Two weeks after: your thoughts on CDPR's vision of Cyberpunk

+
Witcher/cyberpunk will have different design philosophy though. As cp2077 is rising from the confines of a old PnP table top RPG.
i really dont think the origin of the IP changes design philosophy. developers do.

A lot of things go into RPGs, I'm really worried that perks won't amount to anything other than combat applications and won't serve a dual purpose. Or have perks that focus exclusively on dialogue/utility or other cool and non-combative shit.

.
you act like CD PRojekt has never made an RPG AND has been living under a rock with regards to other games.

But yeah, you even had recent titles in memory that had a lot of ways to solve situations without fighting like fallout:NV, So i hope that most situations can be solved in a variety of ways and that combat makes the minority/optional.
i feel like people are forgetting just how many quests in the witcher games could be solved through non violent means considering the game was about a mercenary.

Im the first to be skeptical of a lot of things but this isnt one of them.
 
minus stealth, that's exactly how CD Projekt has always marketed their witcher games.

if its shallow, what do you think about the rest of the gaming landscape? because there are VERY few RPGS with more flexibility that way and most are much smaller games.


I think you're assuming things about the marketing that really aren't there.

i also purport that ghost stealth is still combat.


CDPR promise.JPG


It's hard telling if the vision has changed, I didn't even include the part about varied classes. Though my concern over fluid class system with three classes and a perk system is something i'll reserve for later.

The implication with 2 and 3 would imply a lot of variety in solving quest in your ways and basing the game heavily around the system it is a derivative from.
 
minus stealth, that's exactly how CD Projekt has always marketed their witcher games.

When?

if its shallow, what do you think about the rest of the gaming landscape? because there are VERY few RPGS with more flexibility that way and most are much smaller games.

Your point being?

I think you're assuming things about the marketing that really aren't there.

In what way?

i also purport that ghost stealth is still combat.

Then you'd be factually wrong, because combat, by definition, is not non-combat. Not sure how you can logically disagree with that statement. Perhaps you could elaborate on your definition of combat.
 
I really hate when games take control away for you and force you into combat, even if your a stealth character. I do not mind if I screw up which leads to a fight, but when it is some BS contrived situation, that is when I get pissed. Even the great VTM:Bloodlines did this, I went through all the game with a stealth/persuasive character and then at the very end, it forced you to battle which screwed me over since I was decked as a non-combatant. However, the one that really pissed me off was Deus Ex:HR. I go through the mission as pure stealth and then when I get near the boss area, my character is ripped from me for a cinematic where he walked right up to the boss character like an idiot and goes into a boss fight which it then give me control back in the middle of a battle. I cannot stand those and blame lazy devs/writers who think there should be a fight for splashy cinematic moments, not realizing that stealth or non combat characters get satisfaction from completing a mission with outsmarting proponents and not resorting to a shootout.

Your VTM example is particularly irritating for me. The game was handling player options so well up to that point, proving it could pull it off... Then it ballsed it up right at the end. *facepalm*
 
Then you'd be factually wrong, because combat, by definition, is not non-combat. Not sure how you can logically disagree with that statement. Perhaps you could elaborate on your definition of combat.
combat to me in game is the act of engaging with hostiles in a confrontational way. stealth is confrontational. if you get caught thats a negative outcome. you're using skills to defeat an antagonistic situation.
 
combat to me in game is the act of engaging with hostiles in a confrontational way. stealth is confrontational. if you get caught thats a negative outcome. you're using skills to defeat an antagonistic situation.
Thanks for clarifying. We have two very different ideas about what stealth and combat are.
 
I'm actually glad they are streamlining this and kinda fusing stats together. PnP is one thing and video game is another.

Stats or perks too similar to each other or that cannot be expressed properly in gaming could certainly be altered,fused or ditched.
 
Back when the first trailer was released we saw a woman that had killed a lot of people join the psycho squad. My question is will we ever get a similar choice? To join a faction like the psycho squad despite cop not being one of the trees in the rpg aspect? I want that helmet is what I'm pretty much saying.
 
Freedom is the biggest value for cyberpunks, so they wouldn't permanently join any faction. In the game you will be able to work for various factions, but it won't be possible to join them.

I like that idea. Will faction missions be more

- world/gameplay driven ( dynamic conflicts, "capture the territory":..like in Saints Row)

- act as side narrative ( possibly including some of the roles)

- play a part in Main story ( New Vegas)

This would be a good way to give additional char progression through gear, add more variety to player builds and "gate" HQ equipment ( instead of using "levels")...best body armor for cops, vehicles for nomads, wardrobe/style for rockerboys, etc.
 
Freedom is the biggest value for cyberpunks, so they wouldn't permanently join any faction. In the game you will be able to work for various factions, but it won't be possible to join them.


I know you can't be specific, But i take it this is like a new vegas style where you're more of a contractor then? Say you spend the majority of the game working and assiting militech, Does that come with it's own unique perks then say spending that time helping their nemesis, aka arasaka? If not a full on "member" per sey, but unique privileges that feeling rewarding?
 

Vattier

CD PROJEKT RED
We're not planning to introduce any reputation indicators for factions. Your reputation will be measured by a general Street Cred - reflecting how you're seen by the street. You will be able to increase it through side missions and it will allow you to unlock access to additional content, such as new shops or new missions.
 
We're not planning to introduce any reputation indicators for factions. Your reputation will be measured by a general Street Cred - reflecting how you're seen by the street. You will be able to increase it through side missions and it will allow you to unlock access to additional content, such as new shops or new missions.
What about the vehicle combat showcased in the demo? Wasn't that the scavengers from the first mission wanting to get some payback because V killed a bunch of their friends etc? If that kind of stuff isn't based on reputation, does that mean it's more of a simple, binary thing like a boolean?
 
Wasn't that the scavengers from the first mission wanting to get some payback because V killed a bunch of their friends etc?
That's what was said in the previews.
If that kind of stuff isn't based on reputation, does that mean it's more of a simple, binary thing like a boolean?
Could just be choice dependent, not stat/rep dependent. Haven't heard for sure ... but would make sense.
 
Sounds good to me, but I would hope that the choices you make do add up to affect some "internal" reputation system. If you screw over Militech twice in the past, but continue to be friendly and reliable from that point on, should they trust you or not trust you?

I worry that an overly-simplistic system might just feel bad here.
 
Sounds good to me, but I would hope that the choices you make do add up to affect some "internal" reputation system. If you screw over Militech twice in the past, but continue to be friendly and reliable from that point on, should they trust you or not trust you?

I worry that an overly-simplistic system might just feel bad here.


Reminds me of Skyrim in which you can join/work for every faction. No one gives a damn if you save some poor soul with the honorable companions and then brutally murder someone with the Dark Brotherhood 5 minutes later.
 
Sounds good to me, but I would hope that the choices you make do add up to affect some "internal" reputation system. If you screw over Militech twice in the past, but continue to be friendly and reliable from that point on, should they trust you or not trust you?

If I understand it right, there will not be "factions" as a gameplay system where you can join them or your reputation is tracked per faction. But the game obviously still has Witcher style choices and consequences, so helping or screwing over some group may affect how certain quests play out later.
 
Reminds me of Skyrim in which you can join/work for every faction. No one gives a damn if you save some poor soul with the honorable companions and then brutally murder someone with the Dark Brotherhood 5 minutes later.
I'd argue that being a member of the DB is something you'd keep under wraps, people shouldn't know you're part of the DB.

Which is why I always hated the fact that the guards would make the "Hail Sithis!" comment. Like dude, you can't even trully comprehend who Sithis is, what he is and you just spew out "Hail Sithis!"... I hate Bethesda's instant gratification way of doing things.
 
Top Bottom