like theyre use will just primarily be to get you from point A to point b and used to get yiu up to the higher levels in the city. Like you wont be able to hop in your flying car and do flying drive bys or fly it through upper level glass windows. Almost sounds like we wont be able to completely control flying cars. Like maybe you hop in one pick your destination on a gps type system and then boom it automatically takes u there.
Lisbeth_Salander;n9141480 said:
Why is that??? What is the difference between a vehicle moving on wheels and one that moves without wheels (hovering) in terms of game design?
WalteriusMaximus;n9142080 said:
Short answer: It takes less cars to fill empty streets than to to fill the empty spaces between buildings.
Have in mind that the more moving objects we have on screen, the harder it will be for consoles and computers to handle the game (specially if it had top notch graphics). Now consider the following:
Think about it, how many cars (with wheels) is it necessary to fill a street compared to a full empty space that is between all the buildings?
It’s all about perspective, really. Let’s look at this pic from GTA V,
tell me does this it give you the felling of a empty city? It looks pretty filled up, even though there are only 8 cars in it. As we look into the horizon we don’t see many more cars, but it isn’t that important, because most of the game we’re down in the streets while most things that are happening, are in the same level ground/plane of field as us. (And even though we may look into the horizon, no matter how long the highway is there’s no need to put more than 10 or 15 cars in it).
Now compare it to a flying cars scenario:
Would 8 cars give the same feeling? These 2 pics from from the movie The Fifth Element illustrate all this up. Look at them:
it took them 28+ cars to fill all that void in the first picture, while the second has 30+ cars! Now imagine the same scenes with only 8 flying cars. (no matter where you were standing, it would look pretty empty, well it would look even worse from the upper view) But that's not my point, look at how beautiful Milla Jovovich's body is, just look at it.
I think flying cars are great and they should exist, but there won't be THAT many of them flying around. I'm not a designer, I'm telling is all about perspective and fellings, yep you heard that right, FELLINGS! HAHAHA WHO WOULD HAVE TOUGHT
EDIT:add the term "plane of field"
Last edited:
Lisbeth_Salander;n9142540 said:Short answer: It takes less cars to fill empty streets than to to fill the empty spaces between buildings.
Have in mind that the more moving objects we have on screen, the harder it will be for consoles and computers to handle the game (specially if it had top notch graphics). Now consider the following:
Think about it, how many cars (with wheels) is it necessary to fill a street compared to a full empty space that is between all the buildings?
It’s all about perspective, really. Let’s look at this pic from GTA V,
tell me does this it give you the felling of a empty city? It looks pretty filled up, even though there are only 8 cars in it. As we look into the horizon we don’t see many more cars, but it isn’t that important, because most of the game we’re down In the streets while most things that are happening, are in the same level ground as us. (And even though we may look into the horizon, no matter how long the highway is there’s no need to put more than 10 or 15 cars in it).
Now compare it to a flying cars scenario:
Would 8 cars give the same feeling? These 2 pics from from the movie The Fifth Element illustrate all this up. Look at them:
it took them 28+ cars to fill all that void in the first picture, while the second has 30+ cars! Now imagine the same scenes with only 8 flying cars. (no matter where you were standing, it would look pretty empty, well it would look even worse from the upper view) But that's not my point, look at how beautiful Milla Jovovich's body is, just look at it.
I think flying cars are great and they should exist, but there won't be THAT many of them flying around. I'm not a designer, I'm telling is all about perspective and fellings, yep you heard that right, FELLINGS! HAHAHA WHO WOULD HAVE TOUGHT
So...it is a matter of number of assets on screen. You base your argument on the assumption that there must be more vehicles on screen at a time if flying vehicles are possible and implemented. This makes very little sense.
The same could be said for any game asset with any kind of AI including NPCs.
So I can post an image of 5th element showing a crowd of people and argue that they are not going to include NPCs because they are too resource hungry.
Last edited:
WalteriusMaximus;n9142980 said:
No, it makes a fair bit of sense, conditions having been pre-stated. Liz' argument is that a believable living city requires movement and action. Flying cars take up a third axis of same and would exponentially increase the amount of effort required over ground vehicles.
That's if you want to -see- flying vehicles that are more common than the occasional helicopter in the distance. If not, then, sure, you could have them - but you'd have to suspend disbelief as to why there aren't more of them in the air, especially around the Corporate Center.
If you can actually fly them as well, that also magnifies issues of both freedom of movement in a tactical and plot sense, as well as either a) more vehicles in the sky for you to see as you fly around or b) few vehicles in the sky, which, again, in 2077 raises the question of if you can have them, why doesn't Arasaka and EBM and Militech and Raven and..
Also if you're going to tell someone their argument "makes very little sense", a) be nicer about it, because I generally enforce courtesy and b) actually back your statement up about -why- it makes very little sense.
That and flying cars open some cans of worms the developer may not wish to, and it's easily avoided by restricting the number around. So why wouldn't they?
Yes, it'd be cool as hell to be able to fly where you want and have aerial dogfights, but I'm afraid "it's cool" isn't a viable justification for including them.
As Mike said; what function do they perform in the context of the game. That's what matters.
Yes, it'd be cool as hell to be able to fly where you want and have aerial dogfights, but I'm afraid "it's cool" isn't a viable justification for including them.
As Mike said; what function do they perform in the context of the game. That's what matters.
WalteriusMaximus;n9142980 said:
>implying cars are equally resource hungry as npcs
>implying a flying car at 240 km/h is equally resource hungry a a npc
>implying 25+ cars flying at 80 km/h while you fly your car at 240 km/h is equally resourcefull hungry as npcs that stand still and walk slowly most of the time
WalteriusMaximus;n9142980 said:
It's not only about quantity, but also about the objects' position and the perspective of the player.
It's hard to see what's in the horizon in a game like GTA V, when you're in the same plane of field as the cars, so 8 cars is enough, but when looking at 8 flying cars when you're staying on the ground, you'l clearly see how there's not that many cars flying around. My argument is based on fellings. In one case it will feel empty and the other won't.
Perhaps It'd be possible to make CP2077 with a lot of flying cars if there was a big sacrifice regarding graphics OR if they restrutured Night City's map, take a look at the pic bellow. As Sard mentioned in another post most of the streets formations are straigh lines, this hardens even more the existence of 'lots of flying cars (this is because there'd be an endless street with a HUGE amount of vehicles). And considering that they'd reconstruct the city with fewer straight lines, so they would put more flying cars in it, there would remain a issue: Going 240 kilometres per hour in your car with that many cars be a problem in itself since it would be basically impossible, think about it, you'd have to make a turn every time because there'd not be that many straight streets, therefore making it a headache to even drive at 100 km/h. Not to mention that reconstructing the map is a crime itself against the source matterial.
Maybe it'd be nice to have every 10 normal cars only 2 flying ones per street.
I know what you're thinking, what differs the subjectivity I'm defending from yours? Isn't taste a matter perspective? I know it's all about opinion in the end of the day, and there are no absolute truths, but keep in mind that CDPR will probably try to please the majority of gamers (this is the closest thing we have to objective subjectivity) And this is not my point of view, I'd prefer to have a city both full of normal cars and flying ones, but I left my fellings aside and realised that there's little chance of that happening. Perhaps when 2077 comes out Playstation 5 will be a thing and all I said will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Last edited:
Actually, Walterius does raise a good point about the crowd of NPCs.
Even more so than flying cars, a Living City must have a healthy living population. If I see 5 flying vehicles and 10 cars, I want to see ( and hopefully interact with) 20-30 people on the street, in windows and in those cars.
Of course, if we stick with 2020 ethos, flying cars -are- expensive, so you're not likely to see more than 10 at any given time, outside the Corp Center. This isn't Fifth Element.
But I do really, really want to see 20+ living people ( outside the 1 am to 6 am quiet-ish times) moving and interacting with their world. Novigrad from Witcher 3 was pretty good for this, but Night City is more populated.
Even more so than flying cars, a Living City must have a healthy living population. If I see 5 flying vehicles and 10 cars, I want to see ( and hopefully interact with) 20-30 people on the street, in windows and in those cars.
Of course, if we stick with 2020 ethos, flying cars -are- expensive, so you're not likely to see more than 10 at any given time, outside the Corp Center. This isn't Fifth Element.
But I do really, really want to see 20+ living people ( outside the 1 am to 6 am quiet-ish times) moving and interacting with their world. Novigrad from Witcher 3 was pretty good for this, but Night City is more populated.
Based on what was said about the flying cars thing... I would asume that flying cars role in a game like CP2077 would be as some kind of fast travel mechanic.
One that you would have to pay some serious money to use (so it does not become something that you can abuse). The upside to the price would be that you could get all the way across town in a really short time... either via them being really fast... or via some kind of loading screen maybe... depends on how they build the city and all (one big seamless openworld with no loading screen... or where each larger district of the city is it's own map where you have to load into the other districts).
One that you would have to pay some serious money to use (so it does not become something that you can abuse). The upside to the price would be that you could get all the way across town in a really short time... either via them being really fast... or via some kind of loading screen maybe... depends on how they build the city and all (one big seamless openworld with no loading screen... or where each larger district of the city is it's own map where you have to load into the other districts).
Me as well.Rawls;n9143880 said:
I'd LOVE to pilot one myself but sort of doubt it'll be available outside perhaps a specific mission or two. Just too many issues trying to incorporate them into a video game.
Take for instance Skyrim, I once used a mod that allowed your character to have dragon wings. No more need to find and climb a path up a mountain. You could fly to the top of a tower and attack the NPCs from behind and the AI was less effective then usual because of this. Just plain travel was 10 times easier as you didn't need to deal with encounters along the way.
Not quite sure why people think that flying cars are somehow beyond CDPR's capabilities to develop. It makes no sense. Its seems they're only talking about how they will be implemented into the game and in what way, not that they will be unavailable or that there will only be a small few driving them. Im almost certain vehicles are going to be more then a glorified taxi surface used as fast travel, come on, flying cars being no more useful then road signs from Witcher 3 as fast travel essentially, Doubt it. Lets not forget its a video game people, why bother building the system for vehicles, on ground and in air just for fast travel or looks? And they talk about technology being part of everyday life and its very accessible yet people say vehicles are reserves only for the rich? Way to many contractions.
BeastModeIron;n9144800 said:
CDPR resources and tech aren't infinite - they are still limited. Certain things have a high resource cost and (well-implemented) free roaming vehicle travel is a high bar. Making those vehicles fly is a higher bar yet. Pun intended!
Roach (W3) gave you free riding - one mount, ground movement only. If they move to multiple vehicles on the ground, that's increasing the challenge - and they are already increasing the scope. There will be limits.
Limiting flying vehicles to fast-travel-only makes sense in terms of controlled tactical and mission design. Also makes vertical gameplay more important - climbing and sneaking up a building become challenging if you can't just fly your AV-6 in there.
Flying cars are expensive - that's why they are reserved for the rich. That's economics. Most people in CPunk are poor - tech is generally omnipresent but at different wealth levels. Flying vehicles that cruise above the dirty , teeming masses of the Street are a luxury. This isn't Star Trek or Star Wars - the best stuff still goes to the wealthy.
Flying cars are fast, clean, safe and above the mess - a tool of the rich and powerful. Not the cyberarm-equipped street edgerunners Punks are.
Driveable flying vehicles are a lot of fun - but they aren't typically very Cyberpunk.
As Sardukhar said, it's not a matter of being able to implement them, it's a matter of what effects their implementation would have on game-play that's all-important.
If anyone is expecting CP2077 to be a game that encourages (or even allows) you to fly around in an AV as a full conversion borg with big weapons and continually blast stuff for fun you're in for a serious disappointment I fear. Combat will NOT be the focus of the game, it will be something that happens during the course of the game (hopefully well-implemented).
Any capability included in the game, be it stats, skills, weapons, cybeware, or vehicles has to be considered in terms of not only what it permits a player to do but how it effects the game as a whole. It's 2077, nukes are around, and for the right price available, should CDPR permit a character to get their hands on one? What the hell could they possibly do with one that didn't compromise the game as a whole?
So no, it's not, and never was, or will be, a matter of "can't", it's one of "won't", because it's inclusion compromises the intended game play or is a technical bar to high to jump with the resources and time available and/or within the technical limitations of consoles. As has been said, making a game only playable on monster game PC's is beyond foolish.
Now it may well be that it turns out they are in fact in the game and available for players to freely use, I don't have a clue what CDPR is doing, but I can anticipate, and we can discuss, the implications of what they may, or may not, do. So if you want any particular feature implemented look at if from all angles, pros and cons, and explain how and why that feature could potentially improve the game. I want it because I want it and it's cool doesn't cut it as an arguement.
If anyone is expecting CP2077 to be a game that encourages (or even allows) you to fly around in an AV as a full conversion borg with big weapons and continually blast stuff for fun you're in for a serious disappointment I fear. Combat will NOT be the focus of the game, it will be something that happens during the course of the game (hopefully well-implemented).
Any capability included in the game, be it stats, skills, weapons, cybeware, or vehicles has to be considered in terms of not only what it permits a player to do but how it effects the game as a whole. It's 2077, nukes are around, and for the right price available, should CDPR permit a character to get their hands on one? What the hell could they possibly do with one that didn't compromise the game as a whole?
So no, it's not, and never was, or will be, a matter of "can't", it's one of "won't", because it's inclusion compromises the intended game play or is a technical bar to high to jump with the resources and time available and/or within the technical limitations of consoles. As has been said, making a game only playable on monster game PC's is beyond foolish.
Now it may well be that it turns out they are in fact in the game and available for players to freely use, I don't have a clue what CDPR is doing, but I can anticipate, and we can discuss, the implications of what they may, or may not, do. So if you want any particular feature implemented look at if from all angles, pros and cons, and explain how and why that feature could potentially improve the game. I want it because I want it and it's cool doesn't cut it as an arguement.
Last edited:
- Status