Weekly Poll 10/1/2018 - The Gunplay!

[Sardukhar]

Kind of related to last week's poll. How do you like your gunplay? You may not care either way - there's an option for that. Also going to do a poll about Melee later.

List of Polls to date: https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/collected-weekly-polls-thread.10984601/

 

[Trazon]

For Myself, its based on the game and the Lore, for Cyberpunk 2077, I expect a mix of 1 and 3, Fast and Frenetic, but at times a bit slower, based just on who or what we are fighting, some enemies I feel will be toughter to take down due to armor and pain editors/cybernetics. While others will be fast and strong, but easier to go down. But for a General Rule, 1,3, and 5.

 

[BontaHellion]

1! Throw a lot of agile and hard-hitting enemies at me that I can take down in a couple of shots (unless armored/augmented).

 

[BarefootWarrior]

I tend to use stealth as much as possible, then hit hard and fast. Hit and run, repeat, that kind of thing when ever possible. I rarely charge in guns (or bows ) blazing.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

"Deliberate, tactical, TURNBASED or VATS. XCOM influenced." FOR SURE.

There is no other option, if the game wants be an RPG first an foremost. Going any other direction is just diluting that in various degrees.

I do not want simulationist realism (ARMA), I do not want twitch shooting (Doom etc), I do not want diluted halfsies that still work like a shooter (Mass Effect). I want stats to make an actual difference in how things work; accuracy, recoil, hit chances (both player and AI)...

It is doable. In various ways. And not even trying is to not making anything different than what the market already offers with the plethora of shooters and action games. It'd be lame. It'd be boring. It'd not be memorable. And the audience will notice it, if the audience was RPG'ers. It'd not be anything different from what GTA does, or what Watch Dogs does, or what Far Cry does, or what Bethesda does today... the list goes on and on, everybody makes it the same thing and wants to appear as different, but absolutely nobody is in the end. They're all the same. There's nothing interesting in straight forward shooter gameplay. Nothing. Everybody's experienced it before in multitude of games, and will in a multitude of games to come. There is no creativity in it, nor in spicing that shit up with a few abhorrent slow-mo tricks and gimmicks that everybody else does already either. It is lazy design-wise. It is but an easy cash grab with no soul what-so-ever of its own. That's what it is, and it'll only drown the whole feature in the ocean of others who have done it better.

So, there.

 

[Keive]

Choose 6, I'm more into sneaking, so I want to do that mostly. Otherwise, 1.
Not really into shooters in general, but from what I played I definitely prefer faster pace.

 

[Heart Of Dawn]

Exciting. Both ME and BL had good RPG elements that supplemented the gunplay- they added to it, rather than weighing it down.

While Fallout's VATS is really good, it's a big no for a turn-based system. If I'm trying to kill you, I'm not going to be polite and let you have a go at me.

And RNG should be right out. Success or failure should be entirely on the shoulders of the player, and not the capricious whims of luck.

 

[lelxrv]

Based on what we saw in the demo, it's somewhere between Dishonored and Mass Effect. I'm fine with that. As long as damage numbers can be disabled or moved away to some separate panel and not spring out of enemy's body.

Man, Doctors' Bioware is quite an influence on CDPR.

 

[metalmaniac21]

Neither of those. Prefer the one where stats matter but bullets shouldn't respect the characters long/short gun skill. Bullets should blow holes and inflict injuries.

 

[Snowflakez]

Like Metal said, none of the options really suit me. I don't want specifically fast or slow gunplay. Just gunplay that has statistical impact. Whether it's slow or fast is inconsequential, so long as it isn't turn-based or real-time-with-pause (nothing against those games, just don't want it here).

I would use Bloodlines as a point of reference, but obviously much less clunky. Guns shoot at enemies, at the speed you think they should, and you can move around in real time. But your weapon skills impact how accurate you are, and they should also impact your reload speed, recoil, and bullet spread.

 

[CybrisPunk]

ì want to say.. like PUBG...

but in PUBG is no RNG and i don't like RNG...

where you aim and shoot the bullet go.
the dmg is based on where it hits on the body and if it wears armor.

 

[walkingdarkly]

If had to choose, it would be a mixture of 1, 4 and 5.
Which is how I remember the way the combat is described in the 2020 Core book.
Or just to say I'd like combat to be Fast, Deliberate and Deadly.

 

[Sardukhar]

Updated to add Bloodlines-like play.

@Snowflakez @metalmaniac21

Note - everyone can change votes as well.

 

[Snowflakez]

Updated to add Bloodlines-like play.

@Snowflakez @metalmaniac21

Note - everyone can change votes as well.

Sorry. I wasn't trying to be difficult or special. Just giving my 2 cents on the gunplay thing as a whole, not specifically the poll. Thanks, though!

 

[Sardukhar]

Sorry. I wasn't trying to be difficult or special. Just giving my 2 cents on the gunplay thing as a whole, not specifically the poll. Thanks, though!

No no it was an excellent point.

I should have thought of Bloodlines as well, duh.

I changed my vote already to it, in fact. Given the choice between ARMA-like accuracy and lethality and the (still deadly) fun of Bloodlines, I picked VBL.

 

[Keith_Latondress]

I picked Tactical .. what can I say I love war games. I love tactics over flash any day of the week. and to be honest FPS shooters are fun but can get real boring real quick. but games like X-com I cant get enough. go figure.

tho FPS with RPG elements like Fallout and Mass Effect are not so bad as there is more to do . but the biggest failing with FPS RPG's is that the world almost all way's feels empty, sure I can build a settlement in Fallout, but I felt annoyed that the NPC could not contribute to my settlement in any meaning full way. they should of gone with a more organic approach but still let the player control things they want.

 

[Radbane]

Though I chose Milsim I prefer it a tad lighter than Arma but more realistic than the bulletspongy gameplay of Mass Effect and Borderlands. I have not played PUBG or seen any streams of it so I can not say if that's what I should have chosen.

Rainbow Six Vegas 2 or STALKER is what I'm looking for. Bullets hurt, full auto is messy and hard to control, and most weapons have the ability to switch between safe, semi and auto mode (with the adition of bursts for those who have the opion). Ammo is heavy and limited.

 

[CybrisPunk]

Kind of related to last week's poll. How do you like your gunplay? You may not care either way - there's an option for that. Also going to do a poll about Melee later.

those weeklies, are they questions the RED's have for the game?

not that they have to listen to us. but they like to know the outcome of the mini surveys?

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Updated to add Bloodlines-like play.

@Snowflakez @metalmaniac21

Note - everyone can change votes as well.

Isn't Mass Effect affected the same way as Bloodlines?

 

[gogmeister777]

Isn't Mass Effect affected the same way as Bloodlines?

Irrc, Vampire took it to a far greater degree. Trying to use a pistol without points in the skill played like you were absolutely drunk. I know for sure that's how Deus Ex 2000 was. The reticle would move dramatically and would take forever to 'zoom' in and even then shots might not go precisely to the centre of the crosshair.

Having said that, if we are specifically talking about the first Mass Effect, then that was a lot closer to Vampire than the sequels but still not as accentuated. Maybe you were only referring to the original.

I myself voted for 7 but 5 would be fine too. I'm tempted to say 3 also but I'm a bit confused since I found Borderlands and Mass Effect to be quite different. Yes to Mass Effect, no to Borderlands