What annoying game design trends should Cyberpunk avoid?

+
Also, bullet sponges are indeed a problem in design to some extent.

If a game contains a more sliding scale of "damage dealing ability" as befits a deep RPG character progression, then unfortunately bullet sponges are a side effect of that. Imagine that either you equip a slightly better weapon or increase your shooting skill by X points. -> Your dps increases by 1%. The enemies remain the same, which means that in order to have meaningful combat, the same enemies will be bullet sponges to characters on the lower end of the gear/skill spectrum. (Your damage output is so low that enemies appear as damage sponges)

Games that have levels usually have overarching effects of level gain as:
"you have gained 1 level! -> your hp increases by X, your damage increases by Y."
Conclusion: leveling can cause exact same effect. High level mobs appear as bullet sponges to a low level character. But thats okay cause..... you can go grind side missions to level up!

..... anyone notice how this "progression" has nothing to do with story or immersion? Game developers keep on treating this as something that they MUST do. People need to grind, right? Wait, 'grind' is a strong word! We can make leveling faster so its not a grind!

... but why have it in the first place? You can have progression that is solely based on skills/perks/gear. Take good old VtM:B for example. Xp from missions, no levels.
 
You could get away from damagesponges by combining weapon handling (actual handling by the player), accuracy factors (spread and recoil), and soft gate penalties to the afore (skill and stat prerequisites based on weapon caliber and weight), and enemy armor/evasion level.

Could... but of course you can’t make the player inaccurate if he isn’t himself, so...
Post automatically merged:

According to wikipedia he's still in Arkane.

Ah, ok then.
Perhaps there’s still some... hope.
 
Last edited:
..... anyone notice how this "progression" has nothing to do with story or immersion? Game developers keep on treating this as something that they MUST do. People need to grind, right? Wait, 'grind' is a strong word! We can make leveling faster so its not a grind!
Yeah it's not an ideal design IMO. I don't really need my character to feel significantly more powerful at then end of a game than at the beginning to feel like they've "progressed." Learning additional ways to deal with problems is always great, but keeping the character around roughly the same damage output level works fine. Joel in the tLoU is a good example, though it's not an RPG, and a linear game, so applying it to an open world level design is not 1 for 1. He improves some abilities over the course of the game, but the progression of the character is not dependent on him feeling significantly more powerful.
 
Looks like Death Loop and Weird West will be two games I might check out on a deep sale instead of picking it up immediately. I can't tell which kills my excitement for a game more, first person or isometric top-down, :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
Also wanna add i hope they avoid overtuning the enemy AI. Nothing is more irritating then being mowed down by Busted AI goons that attack like you are playing on the hardest in game difficulty when in reality you aren't.
 
I usually play games with inverted cameras(unless they're already inverted), but the thing I hate the most is that some games only give you the option to invert one camera control, usually Y. I'd want the option to invert both vertical and horizontal. If not, don't just do one. It is hard to get into the standard camera controls though.
 
Pulling a Bioware (of the past decade -- not old Bioware) and wrapping up the game with a big baddie that hoses you in what's basically a cut scene, doesn't give you the chance to face off against him, and expects you to accept it as something other than a cheap, cowardly attempt at setting up the next game in the series.
 
Pulling a Bioware (of the past decade -- not old Bioware) and wrapping up the game with a big baddie that hoses you in what's basically a cut scene, doesn't give you the chance to face off against him, and expects you to accept it as something other than a cheap, cowardly attempt at setting up the next game in the series.
That's Very lazy imo.
 
I just don't want a lot of crafting in the game. It's silly how many games allow you to craft ten potions in the middle of a fight and then just spam-heal over and over again. It's too gamy and it breaks immersion. When a game relies heavily on crafting mechanics I get bored.
I was watching a video discussing Cyberpunk 2077's loot and how we'll be able to loot items to either sell or use for crafting... so, whoops? :shrug:
 
Oh god, please no. The most hated thing by me is RNG hit chance, provided only by numbers and not AI behavior.

I bet you wouldn’t even notice it among all the action, if it was done right. (Meaning, nobody would do or want it to be such, where you keep shooting a stationary target and dicerolls make you miss 7 out of 10 rounds.)

AI is always either stupid, or ”smart” enough to be a cheat, i.e. conspicuously ”too smart”. It’s easier to provide these sorts of effects through clever systems design.

It’s also much more satisfying to score a hit that actually counts for something among few misses, than always hitting but doing minuscule damage because your enemy is a couple of levels above you.
 
It might sound stupid/unimportant... But i really HATE when a game doesn't have customized input icons according to your device (ex: xbox icons while using ps4 controller or kb+mouse) and i instantly assume the developer was lazy for not taking the time to work on such a simple feature.
Another thing i HATE is when the game is clearly a port of a console game (ex: Hold button to use item from a menu, unable to select menu options with mouse but have to use ARROW KEYS instead). Same as above, i instantly assume the dev were lazy and couldn't be botered to make an effort to differentiate console vs pc release.
 
Top Bottom