Of course you.. I mean, you were nice once.. Before the whole Peter Pan incident.. There is still good in you.. Deep down.. Possibly under a rubble somewhere..
Nope, not at all, just thought you could scrape it for ideas since you seem to be having performance issues with some of the original RAW combat machanics.
Just trying to be helpful.
And I took it as such.
From what I recall of my peruse of your system the mechanics are a bit different then mine (duh) but the net result is pretty similar.
I don't recall "borrowing" anything from your system, nor do I recall anything in it that jumped out at me as "unreasonable/unrealistic".
Great minds again ?
I believe in equal opportunity. I want to be the root of all evil too.
And behind every great man there's a great woman, whispering evil things to our ears.. Who is the real evil here?
Currently I'm playing TW2 again, and there is one thing that simply piss me off. That moment when you fight a boss, when you did your best, when against all odds you win... not. To put things simple, I don't want to win the fight, just to watch cutscene, where my already defeated enemy is beating the hell out of me instead, 'cause plot demands it.
\
Ah. Validity in action. I REALLY hope CDPR doesn't miss this. A recent example was Deus Ex Human Revolution, where regardless of yoru preferred playstyle, you -had- to fight and kill bosses. No.
It wasn't a big deal for me, since I did pretty much what their cutscenes said I did, but it sure was an override on my choice.
They've done that multiple times in both games. I don't think the idea itself is flawed - Saren escaping initially in ME1 worked just fine, but with Witcher there was too many times the enemy gets whisked away because the plot demanded it. It's something CDPR needs to treat with more care I think, and come up with gameplay concepts that allow an enemy to escape if need be, not just because 'he beats you'.
The incident in TW2 never really bothered me that much, but I saw a lot of complaints, and understand why it pissed people off, so yes, agree. If you win a fight, you should WIN that fight. If they need a confrontation that can't end in death, they should do it some other way.
(And also agreeing with Slim, there were a few Deus Ex Machina moments, especially in TW1, that didn't really work out well. And that awful fight between Roche and Iorveth in TW2 that should never have been in the final version of the game.)
(And also agreeing with Slim, there were a few Deus Ex Machina moments, especially in TW1, that didn't really work out well. And that awful fight between Roche and Iorveth in TW2 that should never have been in the final version of the game.)
Last edited:
Don't even get me started...
In the first place, if the cut scene is going to show that the fucker gets away, then why the fuck do I have to spend my time fighting them in the first place... if my fight is meaningless don't force it on me...
And for fucks sake, don't have the final fight be cut scene bullshit or forced QTE... fuck I hate that shit.
In the first place, if the cut scene is going to show that the fucker gets away, then why the fuck do I have to spend my time fighting them in the first place... if my fight is meaningless don't force it on me...
And for fucks sake, don't have the final fight be cut scene bullshit or forced QTE... fuck I hate that shit.
Might be interesting if there other elements to consider. How about if you send different team mates to cover alternative exits or scramble comms? Perhaps you could take out potential enemy reinforcements by some means prior to the initial attack, or during the run?
Choices, cause, effect. There more the merrier.
Oh, and random elements for each playthrough. I don't want to see Wikipedia pages on how to run every mission and if I replay I want to see something different so I have to think outside the box.
i dont want to see "good" or "bad" choices, dont get me wrong i want choices, many of them, but not black and white or like in every game at the moment red and blue.
It's either Good or Evil, there's nothing else. Real decisions show if you are greedy, lazy, selfish, kind, friendly, but People are not that simple, and for some reason many developers fail to acknowledge that.
InFamous is a great example. Your character Cole is totally limited, he is torn between whether he should be a superhero or a supervillain. Instead of, you know, just remaining Cole.
But you can only be Cole, The Saint Protector, or Cole, The Mass Murderer. Cole, The Guy Who Just Wants To Stay Alive would have been way more interesting, and believable.
Also the the Evil options are in many games just cartoon villainy.The problem is not playing as a villain. The problem is playing as an impulsive, stab-happy, rabid murderbeast instead of a real villains with motives.
And I also dont want a reward for being pure good or pure evil.
The point is: by rewarding us for doing the same Good/Evil options over and over again instead of thinking for ourselves, we punish everyone else just to get points or rewards.
And at least no grinding and exploits for beeing good or evil. At the very core, a moral choice system is always a numbers' game. Do something good and you get a fix amount of good points. If you had 60 good points and get 5 more, you have 65 now, which means you became better. If you had 60 evil points and get the same 5 good points, you have 55 evil points now, which means you became less evil. in games like Fable you can have the whole town hate you for killing some dudes on the street in broad daylight, then love you as a funny guy just minutes later by doing the same fart joke 60 times.
It's either Good or Evil, there's nothing else. Real decisions show if you are greedy, lazy, selfish, kind, friendly, but People are not that simple, and for some reason many developers fail to acknowledge that.
InFamous is a great example. Your character Cole is totally limited, he is torn between whether he should be a superhero or a supervillain. Instead of, you know, just remaining Cole.
But you can only be Cole, The Saint Protector, or Cole, The Mass Murderer. Cole, The Guy Who Just Wants To Stay Alive would have been way more interesting, and believable.
Also the the Evil options are in many games just cartoon villainy.The problem is not playing as a villain. The problem is playing as an impulsive, stab-happy, rabid murderbeast instead of a real villains with motives.
And I also dont want a reward for being pure good or pure evil.
The point is: by rewarding us for doing the same Good/Evil options over and over again instead of thinking for ourselves, we punish everyone else just to get points or rewards.
And at least no grinding and exploits for beeing good or evil. At the very core, a moral choice system is always a numbers' game. Do something good and you get a fix amount of good points. If you had 60 good points and get 5 more, you have 65 now, which means you became better. If you had 60 evil points and get the same 5 good points, you have 55 evil points now, which means you became less evil. in games like Fable you can have the whole town hate you for killing some dudes on the street in broad daylight, then love you as a funny guy just minutes later by doing the same fart joke 60 times.