What is your biggest fear regarding CP2077

[kofeiiniturpa]

I think it would be a disappointment if CDPR don't use the PnP as the basis for the combat and roleplay mechanics, it is afer all meant to be one of the more unique PnP games out there. A shame if all they did is take style and lore and slap generic mechanics on top of that. To an extent, that was one of my criticisms of TW3, the more unique gameplay elements from the earlier titles got dropped.

Very much agreed.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

I think it would be a disappointment if CDPR don't use the PnP as the basis for the combat and roleplay mechanics, it is afer all meant to be one of the more unique PnP games out there. A shame if all they did is take style and lore and slap generic mechanics on top of that. To an extent, that was one of my criticisms of TW3, the more unique gameplay elements from the earlier titles got dropped.

The demo looked exactly like a FPP TW3 and people love those MMOish mechanics, so I think they'll continue in that direction... fingers crossed, but not many chances.

 

[Suhiira]

Except, when it comes to the mechanical aspects of the game, they have blatantly misled us, completely ignoring their stated and advertised goals.

I wouldn't say "blatantly", but yes, from the press demo it's far more of an FPS/action game then an RPG.

I think part of this is their target audience, the press. Most of whom wouldn't know an RPG if it fell on them, but everyone knows CoD, Battlefield, most of the Star Wars games, etc. So you need a demo with lots of shooting, flashy graphics, and action, action, action!!!

Does this represent the game as a whole or just the portions of it likely to appeal to journalists and FPS/action gamers?
Who knows.
But we can hope.

Grounded in reality is fine. But they aren't just making this game for me or for you. They have to also appeal to gamers unfamilair with Cyberpunk and part of that may be showing them weapon types that they haven't see before.

So why not make a game that's different? Grounded in reality like CP2020 rather then anime?

I think to many people take WoWs cartoony graphics and animes over-the-top combat to seriously. These are NOT what makes a game popular and fun to play. It's the gameplay mechanics not the visuals that make a good game. I see publisher after publisher stressing graphics and fast paced action because of the mistaken belief that these sell games. Ask any competent game developer and they'll tell you the same thing, gameplay sells games not graphics.

P.S.
Many people seem to confuse semi-automatic and fully-automatic weapons, magazines with clips, and since "assault rifles" look scary they all need to be banned. So showing them real weapons in a realistic manner IS showing them weapons they've never seen before.

And I'm not even going to get into "little" things like recoil, spray-n-pray accuracy, and bullet sponges.

Yeah, Kofe has been fighting this fight for, like, one million years. He (?) and Su are the Classic Role-Play stanchions around here. Doomed, but still fighting a valiant rearguard action!

And, who knows, maybe not doomed? I, too would like to see many PnP and TB concepts in 2077. Unlikely, but perhaps not impossible.

Hey, retired US Marine here ... valiant rearguard actions are our specialty ... just ask the Chinese from 1950!

(( And NO, I'm not that old! ))

 

[Sardukhar]

(( And NO, I'm not that old! ))

Welll...you -say- that...

 

[evotaph]

So why not make a game that's different? Grounded in reality like CP2020 rather then anime?

I'm not suggesting anime. I'm just saying that a person like yourself who gets the things that make real world firearms compelling (as they truly ARE) may be in the minority... literally millions of people may buy this game. As you point out, most gamers know very little about firearms. Most of those gamers views on firearms are informed by COD. And CDPR has to appeal to those people as well.

And I completely agree with your comments about the press. Some degree of spectacle will be required if they want to get the press hyped up for 2077. If you show them ARMA style firearms, most won't care that it's a much more realistic representation than games like COD. They'll likely just think "boring". It's a shame, but the press can be like that.

So part of the answer could be to make *most* of the weapons grounded in reality "under the hood" while still presenting them in as exciting a way as possible (visually/aurally/camera/vibration). How they interact with the evironment/enemy bodies may be part of that. Then add weapons that we *think of* as being more Sci-Fi, like rail guns and the self guided rounds in the demo (which is just a logical extension of DARPA's EXACTO program). Both of those weapon types publicly exist already. Imagine where the cutting edge REALLY is in 2019, then extrapolate out to 2077. It feels overly conservative to me for CDPR to limit themselves creatively based on 20th century firearm technology.

I agree with you that gameplay should come first. They seem to be taking steps towards getting the right mix of feel, tuning (lethality versus approachability) and presentation. I trust CDPR to strike this balance.

 

[Suhiira]

I'm not suggesting anime.

My apologies if you get the impression I was suggesting you were.

I was merely attempting to point out that many players seem to expect an anime style game. Fast paced "Street Fighter" style combat, wall running, double jumps, replicants, terminators, etc.

I'm just saying that a person like yourself who gets the things that make real world firearms compelling (as they truly ARE) may be in the minority... literally millions of people may buy this game.

So what?

Or are you suggesting that if CDPR were to pursue a more realistic approach CP2077 is doomed to failure because players are incapable of adapting to, and embracing, a game that's not a virtual clone of every other shooter on the market?

CDPR has made its reputation by innovating on "old school" tried-n-true game concepts why should they embrace the current "more of the same" ones?

 

[evotaph]

Or are you suggesting that if CDPR were to pursue a more realistic approach CP2077 is doomed to failure because players are incapable of adapting to, and embracing, a game that's not a virtual clone of every other shooter on the market?

A few thoughts on that:

One of my points above is that we don't know what "realistic" will even mean in 2077. And that IMHO we shouldn't contrain our thinking about "realism" to 20th century firearm technology. Even near future projections include things like weaponized micro drone swarms.

Nowhere am I suggesting that CDPR create a virtual clone of every other shooter on the market. Nor am I suggesting that they would be doomed to commercial failure by adhering to the model of realism you are advocating for.

CDPR has made it reputation by innovating on "old school" tried-n-true game concepts why should they embrace the current "more of the same" ones?

I'm not saying that they should. All I'm saying is that they have to consider a wide range of player expectations. They will be criticized no matter what they do. NONE of us are going to get a game that 100% lines up with our personal preferences.

 

[Suhiira]

One of my points above is that we don't know what "realistic" will even mean in 2077. And that IMHO we shouldn't contrain our thinking about "realism" to 20th century firearm technology.

Unless the laws of physics change, which is rather unlikely, we can make a pretty good guess.

Ummm ... 20th century firearms technology ... like the M1911 (adopted in 1911) the M2 .50 cal (adopted in 1933) the AK-47 (adopted in 1947) the M-16 (adopted in 1964)? All of which are still going strong? And there's nothing, nothing, to suggest gunpowder is going obsolete any time soon.

Now if you want to postulate phasers and such go ahead, but while we have a good scientific basis for creating such weapons we have no clue how to create a portable power source for them, because the laws of physics only allow energy to be stored and more importantly accessed in certain ways. Nukes create LOTS of energy, but safely accessing and using that energy leaves a bit to be desired.

I'm NOT making fun of you, I'm making fun of the idea ... because no one with even a basic grasp of physics could take it seriously.

Even near future projections include things like weaponized micro drone swarms.

Only on YouTube "Gee wouldn't this be kool" future weapons vids.

 

[evotaph]

Unless the laws of physics change, which is rather unlikely, we can make a pretty good guess.

Not suggesting physics are going to change. A gunpowder bullet in 2077 will still be a bullet. What I'm saying is that different types of weapons can exist. Railguns were being developed in what, the 1980's and still conform to physics. Reagan's SDI program in the 80's still existed within our understanding of physics. We have weaponized drones today (witness the assasination attempt recently on Maduro). Then consider advances between now and 2077 with virtually limitless R&D budgets.

I hope you aren't taking my statements as some sort of argument that bullets are going to disappear because that's not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is that it's reasonable that weapon development will continue on parallel tracks and that the true cutting edge is not the stuff that we see publicly. When did we have the SR-71 compared to when people learned that we had it? Do you see what I'm getting at? I'm not arguing in favor of Star Trek or Star Wars weapons. Not even close.

But I see absoluetly zero reason to limit player options by arbtrarily restricting weapons to only gunpowder based firearms. I can fully appreciate and respect your preference. No one will force you to use weapons you don't like. But also, CDPR shouldn't force all players to only use the type of weapons that you are advocating for either.

People have different ideas about what "fun" entails. As long as it makes sense in the context of a Cyberpunk world (ie no lightsabers, etc) what is the downside of giving players as many creative options as possible?

 

[Suhiira]

Railguns were being developed in what, the 1980's and still conform to physics. Reagan's SDI program in the 80's still existed within our understanding of physics.

I'll repeat myself.
Power source.

Railguns and space lasers still require a power source. And currently physics, and it's subfield chemistry, don't show much promise for the development of power sources small enough to be portable.

Sure, you can put a laser on a ship ... have you ever seen how large a ships engines are?

We have weaponized drones today (witness the assasination attempt recently on Maduro).

Ummm ... weaponized drones existed in 1944 ... the V-1.
Yes, such things exist, but just because something can be done doesn't mean it'll become commonplace. Rocket cars have broken the speed of sound, I don't see any on the highways or city streets.

I hope you aren't taking my statements as some sort of argument that bullets are going to disappear because that's not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is that it's reasonable that weapon development will continue on parallel tracks and that the true cutting edge is not the stuff that we see publicly.

You're not, and I appreciate that. But I'm not so much discussing this with you as I am the topic itself.

Many discussions in these forums center on "what if". That that in and of itself is one of my great fears for CP2077 (See! I am on topic Sard!) that it'll be some sort of science fantasy vice science fiction game. I love good science fiction, I read science fantasy for the laughs.

But I see absoluetly zero reason to limit player options by arbtrarily limiting weapons to only gunpowder based firearms.

Wanting to limit CP2077 to what's physically (in terms of physics) possible and probable is arbitrary?

No one will force you to use weapons you don't like.

Of course they will.
You can play Skyrim with a butter knife if you want, just don't expect to be able to win.

People have different ideas about what "fun" entails. As long as it makes sense in the context of a Cyberpunk world (ie no lightsabers, etc) what is the downside of giving players as many creative options as possible?

Of course they do. And there are any number of existing games that allow people to be Rambo whoever, why does this game have to be yet another?

Dare to be different.

 

[evotaph]

I'll repeat myself.
Power source.

Railguns and space lasers still require a power source. And currently physics, and it's subfield chemistry, don't show much promise for the development of power sources small enough to be portable.

Sure, you can put a laser on a ship ... have you ever seen how large a ships engines are?

I have. And I agree with you that if there were no advances in power source / storage technology from 2019 onwards you would have a point.

Yes, such things exist, but just because something can be done doesn't mean it'll become commonplace. Rocket cars have broken the speed of sound, I don't see any on the highways or city streets.

I didn't say commonplace. A weapon system that *isn't* common might even be more desirable.

Wanting to limit CP2077 to what's physically (in terms of physics) possible and probable is arbitrary?

That is mischaracterizing my statements. Every example I've used exists within our current understanding of physics. I haven't heard a physics based argument against any example I've mentioned. So in the absence of that argument, I would call restriction of options arbitrary, yes.

You can play Skyrim with a butter knife if you want, just don't expect to be able to win.

That position assumes that the game is designed around a small number of "correct" or "best" choices and that all others are invalid. I have more faith in CDPR's designers than that. You shouldn't need the absolute most powerful item available at any given point to proceed. Creative players may not even need to get into combat at all (TBug hacking things, dialogue, manipulating hardware, stealth, etc).

And there are any number of existing games that allow people to be Rambo whoever, why does this game have to be yet another?

It doesn't. I think you may be inferring a position from my statements that isn't there. I'm not suggesting that being Rambo would be the path to success in 2077. Even the Demo makes an effort to point out that forethought is key and that decisions have consequences. Can a player try to take on Merideth Stout's security detail? Absolutely. Will they probably die. Yup.

I don't think CDPR has to babysit the player too much from poor decisions via option restriction (instead they can show or make the likely outcome of decisions clear in more elegant ways). If players still want to use the butter knife, let them. But also let them experiment with as many options as possible to figure out what best suits their play style. I think restricting player options is the wrong solution to the problem (of compelling weapon types / variety.)

I think we actually agree on a lot, but just have different ideas about how the game can be different.

 

[Suhiira]

You shouldn't need the absolute most powerful item available at any given point to proceed. Creative players may not even need to get into combat at all (TBug hacking things, dialogue, manipulating hardware, stealth, etc).

I quite agree.

But would you care to make a wager you can't complete CP2077 with V's starter handgun without exploits or cheats?
You can (usually) do an entire CP2020 campaign with the weapon you bought as a noob.

I don't think CDPR has to babysit the player too much from poor decisions via option restriction (instead they can show or make the likely outcome of decisions clear in more elegant ways).

Yet they are.
Health regen being #1. If you play at all smart you'll never die, there are no lasting consequences for getting injured, nor even any real downtime. Action, action, action!

In CP2020 combat is the LAST resort because it's fracking dangerous, in CP2077 it's the first because it's fun.

Makes CP2077 an entirely different game then the source material it's based on.

For many people, especially those the know little to nothing about CP2020, that's not an issue. And yes old CP2020 players will be a minority of CP2077s customer base. But that doesn't mean they're wrong or that the game would be a flop if it payed more attention to it's roots then current popular trends. But we'll never know, because it is what it is.

I think we actually agree on a lot, but just have different ideas about how the game can be different.

That's usually the case when people have a logical and reasonable discussion but have differing core ideas.

 

[Marquis_deShade]

I'm personally less concerned with the intricacies of firearms physics portrayal/interpretation in a computer game than I am for things like narrative, the existence of decision trees and their consequences vs. merely aesthetic binary choices that have zero real impact inside the game environment.
I'm more concerned about whether or not something ridiculous like child adoption in Skyrim will happen. I mean, like, Hi, I'm a vampire dragon killer murder hobo ... but, I have a home, so, gimme your children, because ... reasons. What was Bethsoft thinking? The feature is like soft sell marketing ploy to get money out of people with ... "interests" in children. ... and it's just creepy as all get out.
I'm more concerned about micro-transactions, which, is thankfully reported not going to happen. (huzzah!)
I'm more concerned about pointless fetch quests existing.
I'm more concerned about whether modding will be supported or not.
I'm more concerned about the depth and complexity of the writing where it seems so many many developers skimp on writing like it's a barely tolerable necessity to part gamers from their money. I want to see writing from folks that know Akira Kurosawa, Shakespeare, Sophocles, Alfred Hitchcock, and everyone else worth mention; writers that collect and are familiar with myths and stories from hundreds of cultures, that have libraries of stories in their heads they can pull from to give us countless nods to themes, devices, plots, symbology, and characters plucked from all the ripe fruits of giants throughout history.
I'm more concerned about language I hear like "padding" where people complain about a game being longer than it "should have been". WTF. What about those of us that want to play for 1000 hours? A mere 40 hour long main quest line was too long for you? I know I'm not going to see a 1000 hour long main story, but, I'm more concerned about the game being too short because of those voices in the community that talk about some games being long longer than they "should" be.
I'm more concerned about the detail of the RPG element and how it's implemented.
I'm more concerned about SO many more things than whether or not a 9mm pistol vs a .45 pistol in game perform with the same differences they do in real life.

Yes, I can understand how gun nerds will get eye-twitchy when something is misrepresented, or represented poorly. there's lots of folks due their professions, hobbies or general life experiences who get all sorts of things ruined when movies, TV, and, yes computer games don't get "it", whatever "it" is, right. For some folks it's annoying AF to see spaceships in Star Trek and Star Wars operating all in the same XY plane orientation as if they were airplanes.

Anyway, I've got way more many things to be concerned about than how guns are portrayed in a Neon/Cyberpunk fantasy sci-fi title.

 

[evotaph]

But would you care to make a wager you can't complete CP2077 with V's starter handgun without exploits or cheats?
You can (usually) do an entire CP2020 campaign with the weapon you bought as a noob.

The reason that I wouldn't take that wager is because the damage system has been changed from 2020. But 2077 is a video game not a PnP game. The right tool for the right job. Just because something worked well in 2020 doesn't mean it's the correct solution for 2077. They are different mediums. IMHO it would be a mistake to cling to 2020 dogma without regard to context.

Yet they are.
Health regen being #1. If you play at all smart you'll never die, there are no lasting consequences for getting injured, nor even any real downtime. Action, action, action!

My point about babysitting was that there are multiple ways to help guide the player without being heavy handed. The hope is that you can help the player make informed decisions so that you don't *have* to fall back on blatant solutions like restricting their options.

And (respectfully) I think you are making a lot of assumptions based on extremely limited information. "There are no lasting consequences..." How do you know? "Nor even real down time." How do you know? It seems like you are assuming (based on a tiny snapshot of press facing WIP gameplay) that if something is different from 2020, the game must have turned into COD. But we simply have no idea. What I DO have is faith in CDPR as a developer. And I have faith that any changes were made with Mike Pondsmith's approval.

In CP2020 combat is the LAST resort because it's fracking dangerous, in CP2077 it's the first because it's fun.

We don't know that. The game isn't even tuned as far as we know. And it definitely wasn't tuned during the demo. It can be as lethal as they choose to make it, and you can bet that they either are or will be playtesting the hell out of it internally to strike that balance.

Makes CP2077 an entirely different game then the source material it's based on.

Different, yes. Because the mediums are different. As an old school 2020 player myself (I missed 2013), I'm still all for picking the right tool for the job rather than CDPR being slavishly devoted to a literal implementation of the 2020 mechanics. These decisions don't just happen in a vacuum, but result from tons of discussions, meetings and internal iteration. The choices they arrive at will be the result of years of refinement.

What may help reduce your worries is that CDPR are listening to feedback here and elsewhere. And even if they go a different direction, it will probably be after considering a wide range of opinions to help inform their choices.

But belaboring these points may be academic. There is a "MagRail" (individual railgun) in the game already. And tracking bullets (upgraded EXACTO). And targetting computers to help ricochet bullets. CDPR could decide to pull that stuff out but I don't believe that they will. It would be a waste of work for one, but also, the general response from the press and public was very supportive. So while I find this interesting, I'm kind of with Marquis_deShade. If CDPR gets the other things right, I think most will be happy.

 

[Suhiira]

The reason that I wouldn't take that wager is because the damage system has been changed from 2020. But 2077 is a video game not a PnP game.

Umm ... this makes no difference whatsoever.
The game mechanics not the game medium (video vs PnP) determine what can, and can't, work in a game.

And (respectfully) I think you are making a lot of assumptions based on extremely limited information. "There are no lasting consequences..." How do you know? "Nor even real down time." How do you know?

I'm basing my assumption on the game mechanic itself.
The whole point of a health regen system is to minimize player/character downtime and reduce if not eliminate the need for "healing" items/spells.

We don't know that. The game isn't even tuned as far as we know. And it definitely wasn't tuned during the demo. It can be as lethal as they choose to make it, and you can bet that they either are or will be playtesting the hell out of it internally to strike that balance.

And in this there's a slim hope of something resembling CP2020 lethality. And there's also a hope of a character vice player skill based combat system. But I'm not holding my breath for either.

Different, yes. Because the mediums are different. As an old school 2020 player myself (I missed 2013), I'm still all for picking the right tool for the job rather than CDPR being slavishly devoted to a literal implementation of the 2020 mechanics. These decisions don't just happen in a vacuum, but result from tons of discussions, meetings and internal iteration. The choices they arrive at will be the result of years of refinement.

True.
But they also result from a determination of the target audience.
Trouble is no single game can fully appeal to both FPS and RPG players. They are diametrically opposed gameplay styles, one stresses player agency, the other character. Attempts to appel to both result in games that really satisfy no one. If your primary goal is the highest possible sales then this is fine. If your goal is a quality game you're shooting yourself in the foot. Will people buy them, probably, will they love them, half won't.

The problem is we're being told CP2077 is an RPG first and foremost, but everything, EVERYTHING, we're seeing indicates it's an FPS first and foremost. If they'd just come out and say it's an FPS with RPG elements everyone would know what to expect and there would be no need, or reason, for these discussions.

What may help reduce your worries is that CDPR are listening to feedback here and elsewhere. And even if they go a different direction, it will probably be after considering a wide range of opinions to help inform their choices.

I'm 100% sure they're listening, and we appreciate that.
The real question is, are they acting on any of them?

But belaboring these points may be academic. There is a "MagRail" (individual railgun) in the game already. And tracking bullets (upgraded EXACTO). And targetting computers to help ricochet bullets. CDPR could decide to pull that stuff out but I don't believe that they will. It would be a waste of work for one, but also, the general response from the press and public was very supportive.

I totally agree, and I don't really expect any changes. But hope springs eternal.

 

[lelxrv]

The real question is, are they acting on any of them?

Why do you think your or anyone else's opinion is a 100% working solution that is possible to implement within what they're trying to make? That it won't compromise other systems in the game? That it won't make the game a convoluted mess of complicated mechanics that confuse and frustrate players outside a few hardcore fellas? The fact that they're reading the forums is already great, because it helps developers make more informed decisions, even if most of the time they won't align with what specific forum members want.

 

[evotaph]

I totally agree, and I don't really expect any changes. But hope springs eternal.

Absolutely. And please don't take my comments as trying to keep you from lobbying for the game that you want to see. I may disagree on some of the particulars of your approach, but respect the passion that you have for it.

 

[Marquis_deShade]

... also, to firearms. Specifically. Once upon a time, there was a gun developed called the Gyrojet.
If I'm recalling correctly, the 49 and 50 caliber rocket-bullets had zero recoil.
That technology has been a flop in the real world, but, for the sake of plausibility in a sci-fi fantasy game, bullets could be said to be composites with a small kicker round to get your package going downrange while the gyrojet-like rest of the bullet does the rest of the job. Minimum recoil with weirdo small casing discharge and no overheating.
Such could, potentially, plausibly, explain away lack of recoil, and other particulars that deviate from gun handling realism. Welcome to 2077 where gun handling is video-gamey for ... (insert sci-fi technobabble reason here) reasons.
Additionally, if V ever gets certain modifications, like a stabilizer implant, or whole arm replacement with gyroscopic balance, or some other sci-fi technobabble, additional weirdo-otherworldly firearm performance could get explained away.

We all, however, have our thresholds for suspension of disbelief. Part of creating any fiction is in the act of helping your audience to believe in the improbable, fantastic, and even the impossible.
Every comic book hero movie is filled with characters doing the improbable and impossible, yet, many of us watch them with a willing suspension of disbelief without stabbing out our own eyes because the physics are wrong.

Further, what we saw in the demo game play video is mostly indicative of a final product with truck loads of polishing, optimization, filling out, testing, crash-testing still to go. CDPR continues to claim the game is first and foremost an RPG, and with all the trust lost due lots of lies, failures and disappointments from other developers, it's easy to be skeptical, and all the more so when the demo does indeed look like it's primarily a shooter.
The woods are lovely, dark and deep, But (they) have promises to keep, And miles to go before (they) sleep, And miles to go before (they) sleep.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

I'll repeat myself.
Power source.

Railguns and space lasers still require a power source. And currently physics, and it's subfield chemistry, don't show much promise for the development of power sources small enough to be portable.

Sure, you can put a laser on a ship ... have you ever seen how large a ships engines are?

Sorry, but I don't know how this argument can be valid in a cyberpunk ("""sci-fi""") setting. Technology is continuously evolving and what seemed impossible 50 years ago is now everyday stuff.

I'm a chemist by profession and I'm not pulling my hair because mike pondsmith created CHOOH2 (and thank god he never claimed the name was its molecular formula, since it'd "simply" be a protonated form of formic acid). That's a superfuel, meaning it's much more powerful than the fuel we have now and uses biomasses to be produced. Do we know exactly how it works? Is mike pondsmith a chemical engeneer or a scientist and has any REAL knowledge in the field? I don't think so. Is this a problem? absolutely not, it's a fictional setting and as long as it's coherent with itself, in the moment the game set a specific point that makes sense, it's fine. In CP they created CHOOH2? fine, it's not impossible. People use "realistic" cyberware? Why not. People modify their DNA to look like furries? In real life we've recently invented the CRISPR-CAS9 technology, maybe in 50 years it'd be possible. Borgs are a thing? thanks to cyberware technology, sure.

Regarding laser guns, the technology exists already (far from being at the sci-fi levels). I remember watching some cool videos, but I'm lazy so here you have the first youtube video I found:

In a fictional world they can solve all the problems of technology, power storage, efficiency or whatever just creating something like CHOOH2, a fictional technology that, as long as it makes sense (no alien stuff, no magical tricks), makes it possible.

I'm a big fan of realism, it's my main complain for the demo, but I don't think we call unrealistic stuff like CHOOH2, borgs and smart guns (maybe we can when it comes to double jump, I still don't get why they didn't go for a more realistic super jump thanks to bionic super-strong legs, but hopefully they'll justify it somehow).
I believe the problem with realism in the demo comes when we talk about game mechanics: you see a subdermal grip that somehow increases your guns' DMG output, levels on enemies' head (if it's like TW3 -and most likely is - 2 enemies that look exactly the same, with same abilities, the one that matches your level can be killed normally, the one that is stronger than you is a bullet-sponge who one-shot kills you for reasons), weapons classified as epic/legendary because bards (rockerboys) sing ballads in taverns about the epic smart gun mass produced by militech... these are things that make absolutely no sense in a realistic game.

 

[evotaph]

Do we know exactly how it works? Is mike pondsmith a chemical engeneer or a scientist and has any REAL knowledge in the field? I don't think so. Is this a problem? absolutely not, it's a fictional setting and as long as it's coherent with itself, in the moment the game set a specific point that makes sense, it's fine. In CP they created CHOOH2? fine, it's not impossible. People use "realistic" cyberware? Why not. People modify their DNA to look like furries? In real life we've recently invented the CRISPR-CAS9 technology, maybe in 50 years it'd be possible. Borgs are a thing? thanks to cyberware technology, sure.

^This is kind of what my position is as well. "Realism" is an ever evolving concept. Even if hard Sci Fi isn't the direction CDPR goes, I'm fine with that.