What annoying game design trends should Cyberpunk avoid?

+
It can only be fun in role-playing games. For example, a character with an obsession with a specific junk item, like broken rakes. :p

I'm all for letting people role play as they see fit. In this particular case I'd question if anyone actually builds a character with the intent to make them a broken rake collector. If those rakes didn't exist I'd doubt anyone would miss them or the ability to build the character this way. Admittedly, I could be wrong :).

The underlying point is this random garbage has zero game play impacts beyond supplying more in-game currency. If there were a need for more in-game currency it could be addressed by providing more of it via the various methods to acquire it. You shoot a NPC in the face and they have more money on their corpse. Barring that, at least make the items collected useful for something beyond "sell to merchant". Apply some lore or story element to them. Case and point, many books in TW3 were completely pointless from a functional stand point. They were still fun to read. Thus, they had a purpose outside of "sell to merchant". A broken rake, fishing net, piece of trash, gum wrapper, broken bottle.... Yeah, those serve no purpose.

Interestingly, the TW3 example of books raises another annoying game design trend. Certain types of special loot or gear obsoleting everything else in the game world. Yes, I'm referring to witcher sets. After my first or second play through I recognized the general theme of loot progression in TW3. In a nutshell, pick up unique early sets off merchants, acquire your first witcher set then leap from witcher set to witcher set. 99% of the remaining gear in the game was instantly obsolete. There were very few gear pieces you would even consider outside of the witcher sets because everything else was flat out inferior (there were a few notable exceptions, of course). Incidentally, 99% of the gear also turned into "sell to merchant".

Consider for a moment all the work placed into those gear pieces. The item itself, the visuals of it, the description, etc. To me it feels like most of this work ends up irrelevant when the gear in question is forced into obsolescence. It felt like bad design.
 
I wasn't complaining, I was merely stating a fact. Hoarding literally worthless junk can even be fun.
I don't remember how many I eventually ended up with but I started hording toilet plungers in Fallout 3 once.
THEN I discovered some dev had created a room full of the damn things ... sorta took the fun out of it.
 

G30M1

Forum regular
Yes, I'm referring to witcher sets. After my first or second play through I recognized the general theme of loot progression in TW3. In a nutshell, pick up unique early sets off merchants, acquire your first witcher set then leap from witcher set to witcher set. 99% of the remaining gear in the game was instantly obsolete.

Yeah! I knew from looking online that the best armor were the sets, so after I found a set, any other armor piece in the game was considered junk to me. Also because the rest of the armor wasn't nearly as nice looking as the sets.
That's why I'm hoping 2077 is more fashion forward with how we collect armor. A big part of cyberpunk for me is the fashion, and I'm hoping we'll be able to play with that rather than "ah, this is the best gear in the game... guess I'll wear this cause I need the stats...."
And I know they've addressed this problem, saying that they don't want to have fashion vs. functionality in this game... but we'll have to see~
 
I hope that the distribution of loot type will be more coherent within the CP world, and that it will be made so we quickly know what is valuable and what we can let in the NPC's pockets. Unless I roleplay as a "vulture" kinda character, I don't want to be too much involved in micro-economy, aka reselling hundreds of cigs for one buck.

If we ponder this a little: What kind of things WOULD you be willing to pick up? I can only see
- guns but only if its better than what you have
- ammo
- electronic devices to be sold, maybe. Depends whether there is a fence somewhere.
- scavenge cybertech but only if you are a techie
Thats about it. I just don't see us collecting daffodils and troll snot the same way as we did in Witcher 3.
I hate the looter shooter concept through and through.

I don't remember how many I eventually ended up with but I started hording toilet plungers in Fallout 3 once.
THEN I discovered some dev had created a room full of the damn things ... sorta took the fun out of it.

On the other hand, its completely different for Fallout 4, because things are no longer produced in a post-apocalyptic world. In there, hoarding junk is exactly how you would go about living. Its worlds apart from something like CP2077, where you could simply buy stuff from a vending machine if you got the bucks.
 
If we ponder this a little: What kind of things WOULD you be willing to pick up? I can only see
- guns but only if its better than what you have
- ammo
- electronic devices to be sold, maybe. Depends whether there is a fence somewhere.
- scavenge cybertech but only if you are a techie
Thats about it. I just don't see us collecting daffodils and troll snot the same way as we did in Witcher 3.
I hate the looter shooter concept through and through.

"Daffodils and troll snots" hahahaha you made my day :howdy: I agree with you on the junk items, or if there is some kinda useless yet funny collection we can only complete through looting NPCs, I sign for it (but I digress, this isn't problematic for the game experience).
I think the problem isn't about "what" items, but more if the game design makes you keep every junk in your inventory.
I would prefer a limited inventory space, just so you know from the start that you wouldn't care for keeping 150 shirts and hundreds of guns for resell, even if they were valuable items.
As a potential (and I bet we'll be) polyvalent characters, it could help us to diversify the gameplay and improvise strategies when we lack ammunition, for example having to choose between two gun chargers and a medpack, using close combat instead, or try to talk our way out a little more often, etc...
I have problems with RPGs that let you pile 30kgs ammos for 3 weapons, dozens of throwing knives, five katanas, a kill bot, a pair of mantis blades, and a stack of bullet proof vests "just in case" ; this isn't the way I would describe an immersive RPG ^^
 
Most of the stuff covered in this topic lol but I'll cover some specifically, apologies if I go over something already covered in this topic.

Escort missions: I hate escort missions so much, they are always brought down by terrible AI running headlong into enemies and getting gunned down. One of the few good examples of one done right is Resident Evil 4, she would hide and stay hidden until the battle was over and if she was stuck out in the open she'd stick to your back while aiming to keep your sights clear. Unfortunately most of the time they are the former.

Protect targets: Having to defend a wall, door, ect from a wave of enemies is pretty much always a chore at best and hair pulling frustrating at worst. The funny thing is I actually did one as a mission in a session of Cyberpunk 2020 and it was awesome and intense, I really hope that CDPR can capture that in this game.

Forced stealth/Stealth failure game overs: I play an aggressive, brute force style, so the last thing I want is to be forced to use stealth and the even more last thing I want is there to be an instant fail state for being caught.

Now I do remember CDPR saying somewhere that the only game over state was the death of V so hopefully I won't have to deal with any instances of those.

Other stuff I don't like:

Over complicated area designs without an easy way to navigate them. Unfortunately my navigation skills are piss poor so I get lost super easy without a GPS, guide line or something else holding my hand guiding me out lol.

Forced fights with invincible bosses/unwinnable fights: For these I am only counting fights you have to do, being able to pick a fight with someone like Stout that is unkillable at your current level is fine but I absolutely hate being forced into unwinnable fights, this is more of a jrpg thing but its something I can't stand so I'm going to list it here.

And for the last thing is not really a bad thing but I did find myself disappointed that we couldn't permanently have team members with us. I understand why they are doing it but it doesn't mean I have to like it lol I'm one of those guys that likes to have his favorite companions around at all times so not being able to do that is a little disappointing for me. Especially since I already love T-Bug and want to go everywhere and do everything with her, I'm hoping I get the opportunity to steal her from Dex and she can be my hacker lady :howdy:
 
Last edited:
- gating gear, events, areas, and enemies (whatever) behind levels. If I shoot him in his head, level has no importance, no protection = dead. No "lvl 17 gun" vs "lvl 28 gun" or common/epic/legendary.
- progression based on passive skills/perks and numbers increments (except where it makes sense, like physical strenght or accuracy)
- junk loot and huge inventory
- bullet sponges
- bad boss design (royce can be a bullet sponge because of his shield, sasquatch shouldn't survive all those bullets, also they have the same design, which is lazy)
- illusion of choice: better having few significan choices that affect the world than the other way around
- dice roll: if the game is interactive, then I want to interact (mini-games for significant actions are welcome)
- difficulty levels pump enemies' numbers up (just change their accuracy instead of making them bullet sponges)
- navigation through map only possible following the dotted line
- every quest has a reward, so you accept everything with no fear of possible drawbacks
- weapon durability (in survival games = big yes, everywhere else = huge no)
- useless pvp multiplayer "because share holders want to make some easy money". We don't need another COD or fortnite.
 
I hate the looter shooter concept through and through.

You and me both. For many, many reasons.

With that said, it does seem like CDPR is taking some steps away from something like the Division 2. Gear has rarities, yes, but not levels, for example.

Still. I don't care for it. It annoys me, especially in a bloody Cyberpunk setting.,
 
I hate the looter shooter concept through and through.
You and me both. For many, many reasons.

Me, three. Don't "hate it" per say...but I would love a game that does not involve "looting" at all. I mean, if I get into a violent situation pretty much anywhere, and it results in anyone or anything being killed -- there are literally hundreds of reasons NOT to remain in that spot looking for spare change or skinning wild animals.

My favorite way to handle "combat loot" was Jagged Alliance 2. Finish the fight, and when you get back to the map screen, you can access an "area inventory". Every gun, bullet, piece of gear, or other item that enemies "dropped" was right there in menu form for each map region, and I could just manage everyone's inventory simultaneously.
 
Agree with previous comments, sick of looter shooter and I'm not a fan of 3rd person gaming.

I want to see games finished on their release date, NOT released and then fixed with nerfing or boosting or countless updates and fixes.

It is getting harder and harder to make a "different or new" game. Everyone keeps talking about immersion.
Too bad nobody buys VR, keeping it a "niche" market, lol.
 
Big Empty Maps
Looting items is okay for me, whether inside or outside of combat, but it really gets boring for me when a large portion of a map has nothing but looting useless stuff. For instance, Skellige have many locations of looting items, while having few locations of actually doing missions or at least something meaningful that you interact with. Similarly, but far worse, Far Cry Primal's map is like 30% missions and 70% looting and hunting. I admit that hunting was fun, but it gets, as with anything, boring after a while, especially if there are no extra elements implemented in the activity. And many other examples.

There has to be some sort of proportionality between the size of the map and what we really do inside of it.
 
Puninshment for "morally" bad actions and/or lack of "Dark Side" ending: In Witcher 3, if
You romance with both Yennefer and Triss you get none of them
. That is straight BS, undeniable fact and not open to discussion. Respect people who wants to play the game like a douchebag. Do not give them hard time, this is just a game. I am an IRL sadist and I love being a douchebag in RPG games, there is nothing I can do about it.

FPP for "immersion": All I'm going to say is whoever makes TPP mod of this game will be praised like how the creators of TSLRCM mod of KOTOR 2 are praised

"Difficulty" being only increase the enemy stats and decerase your stats: Is it too much hard to make enemies smarter instead of using cheap tactics?

Having censorship for sake of not offending people or a group: It is simply sucks. Show the stuff how it is, no need to edit. It's way better lose small amount of customers for sake of not making majority angry. That's why people love God of War, shows the massacre how it is. No censorship, no BS.

No Cheats: Really? What's the point of gaming if I can't mess with stuff? That's like the entire point of games, doing stuff interactively that impossible IRL due to physics rules, laws, technology etc

Release an Alpha build and fix it years later, not fix some issues: Self explanatory

Totally nonsense DLC's: Don't make DLCs that gives a "cool" skin for $14.99
 
This is going to take some explaining so bare with me.

In many games, hacking is just "press hack button". There is zero gameplay there. One step above that is D&D stats-based hacking, your hack success is stat and RNG dependent - pretty much still "press a button". Another variant is the barely related mini-game, e.g. Bioshock's Pipe Dream hacking.

What the aforementioned designs do is completely abstract away the details of the activity (and replace it with something unrelated).

Now I understand not everyone is going to be interested in the details of how networks work and what not - even a simplified one - so some abstraction will be necessary.

A good idea for hacking abstraction would be programs that players can get to allow the hacking - it would at least make sense on some level. What would be even cooler, is to allow players to reverse engineer the program by giving players access to the in-game hacking program's source code. This way players who care can see how the program works and even write their own variants.

So yes, the network systems in the game will have to be simulated and be functional. The hacking programs players can buy would actually have to be real programs that can run and do their hacking via an (exploitable) "fictional" API.

This goes for the Techie too. Instead of just giving your flathead vague commands like "aggressive". Players should be allowed to reverse engineer exactly what "aggressive" does - maybe the aggressive command sets specific functions as the interrupt handlers for the "enemy detected" interrupts; players can then write their own functions to replace those.

Of course, this means a clean API (stripped of all stuff related to how the game internally functions) to control the flathead would be necessary.

Players who can't be bothered can just use the prepackaged programs/commands so no harm there.

PS: LUA is always available if you need a scripting language to write those programs/commands in. Would save you the work of creating a language from scratch and writing the parser.
 
Last edited:
In many games, hacking is just "press hack button". There is zero gameplay there. One step above that is D&D stats-based hacking, your hack success is stat and RNG dependent - pretty much still "press a button". Another variant is the barely related mini-game, e.g. Bioshock's Pipe Dream hacking.
The "trouble" is, if a game is truly an RPG then stuff like hacking is totally dependent on the characters skills so "press a button" is the only way to represent it. As soon as you require player skills in some minigame or another you've crossed the line from RPG to a player-centric game. While many (most?) don't have a problem with this it's a red flag that a game is not an RPG at heart.

A classic example of this is platforming or QTEs. Personally I suck at them, and more then once I've given up on supposed RPGs because I, the player, couldn't manage this or that section of the game that required platforming or QTEs. Yes, an entire game made unplayable due to design decision that effects a only tiny portion of the overall game.
 
Last edited:
The "trouble" is, if a game is truly an RPG then stuff like hacking is totally dependent on the characters skills so "press a button" is the only way to represent it.

Not really though. Skills and stats are there to "tune" the player's interactions with the environment, through the character. There's no rule saying it has to be a "button press".

I hope they cook up interesting and interactive ways to apply your character skills.. KC: D Alchemy comes to mind.
 
Yeah that would be great IF you knew what you were doing BUT I highly doubt ANYONE outside the programming community would understand what to do!
There are still the off-the-shelf programs/commands the game provides. Those will be sufficient to get through the game. Just use those as they are, you don't have to poke around inside to figure out how they work. It's just an option, giving you possible alternative (creative) ways to complete missions.

It will be cool for the player community too as people can write their own custom programs/commands and post them for others to use.
The "trouble" is, if a game is truly an RPG then stuff like hacking is totally dependent on the characters skills so "press a button" is the only way to represent it. As soon as you require player skills in some minigame or another you've crossed the line from RPG to a player-centric game. While many (most?) don't have a problem with this it's a red flag that a game is not an RPG at heart.
But shooting in the game is player-centric no? You have to physically aim. If you got good reflexes and eye-hand coordination, you can probably breeze through the game with a solo build.
 
The "trouble" is, if a game is truly an RPG then stuff like hacking is totally dependent on the characters skills so "press a button" is the only way to represent it.
IMHO, a good compromise is to make the minigame's difficulty changing according to the character's skill: the higher the easier for you to solve it (more time, more hints, whatever).

I suggested it back in 2018, but CDPR like hard gating stuff behind levels and skill points (which is also much easier to implement). :shrug: At least they added a mini-game instead of just "push the button to hack". Which is very apprecitated.

Hard gating is still better than RNG, though. Everything is better than RNG. :p
Post automatically merged:

It will be cool for the player community too as people can write their own custom programs/commands and post them for others to use.
anything more complex than FF XII's gambit system would be a nightmare for 99.9% of gamers and for devs to implement without letting us breaking the game.
 
anything more complex than FF XII's gambit system would be a nightmare for 99.9% of gamers and for devs to implement without letting us breaking the game.
How would it break the game?

With hacking, I suppose you could save some money if you figure out how a hack works and so don't have to buy the program to do it - you just write it yourself; maybe you can even save some memory on your deck by writing your own multi-purpose program or create an improved version that runs faster (assuming the programs that the developers included with the game aren't 100% optimal). The developers can even leave some "network exploits" that existing programs don't cover for players to find and exploit themselves.

When it come to the flatheads, it will just give you better control over their behavior, increasing the tactical options available to you.

Neither of which is considered game breaking IMHO - no more than having CS:GO professional-like FPS skills will be game breaking.

PS: That said, I doubt this will happen. It's probably too late in development to add something like this.
 
Top Bottom