Sinnerman

[Ayinde_Palmer]

You can kill him only at the beginning of the quest. You can't kill him after the car ride, the game forbids you to draw your weapon. You can't kill him in Zuleiha's house, see her reaction to the event, get new dialogues, and get the full completion of the quest.
You can either complete the quest or kill him and lose quest content.

I tried not to talk to him in the car and Rachel still said that V was a bad influence on Joshua.
I took Rachel's money and went to the cafe anyway. No new dialogues, no new development of the quest.
If you turned down a bribe and went with Joshua to the cafe, it doesn't matter what you say, Rachel still won't be happy. So why give a choice of dialogue if the characters reactions are the same?
So your choice again - to do a linear quest or lose part of the content without getting anything in return.

All of this leads to the difference in one short phone call. No real consequences.

By that logic, you can do no story missions and V will stay alive forever. And then you can call it a secret ending.

an illusion of choice would be that the outcome stays the same, it doesnt
1)kill joshua in car = quest over, get paid
2)don't kill Joshua, fill him with doubt, longer quest chain get paid less
3)don't kill Joshua in car, support him, longer quest chain get paid more, BD is a success

now, you are saying you want more, or different choices.

this is like saying ending after one date, breaking up after a horrible relationship, or breaking up after a good relationship are all the same thing, because yall didnt stay together anyway.

 

[maniak6767]

This actually looks like oversight to me, worth a ticket.

I don't think it's oversight.
(I think quest is pretty buggy and janky: car chase, Wakako is mute during some of conversations - so I would say it's priority for them to fix bugs aruond this quest.)
V talking with Wakako like "hey biatch, I just crucified guy, job done, send me some eddies" would be too dark even for Cyberpunk

Spoiler

I'm not sociophat, I swear

 

[CS554]

I don't think it's oversight.
(I think quest is pretty buggy and janky: car chase, Wakako is mute during some of conversations - so I would say it's priority for them to fix bugs aruond this quest.)
V talking with Wakako like "hey biatch, I just crucified guy, job done, send me some eddies" would be too dark even for Cyberpunk

Spoiler

I'm not sociophat, I swear

I didn't had issue with car segment as I'm on Xbox.

My current plan for playthrough on 1.2 is to kill the whole freak show. But, if I change my plans and has guts to nail that guy to cross (I really liked to option to just walk away) I will submit that ticket if I wont get paid. I don't think that's really too dark for cyberpunk.

It's cumbersome situation when I want to see if what has been said that Sinnerman advertisements don't disappear even if V kill them all is true. As production would come impossible, there's definitely an issue if consequence of major player decision not reflecting to game world if adverts don't disappear.

 

[Grindders]

this is like saying ending after one date, breaking up after a horrible relationship, or breaking up after a good relationship are all the same thing, because yall didnt stay together anyway.

I'm not talking about real life. in terms of game design, it's same result.
And I don't remember anything like that in The Witcher 3: I can't remember a single side quest where no matter what you do, it would be the same result, and the only difference is the amount of pay.

 

[maniak6767]

I didn't had issue with car segment as I'm on Xbox.

My current plan for playthrough on 1.2 is to kill the whole freak show. But, if I change my plans and has guts to nail that guy to cross (I really liked to option to just walk away) I will submit that ticket if I wont get paid. I don't think that's really too dark for cyberpunk.

It's cumbersome situation when I want to see if what has been said that Sinnerman advertisements don't disappear even if V kill them all is true. As production would come impossible, there's definitely an issue if consequence of major player decision not reflecting to game world if adverts don't disappear.

Maybe it is like it was with Cyberpunk advertisements, they were around even with wrong dates of release .

I'm not talking about real life. in terms of game design, it's same result.
And I don't remember anything like that in The Witcher 3: I can't remember a single side quest where no matter what you do, it would be the same result, and the only difference is the amount of pay.

I can remember: quest abut Dandelion and his tavern, quest with escaping mages from Novigrad, final quest (fighting eredin) before 3 possible epilogues.etc.

 

[CS554]

Maybe it is like it was with Cyberpunk advertisements, they were around even with wrong dates of release .

Came to think of something. What if there's actually reason for V not getting paid but reason isn't in-game but about in-game. If there would be payment for completing that job and getting paid by Wakako after V nails Sinnerman to cross, the follow the quest marker crowd(?) certain kind of players would do just that without batting an eye. I'm not moralizing anyone's decisions, just sayin that things like that might be factor. Getting paid could sort of ruin story segment.

 

[Grindders]

I can remember: quest abut Dandelion and his tavern

Sorry, i can't remember side quest about Dandelion and his tavern. Could you elaborate?

quest with escaping mages from Novigrad

You can choose to save Triss friends or not - leads to different dialogues and scenes within the quest. At the end of the quest you can choose your attitude towards Triss - leads to different dialogues and scenes. She can leave Novigrad or stay with Geralt. On top of that If Geralt is already in a relationship with Yennifer by this point, then choosing to have a relationship with Triss leads to new quest.

If the gamedesign of this quest were the same as Sinnerman's, Triss's friends would always die and Triss would always leave Novigrad regardless of the player's choices. The only difference would have been whether she was leaving feeling sad or happy.

final quest (fighting eredin)

I was talking about side quests.

 

[Hexipoo]

I was simply frustrated how there seemed no way I could prevent it, to talk sense into the guy. But, that may be realistic after all.

There are many, many real-world examples of such people. There is no talking them out of it.

 

[Niatka]

I read all the comments regarding my point of view, as a woman free in her life choices, one comment made me jump; is the electric chair better?
a long time ago, somewhere in this crazy world, a group of people, claiming to be intelligent, told me of their wish; watch a death penalty live, no matter if it's the electric chair, lethal injection or the guillotine / ax.
it is to despair of human nature.

I prefer to hope with... monsters

 

[maniak6767]

You can choose to save Triss friends or not - leads to different dialogues and scenes within the quest. At the end of the quest you can choose your attitude towards Triss - leads to different dialogues and scenes. She can leave Novigrad or stay with Geralt. On top of that If Geralt is already in a relationship with Yennifer by this point, then choosing to have a relationship with Triss leads to new quest.

If the gamedesign of this quest were the same as Sinnerman's, Triss's friends would always die and Triss would always leave Novigrad regardless of the player's choices. The only difference would have been whether she was leaving feeling sad or happy.

Mages will always leave Novigrad, you can romance characters also in Cyberpunk, 4 possible romances, Witcher 3 without DLCs - 2 possible romances.

Came to think of something. What if there's actually reason for V not getting paid but reason isn't in-game but about in-game. If there would be payment for completing that job and getting paid by Wakako after V nails Sinnerman to cross, the follow the quest marker crowd(?) certain kind of players would do just that without batting an eye. I'm not moralizing anyone's decisions, just sayin that things like that might be factor. Getting paid could sort of ruin story segment.

Yeah I think payment from Wakako could damage story, as unnecessary distraction.

 

[Niatka]

Notice;

concerning voyeurism, to make money with the misfortune of certain people, innocent or guilty, I know that, perfectly.
in prison, in this unknown women's prison, terrible, cold and cruel, no one goes outside to see the sky, even for an hour a day, it is too cold.
yet an american citizen came to the prison, a photographer. he takes fine art photos. he paid dearly to be able to come in and choose 9 of us. the most dangerous women, tattooed and, of course; the most beautiful "models".

he took 2 pictures of me, a hundred shots for two pictures chosen.
I had no choice; accept or undergo the punishment. I mistakenly believed that to accept was to be able to get better treatment; naive I was.

now, from this moment, my naked body is on the net. the photos are protected and my photographed body is sold; US $ 145. I can't do anything, my body, my meat, was stolen years ago.

at this moment, how many masturbated while looking at my body? I have chills.
Sinnerman didn't leave me indifferent because of that.
maybe, a reminder to make me understand; I am not the good soul here.