Shall cyberware be of better or worse quality depending on manufacturer/price/seller? And shall they deteriorate from use?

[Bellator Pius Gratus]

Hello!

Time again for another post. Always with a poll, if I can help it!

This topic was touched upon the other day in another post/poll I made:
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/price-of-commodities-cyberware-cars-etc.11011318/.

Think Witcher 3 for example. In the game you have your armour and your weapons. They protect you and allow you to defend yourself(or hunt monsters). At the price of deterioration.
Every armor piece and weapon(almost) has a durability meter that tick down from use. Eventually they are useless and you need to repair them. You may even maintain them while on the road with certain tools.

So when writing my other post regarding cyberware, it got me thinking:
Should cyberware also have a certain quality aspect, depending on manufacturer or price?
Should they have deterioration or a durability stat, getting worse from use, neglection of maintenance or repair? Maybe even at different paces, with pricey cyberware deteriorating slower than cheap cyberware.

Or, maybe, cyberware might be in much worse state/condition from the start, since you refused to pay for quality and went to that ripper doc with the shady-as hell-connections. *Does*Not*Compute*ERROR*

Now, I'm not saying your low-price-certainly harvested from some poor sod in a dark alley-optical scanner, or subdermal grip, shall start beeping error just when you need them the most. Or am I?

I was more thinking Witcher 3, that they are next to useless from wear or tear, until you repair them. Or file a complaint.

Come to think of it, a game has done this very thing before regarding implants. I will avoid spoilers, and so should you if you haven't played it, but do you remember Deus Ex: Human Revolution?
Early on in the game you get these glitches and they have to be fixed. Spoiler ahead:

Spoiler

That glitching and twitching of your vision start again several chapters into the game, and then you hear of a worldwide biochip replacement.

End of spoiler, but remember that the problem was introduced early on. In the very beginning in fact, as Adam has just returned from his recuperation. That experience was awesome!

I do hope CDPR will not only have weapon and armour deterioration, but cyberware deterioration as well.
Not only from taking the brunt of an EMP blast, but also depending on make, model, manufacturer and obviously, from which supplier you got the cyberware.
I'm looking at you, Scavs!

So what do you think?
Shall there be difference in cyberware, depending on already mentioned variables?
Should they deteriorate from use so that you need to maintain them or visit a shop to repair them?

I'll allow two votes for this poll.

Best regards!

 

[imitenotbecrazy]

I despise the degradation mechanic in all games I've played with it. It's just never done with any semblance of realism and only added as a chore to hide other poor mechanics. If it's included, it will be one of the first things I mod out

 

[Hoplite_22]

The Deus Ex comparison doesn't work, that was part of the story, not a mechanic of the game.

if the implants are so unreliable as to be needing repairs after a couple of days of use i don't think anyone would bother with them, it would be like having a car that broke down every couple of days. useless and expensive to run.

the time scale of the game (days rather than weeks or months) makes this idea less realistic than people with metal limbs.

 

[Suhiira]

This is not a "survival" game. And I've hated the degradation mechanics in every game I've ever seen that uses them. Yes, stuff does degrade, BUT (other then ablative armor) at a fraction of the rate you see in games. According to games the M16 I carried, and used, for months would have fallen apart a couple dozen times.

No, just no.

 

[Bellator Pius Gratus]

This is not a "survival" game. And I've hated the degradation mechanics in every game I've ever seen that uses them. Yes, stuff does degrade, BUT (other then ablative armor) at a fraction of the rate you see in games. According to games the M16 I carried, and used, for months would have fallen apart a couple dozen times.

No, just no.

Well I asked and you answered. Don't forget to vote!

Also, did you play Witcher 3? Did you hate that system as well?
I didn't and neither do I consider it a "survival game."

Spoiler

The Deus Ex comparison doesn't work, that was part of the story, not a mechanic of the game.

if the implants are so unreliable as to be needing repairs after a couple of days of use i don't think anyone would bother with them, it would be like having a car that broke down every couple of days. useless and expensive to run.

the time scale of the game (days rather than weeks or months) makes this idea less realistic than people with metal limbs.

Aye, it was story related in Deus Ex. Did not think anyone would assume otherwise from my post.
I asked about this as a mechanic in CB2077, and did not try to imply it was a mechanic in Deus Ex: Human Revolution.
While comparison is moot to you it isn't to me.

 

[Rawls]

Yes to both for me ... but deterioration should only apply to items where it makes sense. If you have a titanium alloy leg, it's probably not going to deteriorate from use very fast.

 

[HockeyMike24]

Very few games get the deteriation system right imo. I hated it in the Witcher 3 because it was a chore like it is in most games

Red Dead 2's system was alright because when your weapons got dirty the stats were lowered a bit but the weapons are still useful even when needing repair/cleaning. Plus it was a good way to admire your custom work on the gun when cleaning.

Any system where the item just doesn't work until you get an item to fix it or go to a location to get it fixed and the problem gets resolved in a menu is just a boring game design.

 

[Ambergeddon]

I don't think it should rapidly deteriorate from just general use but I'm okay with it being damaged should it be directly hit with an attack and either stop functioning or even be blown off if the attack is strong enough.

Also having the ability to repair it in the techie tree would be cool too.

 

[Sardukhar]

No thanks. No automatic or even per-use degradation. Just a money and time sink with little bearing in reality.

You want to have a critical fail-broken item mechanic? Sure. You want to have armor penetration-damaged armor ( only when actually penetrated, not just when hit), then sure. But only when caused by clear environmental factors.

Firearms generally work fine for thousands and thousands of rounds, excepting some bad luck ( see critical fail) and same for melee weapons.

 

[Sild]

Cyberware quality variation? Absolutely. You can see that these days with electronics. Cheap replicas do what cheap replicas usually do: perform worse and break faster.
Weapon degradation? hmm.. i'd say not. The way i see it, there are about two reasons why such a mechanic would be in a game:

1 - as a money sink;
2 - as an immersion mechanic; to make you interact with your gear in more ways than aiming and shooting/swinging as you would in real life.

For immersive purposes i'd remove degradation and instead spin it around to ability to improve performance. Say you have a sword, katana for instance. You're not going to break it unless you use it as a crowbar or hammer. Using it properly won't break it unless in extreme circumstances, no matter how much you use it. The same applies to guns. What does happen to the katana is it will get more and more blunt, lose it's edge. I'd translate that concept to bonus performance if the weapon is well maintained. This removes the troublesome aspect of degradation, encourages the player to interact in multiple ways with his gear and is completely optional.

 

[CyberBrett]

As others have posted please please no deterioration . TES moved away from it and i hope CDPR has too . I remember in Oblivion having to carry hammers to fix weapons and armor in the middle of some cave / dungeon .

 

[Nikola_Nesic]

No no no, Weapon or Armor deterioration in games is never done good or realistically, you fix weapon/armor and after few minute it start to deteriorate again like wtf, it is ok mechanic for survival games, but even there it is boring chore.

It is same as with eating and drinking, that is also done so bad and unrealistic, always ruin game and add one more time limit on you.

 

[CyberBobber]

Cyberware quality variation? Absolutely. You can see that these days with electronics. Cheap replicas do what cheap replicas usually do: perform worse and break faster.
Weapon degradation? hmm.. i'd say not. The way i see it, there are about two reasons why such a mechanic would be in a game:l.

You are right here, you could indeed imagine corps are trying to milk every penny they can get, you pay little, you get nothing, you pay more for quality. More quality stuff should be found in wealthy people's area etc.

I wouldnt definitely mind of the greed of the crops showed off the world. In order to do so, they would need to let player get inside the economy.

 

[Night_City_Native]

Yes to different manufacturers having products of varying quality, no to cyberware or weapons deteriorating over time.

Needing to maintain or replace deteriorating equipment has never been anything more than needless busywork in every game that ever featured it. Additionally it never adds anything to a game in terms of greater realism, as real world weapons do not deteriorate at anywhere near the rate portrayed in games.

*If* deterioration of equipment was portrayed accurately players would never need to worry about it anyway, as the main plot for most games plays out over a relatively short (weeks, months, or maybe a year) period of time.

To demonstrate how silly the deterioration mechanic is...there are authentic 19th Century weapons from the American Civil War or Franco-Prussian War that are still in a condition that they could be fired. Granted they've been maintained and protected against the ravages of time, but it does help demonstrate that simply firing a weapon isn't going to cause it to become less accurate or more prone to a catastrophic failure. Using a weapon in a game should neither cause it's damage stats to dip or become more prone to a complete break.

 

[Bellator Pius Gratus]

No thanks. No automatic or even per-use degradation. Just a money and time sink with little bearing in reality.

You want to have a critical fail-broken item mechanic? Sure. You want to have armor penetration-damaged armor ( only when actually penetrated, not just when hit), then sure. But only when caused by clear environmental factors.

Firearms generally work fine for thousands and thousands of rounds, excepting some bad luck ( see critical fail) and same for melee weapons.

I am honoured to see a post from you, Sard!
Still haunting(humorously at that) these netrunner forum walls I see.
It's good to see some from the old guard still present here!

To all who have pitched in:
Thank you. This is why I post, to see ideas and theories from fellow forum users mingle with my own.
And, who knows, maybe even help the devs?

Post automatically merged: Jul 31, 2019

Yes to different manufacturers having products of varying quality, no to cyberware or weapons deteriorating over time.

Needing to maintain or replace deteriorating equipment has never been anything more than needless busywork in every game that ever featured it. Additionally it never adds anything to a game in terms of greater realism, as real world weapons do not deteriorate at anywhere near the rate portrayed in games.

*If* deterioration of equipment was portrayed accurately players would never need to worry about it anyway, as the main plot for most games plays out over a relatively short (weeks, months, or maybe a year) period of time.

To demonstrate how silly the deterioration mechanic is...there are authentic 19th Century weapons from the American Civil War or Franco-Prussian War that are still in a condition that they could be fired. Granted they've been maintained and protected against the ravages of time, but it does help demonstrate that simply firing a weapon isn't going to cause it to become less accurate or more prone to a catastrophic failure. Using a weapon in a game should neither cause it's damage stats to dip or become more prone to a complete break.

Good example. But things do deteriorate and degrade. Even a gun that has been been mounted on a wall.
My grandfather owned several 18th century pistols. They looked really nice for their age, and I even held several of them as a kid. But firing and firing properly is not always the same. I wouldn't want to aim down the sight of a 200 year old gun, cock the hammer, pull the trigger and then never be able to see anything ever again because the gun exploded.
Nor would I want to fire any dirty and worn gun without some maintenace first. Then again, some guns are apparently more easily maintained than others.

Do I want cyberware, armour and weapons to break down every five minutes? No. Of course not.
Do I want to see some wear and tear from heavily used, and to some extent, completely exhausted cyberware, weapons and armour? Yes. Yes I would. Hell, we've even seen V's weapon benches!
Well, a weapon room anyway.

Now, if I let V jump from the top floor from the mega-building V's apartment is in, I better see some wear and tear on the leg cyberware dampeners, damn it. That is, if that's even possible without dying of course.

 

[LordSerion]

Quality differences? Sure, it would make sense to have top of the line augs and cheap, hazardous ripoffs as well.
Deterioration no, please don't. First of all, it wouldn't make sense as it was already mentioned and the extra hassle is just boring and turns into a scavenger hunt. There's a reason why I think Jury Rigging is the single best perk in Fallout.

 

[Danyel_Longbow]

Yes, difference in prices and manufacture but no deterioration. Hassle.

That's my vote..if I wanted to play some tedious survival game I would buy one..the whole degradation mechanics is a no go for me..even games where you have to "repair" gear is annoying...rule of cool needs to used in a game like this over tedious real life physics as it only detracts from the game they have been marketing imo.

Now if this was "cyberpunk: the survival game" or then sure along with eating and sleeping and all...that.

 

[SlyStrike]

As a persistent gameplay mechanic, I am definitely not for deterioration.
But as a story/mission mechanic? Like finding weapons/cyberware that has already degraded and needs to be restored to optimal condition (such as a stash of pre-Red era gear), then I actually think it could be a nice way to portray the decay of equipment/goods.

 

[Snowflakez]

Yes. Quality + degradation. The more immersive elements the better.

 

[Suhiira]

Yes. Quality + degradation. The more immersive elements the better.

Serious question.
What do you find immersive about repetitive and totally unrealistic tasks?