The Witcher 3 delays will not affect Cyberpunk 2077's development :D

[kofeiiniturpa]

Play Fallout 2.
It's old and turn based, but it's pretty close to what they're heading to I think (not exactly, but the basic idea is here). Your character points (reflexes, intelligence, etc...) "make" your character, for example, if you just put 1pts in Intelligence, all you can say is "Booogiiiieaaaah", you have to choose them wisely at the start, then you choose your basic skills to "define" your character role (gun, medecine, thief, etc...), if you start your game roaming the map by the left, or the right, you'll not encounter the same places, so you'll have different angle of the story, plus your action have an impact over how people are going to interact with you, adding to this the faction you could have joined (esclavagist, etc...), so all of this make the game pretty wide "story-wise" since you can play 2 Fallout 2 games and never having the same "game" in the end, etc...
I thinks that's what they mean by "True RPG", in The Witcher you're forced to be Gerald so you don't have much choices "character wise", here you'll probably have a lot of variation over the world by who and how you play it.

Oh, I've played Fallout 2 more or less regularly since '98 and if I had my way, that's how CP2077 would largely work too (TB combat and all - letting the character be the one who succeeds or fails). That of course won't happen wholesale, but as close we can get to that ideal the happier I will be. Interesting and effective systems design and its hands on application in the game is half the experience in a good RPG.

You see an awful lot of games that get described as aRPG just because they have skills and attributes that improve as you play the game. Where the story is just a rationalisation of exactly WHY the character needs to go from A to B, where choice and consequence means "Pick the right weapon or you'll die", "Should I turn left or right?" or "Lethal or non-Lethal?", and where role-play means character dialogue options that may express personality but don't have any impact on the game. A lot of these are very good games, but not exactly "true" RPG.

I think he's trying to say that CP77 won't be like that.

That sounds good, if it's the case. I just hope it doesn't boil down simply to "choose your own adventure" freeroam with a bunch of aptly named stats thrown in for good measure in the end.

 

[dragonbird]

That sounds good, if it's the case. I just hope it doesn't boil down simply to "choose your own adventure" freeroam with a bunch of aptly named stats thrown in for good measure in the end.

Don't worry. You may want to look at the games that CDPR make. Because that is even LESS likely than them making a shooter.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Don't worry. You may want to look at the games that CDPR make. Because that is even LESS likely than them making a shooter.

To a certain degree, that's how I experienced Witcher 2 (the character system was apt for what the game wanted, but not exactly a shining example in the world of charactersystems). I did like the game for what it was, but...

I'll keep my fingers crossed, though. It would be nice if the dev team could be a bit more open about their... well, not necessarily exact plans (no need for spilling those out), but ideals (more or less specific) about the mechanical side of things. Something just a bit more specific to anticipate and speculate about than "true RPG" which may be interpreted in a plethora if different ways.

 

[wisdom000]

That sounds good, if it's the case. I just hope it doesn't boil down simply to "choose your own adventure" freeroam with a bunch of aptly named stats thrown in for good measure in the end.

I on the other hand, wouldn't really have a problem with that...

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I on the other hand, wouldn't really have a problem with that...

Sure, I can see the appeal. I have a preference on more mechanical intrigue in how things (all of them, basically) unfold, along with strong motivation/drive to develop the character and lead him\her through the events of the game (eg. "freeroam" first and foremost serving a purpose in the overarcing point of the game in some way, rather than being just a playground for random activities at the players leisure).

 

[wisdom000]

I actually think free roam first and foremost should be a playground. If there are things in that environment that further the overall story so be t, but the sotry will be there regardless, and I don't want to be tied down to rails in my exploration of the world, or my enjoyment of it.

 

[chriswebb2020.736]

I actually think free roam first and foremost should be a playground. If there are things in that environment that further the overall story so be t, but the sotry will be there regardless, and I don't want to be tied down to rails in my exploration of the world, or my enjoyment of it.

CDPR have said on multiple occasions that in 2077 they have no intention of railroading anyone. They said that players would be free to follow the story or make their own way in the game.

 

[wisdom000]

CDPR have said on multiple occasions that in 2077 they have no intention of railroading anyone. They said that players would be free to follow the story or make their own way in the game.

I kno0w, I was just clarifying my stance for kofe

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I actually think free roam first and foremost should be a playground. If there are things in that environment that further the overall story so be t, but the sotry will be there regardless, and I don't want to be tied down to rails in my exploration of the world, or my enjoyment of it.

Oh, I don't want railroading either. But I do want purpose, motivation and consideration to guide the gameplay even if you could just run around aimlessly in the city.

 

[wisdom000]

Oh, I don't want railroading either. But I do want purpose, motivation and consideration to guide the gameplay even if you could just run around aimlessly in the city.

Ok cool... I will say I hate awesome shit that doesn't do anything... In GTA San Andreas, the best video game map of all time, there was a baseball stadium... and you could explore all over it, it was detailed enough that I was sure something was going to happen there in the game, but nothing ever did, and it was slightly dissapointing... but then so much awesome was everywhere I turned I hadn't ever really thought about it till now...

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Ok cool... I will say I hate awesome shit that doesn't do anything... In GTA San Andreas, the best video game map of all time, there was a baseball stadium... and you could explore all over it, it was detailed enough that I was sure something was going to happen there in the game, but nothing ever did, and it was slightly dissapointing... but then so much awesome was everywhere I turned I hadn't ever really thought about it till now...

GTA's freeroam and maps are more about sightseeing anyway, something I can tolerate in small doses (for flavor) but get tired of very quickly (overdose) because it gives nothing to the gameplay. Same goes, for me, with Bethesda games that are seemingly chockfull of all kinds of shit but everything is so detached and disjointed that it starts to repeat itself very fast and then it loses the said purpose-motivation-consideration aspect completely (nothing of worth is achieved or found and there's no consideration of whether a possible risk is worth the try -- it's all just busywork with no real point). These sorts of things (random activities and sightseeing) should be offering a gentle seasoning over the meat of the game, but not be the point of it. In my opinion.

 

[wisdom000]

yeah, still disagreeing with you, you cannot have both a giant environment and have everything do something, there simple isn't enough storage, time, or need for that... So yeah, if I can get the sasme amount of crap to interact with as in a smaller game, and a huge environemtn where that stuff gets spread out a bit, I am pretty happy. I like sight seeing, I like exploring, mostly I like the cage too be as big as possible so I can spread my wings and fly, and shit on the people below me... particularly while they are looking up at me...

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Not everything having something to do with everything, but a large amount of things (the major ones at least) having a purpose of existing plus some connectivity, and there being an in-game motivator that relates to something specific for checking out the smaller random stuff (maybe the path of your given task just passes by them, maybe you need to find something or someone who's location is unknown, maybe visiting a certain seemingly random place and doing a random thing - what ever it may be - there has some long term ramifications that you witness later on). There are all kinds of design and narrative possibilities if there's willingness to explore and implement them - it requires some ingenuity, but if the guys at CDPR really put their hearts and minds to it, I believe they could handle it. And it isn't even said the player catches on to these things, he may miss out on majority while being on the random exploration sightseeing trek, but the important part is that the stuff is there to be found and interacted with for the more resourceful and perceptive player who specifically seeks out a motivation (be it a quest or a voice on a radio or some other meant of projecting it to the player) to check things out.

I'm not really against sight seeing, though again, if most of the map exists just for that purpose, I don't see any point in it. Once it's seen, there's nothing to it anymore. Even more true if the setup is going to be a huge metropol, a more or less samey concrete jungle like the cities in GTA (or the whole of Sleeping "Dongs").

If I had my way, the game would be hub based and while free to be explored (by traveling on the citymap by cabs or what ever between the hubs, all of which would be different and very large) it wouldn't be a one large map like in GTA. I think the one-map sandbox decision is doing a disservice to the setting through obvious and inevitable miniaturization. But since it is apparently decided, I'll have to make do with what is coming.

 

[wisdom000]

hub based means I can't drive myself... which to me is blasphemous...

I want vehicles... lots of them... with the ability to customize them....

 

[Sardukhar]

Not everything having something to do with everything, but a large amount of things (the major ones at least) having a purpose of existing plus some connectivity, and there being an in-game motivator that relates to something specific for checking out the smaller random stuff (maybe the path of your given task just passes by them, maybe you need to find something or someone who's location is unknown, maybe visiting a certain seemingly random place and doing a random thing - what ever it may be - there has some long term ramifications that you witness later on).

I didn't..I read this two and half times. Be clearer! I'm old!

If I had my way, the game would be hub based and while free to be explored (by traveling on the citymap by cabs or what ever between the hubs, all of which would be different and very large) it wouldn't be a one large map like in GTA. I think the one-map sandbox decision is doing a disservice to the setting through obvious and inevitable miniaturization. But since it is apparently decided, I'll have to make do with what is coming.

We don't know what's decided. We really don't.
CDPR is being utterly closemouthed about CP2077 - they say zip nada. That is probably in large part because they are making some very important decisions about what happens and how, in game.

It's also why I'm not changing what's known in the FAQ for quite awhile. I think our Polish masters are correct to be careful in this regard and it's best if we make as few assumptions as possible.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

hub based means I can't drive myself... which to me is blasphemous...

I want vehicles... lots of them... with the ability to customize them....

There's a neat little driving minigame to traverse between city hubs in this game (starts around at 7 minutes -- and there's similiar even for flying some sort of jet). Maybe something similiar could be done to appease the urge to step behind the wheel (the game's from '92 so obviously there's much more that could be done with such a minigame, along with optional ways of traveling).

I didn't..I read this two and half times. Be clearer! I'm old!

I'm not that young myself anymore either (though not an old tymer yet), and I do have a tendency to ramble when I'm tired. What was unclear?

We don't know what's decided. We really don't.
CDPR is being utterly closemouthed about CP2077 - they say zip nada. That is probably in large part because they are making some very important decisions about what happens and how, in game.

It's also why I'm not changing what's known in the FAQ for quite awhile. I think our Polish masters are correct to be careful in this regard and it's best if we make as few assumptions as possible.

I'm just going with what has been hinted so far. Whether or not that is what happens remains to be seen, but it's all we have to go with. Would be cool if they decided against what I'm now led to believe.

 

[wisdom000]

honestly, I hate hub based because it means whenever I just running around it means the game is going to spend more time on loading screens than it does actually playing the game...

Never been a fan of hubs, unless they are for building interiors or something of that nature, then they are less of a problem.

 

[Garrison72]

honestly, I hate hub based because it means whenever I just running around it means the game is going to spend more time on loading screens than it does actually playing the game...

Never been a fan of hubs, unless they are for building interiors or something of that nature, then they are less of a problem.

If hub based means better level design, I'm all for it. Better than driving past what amounts to a bunch of billboards and store fronts in GTA. Sorry, I know you love GTA and I hate it. But I've gotta counter the amount of GTA influence that creeps into this site.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I'd say it (the amount of loadscreens) depends entirely on how large the hubs are, their content density and the players insistense on changing the hub at a higher rate. But it's cool, we differ on that point. I myself have never been keen on sandboxes because they always have their abstraction of scale way off and most of the map is but a visual setpiece.

 

[Sardukhar]

But I've gotta counter the amount of GTA influence that creeps into this site.

Why? You don't think CDPR is really going to be that influenced by Wisdom, do you? Or uninfluenced by you? I read a post recently from some developer guy expressing bafflement at rivalries and hatreds about games. I agree - it is baffling.

I hope CDPR learns from GTA and DXHR.

I also despise loading screens. The thing I like about hubs is the crazy intimacy you can get from them, as opposed to something larger where that simply isn't possible. Customized graffiti, specific NPCs, very particular, lasting and specific quests and location. Just don't see that very much in open-world, not to that detail as in Skyrim or DXHR.

At least, no open world game has done it yet.

I just want larger hubs, so I only load when I'd have to take a long-ish voyage, and not when I change neighbourhoods or go indoors. Ugh.

Boy when Witcher 3 comes out, we're going to be watching like HAWKS. And best thing, half that stuff may have zero effect on CP2077 altogether! We won't know! Gonna be fun times.