What is your biggest fear regarding CP2077

[Sardukhar]

Which is fine. But what Sild says below sums it up for me.

Superman. What, are you kidding? Obviously Superman.

Anyway, there is a point to tech arguments and this thread.

Cyberpunk is a believable-science type world. It's really easy to go over to teleporters and phasers and other high-science gadgets.

But if you do that, you lose the nearness feeling Cyberpunk should get you. That it could happen tomorrow or next week, if you squint your eyes a little.

That's why most Cyberpunk fiction tries to keep it "real"-ish. Cars use gas, of a sort. Guns fire bullets. Cloaking clothes don't make you invisible, just camouflaged. Etc. Power sources should try to be plausible. Even if IRL we totally replace them in 50 years.

Oh and a big part of the reason everyone uses Dataterms in 2020? It's because they are secure.

Cyberpunk 2020 has cigarette-pack-sized cellphones, just like us. Not smartphones, although they also have paperback-book sized computers that work as phones and can even let you log-in to the virtual Net. In VR no less.

Dataterms are secure, though, unlike your pocket cellphone - and Dataterms are trusted by sellers and buyers. Cellphones sure aren't and even microPCs and decks aren't, really. Too hackable.

 

[evotaph]

Sure. I don't think anyone here has suggested Star Trek technology. It's interesting, and certainly everyone will have unique sacred cows, I just personally don't see see this as a dealbreaker. To each their own.

 

[Sild]

Superman. What, are you kidding? Obviously Superman.

Idk Sard.. I heard Ultra Instinct Goku packs a mean punch.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Far Cry has become an "RPG" with new dawn. That's so stupid, you shoot at someone's head from 1 meter with a shotgun but if he's level 4 and you have low level shotgun you barely hurt him. Or you unlock the blowtorch with skill points.

Goddamn if CP will do the same...

 

[SigilFey]

Far Cry has become an "RPG" with new dawn. That's so stupid, you shoot at someone's head from 1 meter with a shotgun but if he's level 4 and you have low level shotgun you barely hurt him. Or you unlock the blowtorch with skill points.

Goddamn if CP will do the same...

FarCry offers more role-playing than a lot of formally titled "Role-Playing Games". Take Diablo for instance. No matter what character I play, I'm going to move through levels destroying every enemy I encounter and collecting loot to become better at fighting. It's not really an "RPG". It's a top-down brawler with some RPG elements. Most JRPGs are basically adventure games with tactical, turn-based combat more akin to wargames than any RPG. And yet, in FarCry, the playstyle is very, very different whether I use stealth and silent takedowns, rig traps, snipe from a distance, or go in with a heavy MG and bazooka, calling for air support as I charge. Is it a full-on RPG? Nope. It's a shooter. But it's got more RPG in it than a lot of "RPGs"

An RPG is a game that focuses on "playing a role". Meaning: if I choose to be this type of character, then I have a certain place in the world, and I have very distinguished strengths and weaknesses. Not just in combat -- for everything. And, my character can alter outcomes based on how they do things and why. This is wholly different from Action games, which rely on fine motor control, reaction time, and patterns, or Adventure games, which rely on puzzle-solving to reach a pre-determined conclusion.

However, for newer generations of gamers, the term "RPG" has largely come to mean only "my character has customizable stats".

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

FarCry offers more role-playing than a lot of formally titled "Role-Playing Games". Take Diablo for instance. No matter what character I play, I'm going to move through levels destroying every enemy I encounter and collecting loot to become better at fighting. It's not really an "RPG". It's a top-down brawler with some RPG elements. Most JRPGs are basically adventure games with tactical, turn-based combat more akin to wargames than any RPG. And yet, in FarCry, the playstyle is very, very different whether I use stealth and silent takedowns, rig traps, snipe from a distance, or go in with a heavy MG and bazooka, calling for air support as I charge. Is it a full-on RPG? Nope. It's a shooter. But it's got more RPG in it than a lot of "RPGs"

An RPG is a game that focuses on "playing a role". Meaning: if I choose to be this type of character, then I have a certain place in the world, and I have very distinguished strengths and weaknesses. Not just in combat -- for everything. And, my character can alter outcomes based on how they do things and why. This is wholly different from Action games, which rely on fine motor control, reaction time, and patterns, or Adventure games, which rely on puzzle-solving to reach a pre-determined conclusion.

However, for newer generations of gamers, the term "RPG" has largely come to mean only "my character has customizable stats".

My man, you haven't read many of my posts, have you? I totally agree with you, 100%, on the definition of RPG. I also agree that diablo is not an RPG.

The only thing I disagree on is the last sentence, since, for what I've seen on this forum, it's "old generation only-turn-based-isometric RPGs are RPGs" gamers who say RPGs are games about stats quoting the guy who created ultima.

EDIT: I have just seen a video of a rocket barely hurting a lynx from 2 meters in new dawn. WTF

 

[Sardukhar]

Sure. I don't think anyone here has suggested Star Trek technology. It's interesting, and certainly everyone will have unique sacred cows, I just personally don't see see this as a dealbreaker. To each their own.

Oh, they have actually. Many times.Star Trek tech, Star Wars tech, you name it. Laser swords, spaceships, true invisibility tech, etc.

Cyberpunk has quite a few sacred cows. It's ironic that it's such a delicate niche, cuz it's all hardboiled noir rooted.

But it is balanced between what is and what will be, in the gap of the possible. Oooh, poesy!

 

[Sild]

Sure. I don't think anyone here has suggested Star Trek technology. It's interesting, and certainly everyone will have unique sacred cows, I just personally don't see see this as a dealbreaker. To each their own.

Oh, they have actually. Many times.Star Trek tech, Star Wars tech, you name it. Laser swords, spaceships, true invisibility tech, etc.

Cyberpunk has quite a few sacred cows. It's ironic that it's such a delicate niche, cuz it's all hardboiled noir rooted.

But it is balanced between what is and what will be, in the gap of the possible. Oooh, poesy!

You..you were supposed to destroy the darkside, not join it!

 

[SigilFey]

My man, you haven't read many of my posts, have you? I totally agree with you, 100%, on the definition of RPG. I also agree that diablo is not an RPG.

The only thing I disagree on is the last sentence, since, for what I've seen on this forum, it's "old generation only-turn-based-isometric RPGs are RPGs" gamers who say RPGs are games about stats quoting the guy who created ultima.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "disagree with the last sentence". Just to clarify what I was saying, I don't feel that an RPG needs to be turn-based, real-time, pausable...whatever. It can be any collection of mechanics, it's simply that RPG elements have been worked into so many games that don't involve any form of "role-playing" whatsoever. Nowadays, the most linear, restrictive, on-rails experience is called an RPG just because it contains customizable stats. Meanwhile, a game that allows unrestricted player agency and responds accordingly, letting players explore branching narratives or even create their own stories, doesn't even fall under the RPG category -- simply because there are no customizable stats.

EDIT: I have just seen a video of a rocket barely hurting a lynx from 2 meters in new dawn. WTF

Yeah...damage is a bit weird in FC5, too. How many .44 caliber rounds does it take to kill the average wolf? About 6. You have to shoot it about 6 times according to FC5. Or, 1 well-placed arrow. :faceplant:

 

[Marquis_deShade]

One thing that's started to bother me about games calling themselves "RPG" these days, is that no matter what direction you take, how you play the game, you wind up with 10 in every attribute, and even more so where those attributes are artificially increased beyond 10 with bonus effects from things like gear, or even a quest reward.

If no matter how I play, all my stats will eventually get to final form level 9000, all my skills will be maxed, or better, and everything that can be increased or customized, is, and while that might feel immediately gratifying on a 12-year-old's level of what "winning" looks like, from many other perspectives, it sucks the life out of the game.
What's the point of New Game + if I got all the thingses on the first play through? What's really the point in playing the game again, ever, if everything that could get got done was done and did the first time around?

I'd love to see games going back to a less gratuitous model of character development where concentrating in a certain style actually means something. It's not really an RPG if you're every single character class maxed by the end of your play through.
In game decisions about resource allocation/expenditure and leveling are meaningless if you have all the attributes, all the skills, all the gear, all the weapons, everything by the end of the game. It's one reasons why I personally feel the early levels of many games are so much more subjectively rewarding play-wise since during those levels you're much more conscious about what points you spend where, money management, and everything else.
Your choices feel like they have much more meaning.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

However, for newer generations of gamers, the term "RPG" has largely come to mean only "my character has customizable stats".

This is the sentence I didn't agree with you, I don't think it's newer generations who think that, but older ones. Anyway, not important.

 

[SigilFey]

One thing that's started to bother me about games calling themselves "RPG" these days, is that no matter what direction you take, how you play the game, you wind up with 10 in every attribute, and even more so where those attributes are artificially increased beyond 10 with bonus effects from things like gear, or even a quest reward.

If no matter how I play, all my stats will eventually get to final form level 9000, all my skills will be maxed, or better, and everything that can be increased or customized, is, and while that might feel immediately gratifying on a 12-year-old's level of what "winning" looks like, from many other perspectives, it sucks the life out of the game.
What's the point of New Game + if I got all the thingses on the first play through? What's really the point in playing the game again, ever, if everything that could get got done was done and did the first time around?

I'd love to see games going back to a less gratuitous model of character development where concentrating in a certain style actually means something. It's not really an RPG if you're every single character class maxed by the end of your play through.
In game decisions about resource allocation/expenditure and leveling are meaningless if you have all the attributes, all the skills, all the gear, all the weapons, everything by the end of the game. It's one reasons why I personally feel the early levels of many games are so much more subjectively rewarding play-wise since during those levels you're much more conscious about what points you spend where, money management, and everything else.
Your choices feel like they have much more meaning.

I'm largely of the same mind. I think the evolution of RPGs lies in two pathways.

1.) So many stats, skills, etc. that it's literally impossible for a character to achieve them all. Even better, make skills mutually exclusive. I think this would work great for something like the Beth model. If I take an ability in one area, an equal but opposite ability becomes unavailable in another area. For example, if I take a base level Strength ability, the top tier Agility ability is no longer available, and so it continues. To achieve the best of the best abilities, I must specialize.

2.) No set story. Having a giant world full of interesting stuff to see and do, a great threat of some sort, but no pre-determined narrative. Rather, a web of pathways leading from the starting point in the center and an incredible number of potential "endgame" outcomes, all based on player choice.

I guess my biggest fear for the future in general is that most RPGs will stagnate and become even more formulaic and reliant on industry "norms".

This is the sentence I didn't agree with you, I don't think it's newer generations who think that, but older ones. Anyway, not important.

Yeah, it can swing that way. But even back in the '80s, I started getting sort of bummed and tired out by the D&D 2nd Edition rules. Rather than being creative and having fun, I started to feel as if far too much time was being spent looking things up and crunching numbers and arguing about which saving throw modifier would apply according to the table being used for...*sigh*.

Granted, some of it was cool, but I definitely felt that I spent more time visualizing my character sheet than my actual character. (Plus, some of those modules were linear as heck.)

 

[Sild]

Take Diablo for instance. No matter what character I play, I'm going to move through levels destroying every enemy I encounter and collecting loot to become better at fighting. It's not really an "RPG"

I always thought of Diablo as a very specific type of RPG, an ARPG with a big focus on a kind of gameplay called hack 'n slash. You probably already know all of this but i guess it servers the point i'm trying to make which that this kind of gamplay has been a part of the tabletop role playing games since before it took on a shape in video games. Diablo simply took that part of the game and presented it to a different audience, a part that was already heavily embeded in DnD PnP games with campains with no other purpose or objective than killing and looting. But i agree, a game that people identify as an RPG should have a balanced gameplay with story, diverse combat, and character progression power and personality wise. How those goals are reached (turn based vs real-time/ shooter vs hack and slash/ FPP vs TPP/ levels vs implants etc...) matters less if at all.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

gamers who say RPGs are games about stats

That comes largely from stats and their effects getting cut and/or streamlined to hell.

Most people take an "RPG" to mean a game that has a high-drama story, inventory that consists of more than just your weapons, some dialog choices and where you can make a couple of narrative decisions.

Talk about stats in a manner that actually makes a difference and most of the time you get ignored or boo'd out of the room.

 

[SigilFey]

I always thought of Diablo as a very specific type of RPG, an ARPG with a big focus on a kind of gameplay called hack 'n slash. You probably already know all of this but i guess it servers the point i'm trying to make which that this kind of gamplay has been a part of the tabletop role playing games since before it took on a shape in video games. Diablo simply took that part of the game and presented it to a different audience, a part that was already heavily embeded in DnD PnP games with campains with no other purpose or objective than killing and looting. But i agree, a game that people identify as an RPG should have a balanced gameplay with story, diverse combat, and character progression power and personality wise. How those goals are reached (turn based vs real-time/ shooter vs hack and slash/ FPP vs TPP/ levels vs implants etc...) matters less if at all.

I'd personally agree with all of that, and that Diablo is an ARPG. (If I were given total control of genre definition for all software games ever created, that's what I'd assign to it.) Also, I'm not trying to argue that Diablo or FarCry are in any way inferior or superior to other games simply because they're more or less of an RPG.

It's simply that a lack of accuracy in communication results when a term becomes largely undefined. I think a lot of the polarization surrounding CP2077 stems from the fact that "Role-Playing Game" can mean literally opposite things to different people...and there's plenty of evidence to back up both sides. The term no longer has a clear meaning.

Hence, the ongoing confusion when "RPG" is used. It's like me trying to sell something, and calling it only a "Snack". We all know what "Breakfast" typically entails. I can't confuse "Steakhouse" with anything else. No one is gonig to be surprised by a "Pastry". If I go to get "Sushi", that's pretty clear. But, "Snack". Well...what does that mean? Sweet? Salty? Savory? How much is less than a meal exactly? Couldn't a single waffle be considered a "snack"? Where's the framework? There's no answer. The term is wholly vague.

 

[Sild]

Hence, the ongoing confusion when "RPG" is used. It's like me trying to sell something, and calling it only a "Snack". We all know what "Breakfast" typically entails. I can't confuse "Steakhouse" with anything else. No one is gonig to be surprised by a "Pastry". If I go to get "Sushi", that's pretty clear. But, "Snack". Well...what does that mean? Sweet? Salty? Savory? How much is less than a meal exactly? Couldn't a single waffle be considered a "snack"? Where's the framework? There's no answer. The term is wholly vague.

Precisely, as much as i myself would like things to be easily categorized and set them in their net little boxes so that whenever someone asks "what's an RPG" ? i can confidently pull one straight out of the box without looking.. it's not how it is anymore.. So whenever people say things like looter shooters have nothing to do with rpg's i can point at Diablo (looter hack 'n slasher?) and say the same.. would it be right? idk.. but it has its roots in the tabletop role-playing games so take from that what you will.

 

[SigilFey]

Precisely, as much as i myself would like things to be easily categorized and set them in their net little boxes so that whenever someone asks "what's an RPG" ? i can confidently pull one straight out of the box without looking.. it's not how it is anymore.. So whenever people say things like looter shooters have nothing to do with rpg's i can point at Diablo (looter hack 'n slasher?) and say the same.. would it be right? idk.. but it has its roots in the tabletop role-playing games so take from that what you will.

Abslolutely, which brings us right back to the topic. Shooter mechanics can't prevent and RPG from being an RPG. RPGs are almost always mixed up with some other genre when they're adapted into a software medium.

 

[Rawls]

Wait. Are we talking about what qualifies as an RPG again?

 

[njeffcoat]

speaking of RPG and game mechanics I think this meme appropriately conveys a lot of opinions on forced play pathing.

 

[TheNeonArcade]

If the main plot line falls in line with The Witcher 3, i'll be dissappointed. I want more of an emotional punch from the main story. Everything else in the Witcher 3, minus maybe the combat was perfect though