Weekly Poll 10/1/2018 - The Gunplay!

[Suhiira]

I am not saying they shouldn't (but they probably won't, because developing two separate systems is harder to do and they have little to gain from it). I simply say that it's entirely possible to have RPG skills implemented in an FPS action game in a meaningful manner.

To be perfectly honest I don't really expect them to develop the dual mode system either, but one can always hope. And I think they'd have a great deal to to gain from the idea. Both shooter and RPG fans get exactly what they want. I don't see a downside to this. YES, it'll take some time and effort but not near as much as many seem to think, I'm a programmer, I could do the RPG system in a couple weeks or a month all by myself.

Given that it's their first game in FPP featuring firearms...?

It's also their first game featuring driving mechanics, a huge urban environment, modern technology, a new dialog system, first person gameplay, etc. etc. etc. What makes creating a combat system any more difficult then any of those things?

Define "controlled primarily by player input". Because if directing your gun at somebody falls under that, then even the games like Deus Ex (2000) and Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines aren't RPGs. And that would be an absurd thing to say.

Aiming is the primary one. In a shooter it tends to require fast, accurate, mouse or controller input on the part of the player. In an RPG that's accomplished via character stats and skills. While you could certainly use some character traits to modify how quick and easy it is to aim it's still primarily up to the player. That's what makes it a non RPG. And yes, Bloodlines (I've never played Deus Ex) is a non-RPG in terms of combat. But it makes up for that with it's other mechanics where character stats and skills are used to determine results. In CP2077 apparently there are some perk trees (which are not the same as actual character skills) and stats which have a minimal effect on gameplay. BIG difference as there are no other RPG elements to make up for the non RPG combat.

They can. Kingdom Come: Deliverance was a pretty big success, despite being first person perspective realistic medieval RPG game with player input and character's stats. Also a story-driven open-world game (which is pretty much what CP77 claims to be).

Again, never played Kingdom Come, looks great, but the combat system/mechanics are such that it'd be fairly pointless for me to even try to play.

"Shooter games" you say? Like a certain FPS game? So much FPS that they had to tell people "It's going to be First Person RPG, not a FPS"?

Most folks can, or are perfectly content to play shooters, that's great. But that doesn't mean RPG fans are happy with CP2077 being a shooter. Most of the "old farts" around here are RPG and/or CP2020 fans, that's why we're here. If we preferred shooter games we'd be on another developers forums.

Mechanics of RPGs aren't as strictly defined in video games as in TT RPGs. Which is why I strongly contest the notion that you can't have an RPG simply because you also have player's input involved.

That's obvious.
But it's also obvious this discussion is going in circles.
So let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Harthwain]

Actually, I really wants to see a Gameplay demo where we'll see that "RPG first, everything else second" that have been told by CDprojekt.

If we get a second video it might be showcasting the RPG elements. Mostly because at this point they have to convince people that "It's going to be First Person RPG, not a FPS."

Unfortunately, that does NOT seem to be what CDPR is going for, and that's why I'm frustrated. If they were going the KCD route, or the Bloodlines route, or the Alpha Protocol route, or the Deus Ex route, I'd be ecstatic. I know Kofe and Su would be disappointed, but I think they'd at least find the game playable.

Right now we have the alpha gameplay, so we do know things may change. Even more so given a rather critical feedback on combat from people who aren't strangers to FPS games. As such it's very much possible for CDPR to put skills in the game that will govern the gunplay mechanic, the same way skill impacts the results in CP2020.

This is the reason why I am not crossing out CP77 entirely, yet. But, like you, I remain highly skeptical, because their actions thus far didn't earn my trust. Not after the stark divide between what we've read prior to the gameplay reveal and after. It seems obvious that the troubles at CDPR made an impact and the new leadership of CP77 has decided to take a different course from the one promised before that.

Agreed. Like "Every Roles will be there".

But I am sure they will be. Just not as playable Roles. Look at the gameplay reveal. We have a Corporate Role right there, in the person of the corpo-woman what-her-name. And a Fixer Role in the form of an NPC Dee Shaadees (or whatever he's called). So, yeah, "they’re all going to be there", which means that technically they didn't lie about it.

It's also their first game featuring driving mechanics, a huge urban environment, modern technology, a new dialog system, first person gameplay, etc. etc. etc. What makes creating a combat system any more difficult then any of those things?

What "new dialog system"?

As for creating a combat system - the reason I distrust them being able to come up with a GOOD combat system is because of what I have seen in the gameplay reveal and because I know they never did an FPS game before. As such they lack experience in making one, which does lower my expectations in them being able (or bold enough) to pull off something above standard. But that's primarly me being a pessimist realist. I can be wrong about it.

And yes, Bloodlines (I've never played Deus Ex) is a non-RPG in terms of combat. But it makes up for that with it's other mechanics where character stats and skills are used to determine results. In CP2077 apparently there are some perk trees (which are not the same as actual character skills) and stats which have a minimal effect on gameplay. BIG difference as there are no other RPG elements to make up for the non RPG combat.

Well, we still don't know what other mechanics there are (which include stats and skills) that will be used to determine results for non-combat stuff (although I think we did have a glimpse of Techie's skill when V was overriding a control box or something? My worry here is that it looked kind of like a "flat" result. But who knows how it works under the hood).

So in that sense CP77 could be like Bloodlines or Deus Ex.

Most folks can, or are perfectly content to play shooters, that's great. But that doesn't mean RPG fans are happy with CP2077 being a shooter. Most of the "old farts" around here are RPG and/or CP2020 fans, that's why we're here. If we preferred shooter games we'd be on another developers forums.

*Harthwain shrugs*

It's my speculation that they decided to go for the "most folks", rather than the fewer "old farts". Masses simply are more numerous and will pay better than a niche of classic RPG fans, and companies are about making money after all.

This could explain the shift in direction from "being faithful to the spirit of CP2020" (to the point where they, supposedly, had stats for everything) to what we can see in the gameplay, where it's really hard to see any CP2020-related influences in action.

That's obvious. But it's also obvious this discussion is going in circles. So let's just agree to disagree.

I disagree, because I am a rebel! Also, I think we made at least some progress in terms of mutual understanding, so it was worth it for that alone.

 

[VolkKnot]

I like tactical games as well. I love x-com, but we all know that's not going to happen lols .
but I like the sound of what they have done for Blood lines.. it sounds more realistic. than anything else and it lends relevance too investing in a skill.

and I think they can add too that realism by only letting you level the skills that you use. just like real life you want to get good at something you need to put your 1000 hours in. not saying that I actually want too spend a 1000 hours too level my gun skill to 10 in a video game just saying.

 

[Snowflakez]

If we get a second video it might be showcasting the RPG elements. Mostly because at this point they have to convince people that "It's going to be First Person RPG, not a FPS."


Right now we have the alpha gameplay, so we do know things may change. Even more so given a rather critical feedback on combat from people who aren't strangers to FPS games. As such it's very much possible for CDPR to put skills in the game that will govern the gunplay mechanic, the same way skill impacts the results in CP2020.

This is the reason why I am not crossing out CP77 entirely, yet. But, like you, I remain highly skeptical, because their actions thus far didn't earn my trust. Not after the stark divide between what we've read prior to the gameplay reveal and after. It seems obvious that the troubles at CDPR made an impact and the new leadership of CP77 has decided to take a different course from the one promised before that.


But I am sure they will be. Just not as playable Roles. Look at the gameplay reveal. We have a Corporate Role right there, in the person of the corpo-woman what-her-name. And a Fixer Role in the form of an NPC Dee Shaadees (or whatever he's called). So, yeah, "they’re all going to be there", which means that technically they didn't lie about it.


What "new dialog system"?

As for creating a combat system - the reason I distrust them being able to come up with a GOOD combat system is because of what I have seen in the gameplay reveal and because I know they never did an FPS game before. As such they lack experience in making one, which does lower my expectations in them being able (or bold enough) to pull off something above standard. But that's primarly me being a pessimist realist. I can be wrong about it.


Well, we still don't know what other mechanics there are (which include stats and skills) that will be used to determine results for non-combat stuff (although I think we did have a glimpse of Techie's skill when V was overriding a control box or something? My worry here is that it looked kind of like a "flat" result. But who knows how it works under the hood).

So in that sense CP77 could be like Bloodlines or Deus Ex.


*Harthwain shrugs*

It's my speculation that they decided to go for the "most folks", rather than the fewer "old farts". Masses simply are more numerous and will pay better than a niche of classic RPG fans, and companies are about making money after all.

This could explain the shift in direction from "being faithful to the spirit of CP2020" (to the point where they, supposedly, had stats for everything) to what we can see in the gameplay, where it's really hard to see any CP2020-related influences in action.


I disagree, because I am a rebel! Also, I think we made at least some progress in terms of mutual understanding, so it was worth it for that alone.

I don't agree with everything here, but well written none the less, and as you said, I think I understand your perspective a bit better.

The only thing I'm curious about is, you seem to prefer FPS combat (and understandably criticized CDPR for what appears to be rather poor FPS combat), yet you say it's possible they might still add more stat-weight to combat - are you for a system like that (think, an improved Bloodlines, not Pillars of Eternity)? Just trying to figure out where you stand.

I also agree that they evidently went for "most folks." Which is no surprise, and by no means some horrible, rotten thing that we should all hate them for. However, given their large coffers after Gwent and the Witcher games' success, there's no reason they can't throw RPG fans a bone. Frankly, I think even hardcore FPS players (Which, to be honest, probably don't usually buy CDPR's games anyway, but no matter) would find enjoyment in a few RPG mechanics.

 

[Poison19]

And yes, Bloodlines (I've never played Deus Ex) is a non-RPG in terms of combat.

Daily reminder what Action RPG genre still exist. And more appreciated by average gamer than classic RPG.

 

[Harthwain]

The only thing I'm curious about is, you seem to prefer FPS combat (and understandably criticized CDPR for what appears to be rather poor FPS combat), yet you say it's possible they might still add more stat-weight to combat - are you for a system like that (think, an improved Bloodlines, not Pillars of Eternity)? Just trying to figure out where you stand.

I wouldn't say I "prefer FPS combat". I used to play a lot of RTS games back in the day. Until the need to get clicks as fast as possible became too annoying for me. As a result I made a switch and a lot of games that I play are turn-based games with RNG. But I also like an active pause.

Now, I do like action games too, but only if their gunplay is satisfying, which more often than not means being less arcadey and more realistic when it comes to aiming and/or the wounding system. And I absolutely don't mind stats playing an important role here, provided they have nothing to do with RNG. Because I think that the real challenge in a FPS action game should come from aiming (otherwise there is little point to the action part and you can replace it with something else. This is why I played Fallout 3 with VATS system over real-time. I simply couldn't stand hitting-but-not-hitting things and turn-based made it feel much more natural).

And herein les the crucial difference between Bloodlines/Deus Ex and KC: D - the first two basically introduce RNG in the form of "aim circle" and you either have a degree of uncontrollable randomness or (if you level up your skill high enough) you are a perfect marksman. There is no in-between the two states, which makes it either annoying or boring. It also creates a strong dissonance between what you get and what you expect.

In KC: D there is RNG, but in the form of your aim being less (or more, depending on skill) stable. As such you can still succeed (or fail), because it's not set in stone where you aim, where your target is or when you release the arrow, but ultimately stats do have the significant impact on the outcome, which keeps combat both interesting and natural at the same time.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Great metaphor. Allow me to introduce you to this. Lo and behold the combined power of the screwdriver and the hammer!

I'm surprised you didn't link a toolbox. But you're still hammering the nails with a hammer with that thing and the screwdriver is still an ill choice for that job.

Mechanics of RPGs aren't as strictly defined in video games as in TT RPGs. Which is why I strongly contest the notion that you can't have an RPG simply because you also have player's input involved.

Yes, that is true. But there is a limit to what end the player input should determine the results; where the role (and gaming the role) stops and the player begins.

 

[Poison19]

And herein les the crucial difference between Bloodlines/Deus Ex and KC: D - the first two basically introduce RNG in the form of "aim circle" and you either have a degree of uncontrollable randomness or (if you level up your skill high enough) you are a perfect marksman. There is no in-between the two states, which makes it either annoying or boring. It also creates a strong dissonance between what you get and what you expect.

Thats why i suggest system, where gunplay turns from military sim (arma like) to more casual (like in borderlands) with the development of shooting skills. The more points you have in stat, more casually it will be. I know players of classic RPG doesn't accept it, but some of them usually doesn't accept anything, if not turn based combat in isometry.

 

[Snowflakez]

Thats why i suggest system, where gunplay turns from military sim (arma like) to more casual (like in borderlands) with the development of shooting skills. The more points you have in stat, more casually it will be. I know players of classic RPG doesn't accept it, but some of them usually doesn't accept anything, if not turn based combat in isometry.

I'm sorry, but this sounds like an awful idea to me. Why would the gameplay get worse as your stats increase? I'm not saying Borderlands gameplay is bad, but you seem to be suggesting going from realism to silly combat.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I’d still suggest that at the character creation the player chooses initial cyberware (since it seems s/he has history with the ripper doc) - or has a chance to acquire early on - among which there could be a hand/eye implant that allows the player to (at his own initiation) lock on and follow the target with the gun (just follow) and inform when’d be the best time to pull the trigger, but not compensate for the characters personal lack of skill or the weapons individual characteristics like recoil and natural spread (preventing the use of iron sights for gameplay reasons - kinda like choosing a trait in Fallout, a benefit for a price). So the player would basically maneuver and choose targets as s/he can, but shoot as per character skill with a sort of a timer function to represent the natural movement of the barrel/situation and the implants capability of holding focus (the nitty gritty details of this system I’ve given plenty of times).

This implant should of course be removable (at a ripperdoc and at the players will).

So there. Optional combat system that relies on both player action (though requires much less twitch shooting) and character skill, and which is firmly tied to the reality if the gameworld (immershun).

 

[Poison19]

I'm sorry, but this sounds like an awful idea to me. Why would the gameplay get worse as your stats increase? I'm not saying Borderlands gameplay is bad, but you seem to be suggesting going from realism to silly combat.

Not at all. What about Bordelands combat you think? Bulletsponges, legendary and weird guns etc? Nope, i suggest only the way you shoot in borderlands - your bullets fly where you aim, low or minimal recoil, easy and simple. In contrast with military sim, where your bullet is affected by nature factors like wind and such. Is it worse? I think not, it just represent how newbie gets used to shooting. And it makes game free from RNG in shooting. You can enjoy playing even without increasing stat if you can handle mill sim combat. Or find your compromice between casual and simulation shooting, maybe with 30/100 points in stat it will be played like PUBG or STALKER (just for example).

Maybe what i wrote is a little mess, but i really trying to explain how my idea works.

 

[Harthwain]

Yes, that is true. But there is a limit to what end the player input should determine the results; where the role (and gaming the role) stops and the player begins.

What limit? And where is the bar set?

When a mechanic is done properly - and a character's skill can impact the task so much that it can range between impossible, various degrees of possible to easy or very easy - how is this, effectively, all that much different from making a roll check, where the RNG decides the outcome? Let's be real; having a high enough skill to make a difference in perform a selected task is precisely in line with a video game that aspires for an RPG title.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

What limit? And where is the bar set?

When you notice that you - the player - are more in charge of the results than the character and can compensate the lack of character progression (while those who’re worse at the game than you, get little to no tangible benefit from the character getting better).

When a mechanic is done properly...

Properly how and for what purpose?

RNG is fair to everyone and reflects the character better than any other system because it has no outside forces that distort it, or which it tries to distort. It’s the hammer and screwdriver situation once again. Or, if you prefer, spoon and a fork for eating soup (and, yes, I know about ”sporks”, but those are still inferior to spoons... and forks for their specific purpose).

 

[Harthwain]

When you notice that you - the player - are more in charge of the results than the character and can compensate the lack of character progression (while those who’re worse at the game than you, get little to no tangible benefit from the character getting better).

That's exactly what I mean when I said "when a mechanic is done properly." Because the point of having a skill, and investing into it, is to make you more likely to succeed with it than those without it. That's the essence of what RPGs do.

RNG is fair to everyone and reflects the character better than any other system because it has no outside forces that distort it, or which it tries to distort.

RNG isn't fair. RNG is random. It's not the same.

You can have terrible rolls, while your oppontent will have great rolls and demolish you as a result. Or you will fail the most important roll you had to make. Or you will make bad rolls in a row, turn after turn, etc. The best part? RNG is an outside force too. All you do is simply swapping the player's input with randomness to do the same thing: to determine the outcome of an action.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

RNG isn't fair. RNG is random. It's not the same.

It’s fair amidst the players. Bad rolls are just a fact if life (metaphorically; and literally in games). The randomness is weighted against the characters ability and the tasks difficulty, it’s not 50/50. Everybody makes mistakes no matter how good they are, and even the most inept might have a fluke every once in a while. It presents an organic situation and solution for the character whose range of ability and understanding it represents.

And RNG is not the outside force, the player is. RNG is the games representation of the situation at hand. The player is a guide who’s outside-the-game ability can nullify the whole point of charactersystems existing and leads to watered down systems in attempt to prevent that.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

But I am sure they will be. Just not as playable Roles. Look at the gameplay reveal. We have a Corporate Role right there, in the person of the corpo-woman what-her-name. And a Fixer Role in the form of an NPC Dee Shaadees (or whatever he's called). So, yeah, "they’re all going to be there", which means that technically they didn't lie about it.

Actually that would be PR talk, and to me it's no diffrent from flat out lies.

Post automatically merged: Oct 10, 2018

and I think they can add too that realism by only letting you level the skills that you use. just like real life you want to get good at something you need to put your 1000 hours in. not saying that I actually want too spend a 1000 hours too level my gun skill to 10 in a video game just saying.

Actually I'm not against that system IF you have to choose things you are already trained in at creation, because having a character that doesn't knows anythings at start is boring as hell too.

Post automatically merged: Oct 10, 2018

Not at all. What about Bordelands combat you think? Bulletsponges, legendary and weird guns etc? Nope, i suggest only the way you shoot in borderlands - your bullets fly where you aim, low or minimal recoil, easy and simple. In contrast with military sim, where your bullet is affected by nature factors like wind and such. Is it worse? I think not, it just represent how newbie gets used to shooting. And it makes game free from RNG in shooting. You can enjoy playing even without increasing stat if you can handle mill sim combat. Or find your compromice between casual and simulation shooting, maybe with 30/100 points in stat it will be played like PUBG or STALKER (just for example).

Maybe what i wrote is a little mess, but i really trying to explain how my idea works.

What limit? And where is the bar set?

When a mechanic is done properly - and a character's skill can impact the task so much that it can range between impossible, various degrees of possible to easy or very easy - how is this, effectively, all that much different from making a roll check, where the RNG decides the outcome? Let's be real; having a high enough skill to make a difference in perform a selected task is precisely in line with a video game that aspires for an RPG title.

Actually my scale would go, on a scale of 0 to 10:
0: Spread Circle on 1/10 of the screen.
1: Spread Circle on 1/20 of the screen.
2: Spread Circle on 1/30 of the screen.
3: Spread Circle on 1/40 of the screen.
4: Spread Circle on 1/50 of the screen.
5: Aim exactly where the crosshair is.
6: Auto Aim Circle on 1/50 of the screen.
7: Auto Aim Circle on 1/40 of the screen.
8: Auto Aim Circle on 1/30 of the screen.
9: Auto Aim Circle on 1/20 of the screen.
10: Auto Aim Circle on 1/10 of the screen.

Post automatically merged: Oct 10, 2018

It’s fair amidst the players. Bad rolls are just a fact if life (metaphorically; and literally in games). The randomness is weighted against the characters ability and the tasks difficulty, it’s not 50/50. Everybody makes mistakes no matter how good they are, and even the most inept might have a fluke every once in a while. It presents an organic situation and solution for the character whose range of ability and understanding it represents.

And RNG is not the outside force, the player is. RNG is the games representation of the situation at hand. The player is a guide who’s outside-the-game ability can nullify the whole point of charactersystems existing and leads to watered down systems in attempt to prevent that.

Actually in an A-RPG the player is the dice. The problem is mostly how to represent the character's skills/stats.

 

[SigilFey]

It’s fair amidst the players. Bad rolls are just a fact if life (metaphorically; and literally in games). The randomness is weighted against the characters ability and the tasks difficulty, it’s not 50/50. Everybody makes mistakes no matter how good they are, and even the most inept might have a fluke every once in a while. It presents an organic situation and solution for the character whose range of ability and understanding it represents.

And RNG is not the outside force, the player is. RNG is the games representation of the situation at hand. The player is a guide who’s outside-the-game ability can nullify the whole point of charactersystems existing and leads to watered down systems in attempt to prevent that.

I'll throw out Fallout 3 here. One of the biggest complaints about the game (right at release and for years afterward) was the way that combat felt. Putting the reticle on an enemy, even at point-blank range, and pulling the trigger only to have nearly every shot miss just felt...off...bad...wrong. What felt good was pausing the game to go into VATS, seeing your percentage-to-hit, and rolling the dice. Inherently, switching the mechanic into a "turn-based mode". The complaints were so overwhelming that Beth completely redid the shooting mechanics for FO4, and they were much better.

Having a turn-based system superimposed on a real-time mechanic simply doesn't work -- the mechanics are pretty much opposite ends of the spectrum.

If the game is in real-time, then it needs to be up to the player to aim and shoot. What the game can do reflect character skill by challenging the player in ways that make sense for a real-time, shooting mechanic. No dice-rolls to see if you "hit or miss", but rather impediments that will steadily decrease as the character's skill increases. For example, the gun could kick wildly and in random directions at low skill, making it very difficult to hit anything -- especially with auto fire -- forcing the player to carefully aim, fire with lots of control. It would kick much less at middling skill, kick only straight up at high skill, and barely kick at all once the character masters it.

In a sense, it's perfectly possible to have a real-time, shooter mechanic work beautifully with an RPG -- but the game can't simply ignore that the action is taking place in real-time under direct, player control. (Nor can it make people enjoy shooting mechanics if they simply don't like shooting mechanics.)

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I'll throw out Fallout 3 here. One of the biggest complaints about the game (right at release and for years afterward) was the way that combat felt. Putting the reticle on an enemy, even at point-blank range, and pulling the trigger only to have nearly every shot miss just felt...off...bad...wrong.

I remember those claims and I remember wondering what game they played because my experience wasn't like that. There was an angle for the bullets, but nothing even remotely near as bad as people claimed. I remember hoping there had been more accuracy penalties since all there was to difficulty was the need to... well I'll get to that just below this...

To get this out of the way... Fallout 3 isn't exactly a good example of anything. There.

There were problems with the combat. But the problems were more related to this (also notice the accuracy... not at all as bad as claimed):

When you combine accuracy penalties with bullet sponges, of course it will feel horrible because in addition to not hitting things, your actual hits don't do anything to compensate for the misses. If the bullets did a more realistic plausible amount of damage, there would've been much less of an issue. Much less... even if the FPS crowd would've still complained.

If the bullets actually did what bullets do when they hit something. It'd been a wholly different game.

VATS ... Inherently, switching the mechanic into a "turn-based mode".

VATS had nothing to do with being turnbased. Nobody took turns. The player got an advantage the NPC's and critters through damage-dealing freeze time magic spell that also granted an 80-90% damage resistance for its duration.

The complaints were so overwhelming that Beth completely redid the shooting mechanics for FO4, and they were much better.

Fallout 4 is indeed better at being a firstperson shooter.

Whether that's a good thing is debatable.

Having a turn-based system superimposed on a real-time mechanic simply doesn't work -- the mechanics are pretty much opposite ends of the spectrum.

They are (polar opposites). But I'm not asking for that. And even if I was, it wouldn't happen - at least not anymore - so I'd be wasting my time (knowingly).

If the game is in real-time, then it needs to be up to the player to aim and shoot.

Why, specifically, does it need to be that just because of real time? That's the very reason why all the games with guns these days are practically the same when it comes to shooting (which, incidentally, is also most of the content and a general focus).

For example, the gun could kick wildly and in random directions at low skill, making it very difficult to hit anything

I've suggested a similar thing before. But I don't think recoil alone would do the trick. It's not really that different with bullet angles, the characters facing just changes a bit.

Tim Cain (the Fallout and VTMB guy) had a seminar a year or so ago where he suggested a similiar system. That the skill progression governed recoil recovery time, not accuracy.

the game can't simply ignore that the action is taking place in real-time under direct, player control. (Nor can it make people enjoy shooting mechanics if they simply don't like shooting mechanics.)

That begs to question, why are the shooting mechanics hampered in the first place. For what point and purpose? Just make shooting like a shooter if that's the goal anyway. All systems that hamper the shooting are away from the players direct control aside from damage.

 

[Rawls]

What "new dialog system"?

GC: What are your priorities then, for improving your work on that game? What are you looking to do differently?

PM: One of the things that I think is most different between this and Witcher 3… we consider dialogue and scenes and all of that to be gameplay. Because it is, right? You’re making decisions, you’re making choices, you’re interacting with the world. But we want that to be more seamless than it was in Witcher 3, or it is in most games. You walk into a conversation and suddenly the camera is its own camera and you’re making choices. We wanted to be a little bit more fluid and a little bit more seamless. And it’s a huge amount of work and it’s really, really ambitious and I hope that we’re able to deliver it because it is a lot of work.

GC: When you say seamless you mean being able to walk up to people and not have it be a separate cut scene?

PM: It’s not a separate cut scene. Like, in the demo you’ve got those bits where you can take out your gun and change what happens in the scene. But, like, when you are in the Maelstrom area, for example, and you’re walking away from those guys that’s all still a scene, it’s all still happening as a scene. It’s tightly choregraphed with all those people moving around and all of that. And stuff like that is actually really difficult.

GC: That was one of the things I was asking myself, about how much of it is just staged for the demo. Because people are always walking into frame at just the right moment to look cinematic and everything seems highly orchestrated. Is that just the demo or is the final game really going to be like that?

PM: That’s what we want the game to be. That’s what we’re building in the game right now.

GC: But how are you able to ensure that, like when the Hare Krishnas come round the corner? Are you looking at the viewing angle and waiting till they walk to a certain spot?

PM: I wouldn’t be able to specify specifically for that, because I didn’t set it up, but what I can say is that, yeah, it’s a matter of, ‘OK, if you’re gonna walk to the end of this area here we’re gonna capture that you’re walking there and we’re gonna know to trigger these guys to walk around the corner’. And doing that across a big open world… like, if you’re doing that and it’s a linear game it’s much easier to do because you know that the player’s going to be coming from that direction.

GC: Well, that’s why I ask, given this is open world. But I also know how it’s tempting for companies to cheat in demos…

PM: [laughs] Setting it up in an open world game is a lot more work, because you have to anticipate all sorts of things. And yes, obviously it is a demo so it’s very tightly controlled. But you can actually play that demo now, it’s real.

Even if you look at Witcher 3 in terms of how the community acts in that, you can see some of the beginnings of what we want to do here. All those characters, you go to a village and it starts to rain and everybody runs and stands underneath a tree or whatever. And at night everybody goes to bed and they all know which bed is theirs. And during the day they go to work. And we want to do the same thing here but on a much larger scale.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/05/cyberpunk-2077-cd-projekt-interview-what-im-not-willing-to-say-is-what-were-saying-7916829/?ito=cbshare

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

That begs to question, why are the shooting mechanics hampered in the first place. For what point and purpose?

To make your aim ability accurate to that of your character. If the character don't know how to handle a gun, he cannot magically become a marksman because of the player. If the character is a marksman, it will hit things not matter how bad the player is.