Hmm, an interesting corundum indeed. On one hand, having limited responses WOULD reinforce the idea of the character as an individual who would respond in certain ways based off of their knowledge, world view and experiences. On another, it does appear to be a limiting factor by virtue of not having all options available. Quite an interesting pickle.
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Never knowing if my build is actually in use or not doesn't interest me in the slightest, and I'm happy with the direction they've gone for now.
I agree & also think a toggle would be a good idea.
If possible, i would even like to have 3 options:
1) Don't display skill check+text if you don't meet requirements
2) Display the skil check+text if you don't meet requirements
3) Extra: Display the skill check but not the text if you don't meet requirements
The last just shows you there are more options, but not what exactly they would be. Good middle ground between being completely in the dark and getting spoiled with the full text.
If possible, i would even like to have 3 options:
1) Don't display skill check+text if you don't meet requirements
2) Display the skil check+text if you don't meet requirements
3) Extra: Display the skill check but not the text if you don't meet requirements
The last just shows you there are more options, but not what exactly they would be. Good middle ground between being completely in the dark and getting spoiled with the full text.
I agree very much. Very logical.
Post automatically merged:
This is a good point also, but it can easily be resolved by not making dialogue options go away after selecting them.
Example:
Talking to an NPC
Dialogue Option 1 "talking talking talking"
Dialogue Option 2 (special option from background) "talking talking talking"
Dialogue Option 3 "talking talking talking"
V chooses option 1.
conversation continues, dialogue options show up again.
Option 1, 2, 3, are still available, and can still be explored.
That would be awesome, because then we would never feel like we missed something we didn't want to miss.
Last edited:
Unless CDPR change their approach with Cyberpunk, which they might for all I know, "special" options will be the best choices to make.
- Looking at The Witcher 3, "special" options (Delusion skill) are usually better than the other options (e.g. are cheaper or have fewer consequences).
- Looking at Thronebreaker, from what I've seen (which is a lot at this point) "special" options are always better than the other options, often combining the other options in a way that sums together the pros and leaves out the cons (e.g. costs less resources and yields better results).
I disagree that "special" options should be the best option. They'd be better used in a way that merely opens up possibilities, even if those possibilities are more dangerous or difficult ways to achieve what could be achieved without "special" options. Having [skill/trait/background/etc.] shouldn't automatically make things easier.
That isn't how it works in real life and I'd really like to see it not be the case in a video game as well.
It's downright boring that "oh, I have a special option here" always means "oh, I can get through this easier than I would by default".
I would prefer KOTOR's system, example
[Persuade]I don't think I should pay credits for this armor
If your Persuasion ability is enough to persuade them
[Success]Yes, you don't have to pay anything to me. Take this armor
If it's not
[Failed]No, you will pay if you want that armor
Summary: You may try every option that you can attempt but fail or success depends of your skills
[Persuade]I don't think I should pay credits for this armor
If your Persuasion ability is enough to persuade them
[Success]Yes, you don't have to pay anything to me. Take this armor
If it's not
[Failed]No, you will pay if you want that armor
Summary: You may try every option that you can attempt but fail or success depends of your skills
@lelxrv @Snowflakez you both have valid points.
I agree that having a "special" line subconsciously forces you to choose it, at the same time devs shouldn't make it the best options (which unfortunately is not always the case).
IE a street kid line should (sometimes) put you in trouble with a corpo NPC or give you an advantage in a street kid situation (or create problems to a corpo NPC).
It's also true that having a special line may help role-playing, considering that sentences are often rephrased when spoken by the character, and we are never sure of the intonation that'll be used (I can read something aggressively but it was very kind in the devs' mind).
This is an hard one.
The most important thing is that a street kid shouldn't even think corpo or nomad lines. In reality we may pretend to be experts of something and bluff, but the only way I can think to see that in a videogame (unless a "bluff label" is clearly stated, but then you need a stat for that) is to have RNG and for me RNG is the biggest possible evil together with bullet sponges and TW3's (and alike) loot system.
I agree that having a "special" line subconsciously forces you to choose it, at the same time devs shouldn't make it the best options (which unfortunately is not always the case).
IE a street kid line should (sometimes) put you in trouble with a corpo NPC or give you an advantage in a street kid situation (or create problems to a corpo NPC).
It's also true that having a special line may help role-playing, considering that sentences are often rephrased when spoken by the character, and we are never sure of the intonation that'll be used (I can read something aggressively but it was very kind in the devs' mind).
This is an hard one.
The most important thing is that a street kid shouldn't even think corpo or nomad lines. In reality we may pretend to be experts of something and bluff, but the only way I can think to see that in a videogame (unless a "bluff label" is clearly stated, but then you need a stat for that) is to have RNG and for me RNG is the biggest possible evil together with bullet sponges and TW3's (and alike) loot system.
I don't think street kid/corpo/nomad lines should be marked/highlighted in any way. The player shouldn't be aware that he's getting a "special" option, it should have a natural flow.
Highlighting dialogue options like they are doing right now is super "video-gamey" and rather against CDPR's "full immersion" slogan.
Highlighting dialogue options like they are doing right now is super "video-gamey" and rather against CDPR's "full immersion" slogan.
But wouldn't the character know he has this insight due to his background ? I'm all for the option to turn this off for people that want the least amount of gameplay info in their dialogue. But personally, i want to have this information available.
Actually, in many cases, Delusion would get you in even more trouble. Thronebreaker is hardly a good comparison for this.Unless CDPR change their approach with Cyberpunk, which they might for all I know, "special" options will be the best choices to make.
- Looking at The Witcher 3, "special" options (Delusion skill) are usually better than the other options (e.g. are cheaper or have fewer consequences).
- Looking at Thronebreaker, from what I've seen (which is a lot at this point) "special" options are always better than the other options, often combining the other options in a way that sums together the pros and leaves out the cons (e.g. costs less resources and yields better results).
I disagree that "special" options should be the best option. They'd be better used in a way that merely opens up possibilities, even if those possibilities are more dangerous or difficult ways to achieve what could be achieved without "special" options. Having [skill/trait/background/etc.] shouldn't automatically make things easier.
That isn't how it works in real life and I'd really like to see it not be the case in a video game as well.
It's downright boring that "oh, I have a special option here" always means "oh, I can get through this easier than I would by default".
And I guess it depends on how you define "best." I define "best" as the most appropriate option for a scenario, and in some cases, there's no getting around the fact that having a specific background will help you out more than others. If you're a skilled techie, YES, absolutely you should have an easier time talking shop/avoiding a scam when talking to a fellow techie shop owner, for example. It's OK to let players actually enjoy success and benefits from their chosen playstyle and background. They should also be taught that auto-picking those options is not always the best choice, but then again, what if they simply want to RP that way?
Example: I may personally think another choice is smarter, but my character is cocky, so he's going to go off on a netrunning/hacking tangent with a short-fused character that has no time or patience for my shenanigans. I as a player know this about him, but maybe my character doesn't. You know. Because it's an RPG.
Remember the "Street Kid" option in the demo, where V says she'd rather put her trust in the Voodoo Boys? How did that work out for her? Not very well. I mean, sure, she works with them anyway because it's a CDPR game and I highly doubt you can avoid that, but she got betrayed for her blind loyalty.
Well, I'm a corpo IRL and when I talk to other corpos, I don't go like "hmm, I know how this works because I'm a corpo! Now, let me use this knowledge to answer this guy's tricky questions. Or maybe I should just answer him in a non-corpo way? Hmm...."
It doesn't work like that, it happens naturally.
For me this is just another video game gimmick that doesn't even serve much purpose. What would this be, to give a player some level of satisfaction that he chose a certain lifepath? It's totally random, it doesn't involve either skill or wit(or even a simple skill check, for that matter)...I don't really see a purpose, it just makes dialogues less immersive and more artificial.
It's how RPGs have worked for years, and people like it, myself included. There are reasons it works that way, but everyone is simply ignoring those reasons.
IIRC she doesn't pick that but the one above (which happens to be pretty much the same)
I'm referring to the Gamescom demo. Journalists say she picked the Voodo Boys option.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Personally I appreciate if games try to advance or at least experiment with their mechanics, just because something worked for years doesn't mean it has to stay that way forever.
Character background options should be hidden, or only appear when qualified.
Skill check options should appear. At least definitely in the open world. If I can't access a certain area because I lack a certain skill, I want to know. Personally, I'd also appreciate it if they appeared in dialogue too, but that's just me.
An option in the settings would be the best of both worlds and give the ability to play what they prefer. Maybe for my first playthrough I'd like to see how deep these skill checks and dialogue options go and leave them on, or change my mind halfway through the game. Options are good, yeah?
Skill check options should appear. At least definitely in the open world. If I can't access a certain area because I lack a certain skill, I want to know. Personally, I'd also appreciate it if they appeared in dialogue too, but that's just me.
An option in the settings would be the best of both worlds and give the ability to play what they prefer. Maybe for my first playthrough I'd like to see how deep these skill checks and dialogue options go and leave them on, or change my mind halfway through the game. Options are good, yeah?
Exactly. Nobody is saying that your way of enjoying it is "wrong" - some want to have the least amount of rolls and game mechanics exposed to them and experience the games as "directly" as possible. Those will most likely turn off the UI unless it has a good ingame reason to exist.
But others (including myself) really like to understand the in-game mechanics, the role playing rule system working behind the scenes. For us, hiding all that and being kept in the dark actually detracts from the fun to be had.
Thats why i think options/settings to fine tune the dialogue UI would be great:
- Show associated dialogue skill: y/n
- For dialogue options without requirements met:
a) display skill check and full text
b) display skill check, but no text
c) hide both skill check and text
Sure, agreed.
Last edited:
No, it doesn't, but if it ain't broke, it doesn't need to be fixed. IMO.
Removing the indicators serves no practical purpose, and only benefits those who (for some reason) prefer to have less information about their characters at any given time. As I've pointed out in the past, I like information density, and arbitrary "immersion"-based decisions rarely make sense to me when it comes to gameplay (cinematics/story-telling are another story).
You correctly point out that you will not always know when you're shifting into "corporate mode" as a human being. That's fair. But we are not actually our character. We do not and cannot (yet) actually feel what they feel or think what they think. This is why user interfaces exist in the first place, to give us information our characters have, but we don't necessarily know. It's also why skill checks in PnPs and normal RPGs exist. This is why dialogue options exist. I think removing the background indicators would lessen the roleplaying experience, because I'll literally never know that my character is actually playing the way I intend for them to play. The only possible way I'll know that my character is different than someone else's is by going and asking them.
Different strokes indeed. This is a scenario where a toggle might be appropriate and perhaps not that challenging to implement, though I can't say for sure.
