What is your biggest fear regarding CP2077

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you think about it those character creation decisions and the skills you elect to improve can (and should) have a significant effect on those RNG rolls everyone loves to hate on.

In CP2020 each stat point and skill level is about a 5% increase, and should you have a maxed stat (10) and skill (10); unlikely but possible; you have a 100% chance to succeed at all but the most difficult skill checks.
I know, but even with 80% chances of success I still have 20% chanches of "sorry man, wrong number from RNG". I understand that it's the only viable way in PnP, but videogames don't have the same limits and let us "really" interact with the fictional world. They are not forced to be a simple video representation of what you would see in a PnP (they can be, of course), they can put you in that situation.

From a philosophical (and professional) point of view I refuse the existence of luck. There's always a reason way things happen (evident or not), even when rolling dice, the number you get depends from the position the dice started, the strenght you applied, the spin, the surface where it lands... It's not "luck", it's the sum of all these factors that, in theory, you can predict and act against (?) them. The same is with diseases. Cancer is not unluck, it depends on your DNA, your habits, the environment... RNG on the contrary is just pure luck because it was designed that way.

As a chemist, if I make a mistake, I can go from "whatever, I can fix the reaction" to "sorry if I killed everyone in the building and polluted the city's surroundings for the next 10 years", but it doesn't depend on luck. I need to check the equipment, I need to check that the reactants are ok, I need to do proper calculations and be sure my chemistry is correct.
I.e. if IRL I had to lockpick something like in a videogame (no idea how to do it), I'd need to check equipment (picklock? google translate gives me "jimmy", really? o_O), know the type of lock and I'd need some skill that depends on my experience and (I guess) my natural predisposition, a "stat": lockpicking. But there's no luck in that.

Of course this can't be applied in a PnP game because it'd become too complex both for the master and the players to keep track of all the possible variables, so you roll a dice and on the basis of your stat vs the lock the master decides if you open it or not. A videogame has more options, it can use RNG, but it can also make you do that in a way that it's up to you as a player to get experience (the more you try the more you improve, like everything in life), to fail or to succeed. Of course you don't have all those details you have in real life (checking equipment, real knowledge of the field), but you're actually role-playing a character in a fictional world. At the same time videogames have the limit of imagination compared to PnP since it's a fixed world and usually you can't find any ploy to solve problems that is not in the game engine (i.e. you can't hide under a car if the game doesn't let you crawl under it).

Now, I understand that someone who has played and enjoyed PnP games for all his life don't see any problem in the luck deciding your fate and see it as an excellent compromise in games (AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY FAIR), but I believe that it's not a realistic portrait of life since all the possible variables are included in a single number decided by a dice and you really can't act against it. Worst thing is that you can reload and next time the result can be different like you moved to a parallel dimension where you managed to open that door. You shouldn't, that's true, but you know that's the case and it screams "unlucky bastard" laughing at you.
 
videogames don't have the same limits and let us "really" interact with the fictional world.

It’s not a ”limit” (in a video game), though. It’s a conscious design decision that promotes certain kind of approach to roleplaying (i.e. the character is meant to be an actual character, inspite of how much the player injects his/her own personality inside, who tries things and makes mistakes like anyone, not simply a growing bag of keys to open up clickables in the gameworld). It’s about interpreting the characters do’s and don’t’s as s/he is guided and progressed through the world and narrative.
 
This is an old can of worms.

Introducing magic to cyberpunk would cheapen the setting (and, consequently, the experience itself). It’s like if you watched Bladerunner, and suddenly Gandalf was there chatting with Deckard. Or if you saw the terminator looking for Sarah Connor in The Shire.

It just messages that the world isn’t taking itself seriously, and opens the door for all kinds of wacky out-the-left-field stuff.

I love Shadowrun. Magic and Machine side by side. Doesn't cheapen it in any way, from my point of view. Bringing Gandalf to Shadowrun would cheapen it, but not because of magic, but because Gandalf is from a completely different setting.

That said, I also recognize that Cyberpunk isn't Shadowrun.
 
I know, but even with 80% chances of success I still have 20% chanches of "sorry man, wrong number from RNG". I understand that it's the only viable way in PnP, but videogames don't have the same limits and let us "really" interact with the fictional world.
I want to stress this is directed at the concept NOT the person that posted it!

And in real life we always succeed at what we do?
Since in PnP/RPG games we can't directly control action like you can in an FPS the RNG represents the times you're not on target with a shot or miss a jump from platform to platform. Now I understand some people can't stand the concept of not being personally (as a player) being in control. And that's perfectly reasonable in a game that's first and foremost a first person action game. CP2077 is first and foremost an RPG.
 
There is more to a role and player agency than simply unfolding a story.

Witcher is a great example of a somewhat disjointed approach of this. He is supposed to ve a master swordsman, but if the player is bad with the controls, Geralt will flail around like a child and is flain by peasants with pitchforks. Here, playeragency would be better served - rpG-wise - by leaving the physical action to Geralt (it’s his forte) and letting the player make the more tactical decisions.

Yes, this exactly. I loved, adored, and still play the old SSI Gold box AD&D games. One of the things I rated highly was the tactical combat in those games. I made decisions on what stats to prioritize on which characters, what abilities to develop, what gear to equip, etc, but it wasn't me aiming the bow, swinging the sword, etc. I decided where to position the characters, decided which enemies to target, what abilities to use to attack said enemies, and the game handled the rest.

Dragon Age Origins was like this, too, and I love that game as well. The new Shadowrun games also handle combat like this.

I liked pretty much everything about TW3 except the combat.
 
I want to stress this is directed at the concept NOT the person that posted it!

And in real life we always succeed at what we do?
Since in PnP/RPG games we can't directly control action like you can in an FPS the RNG represents the times you're not on target with a shot or miss a jump from platform to platform. Now I understand some people can't stand the concept of not being personally (as a player) being in control. And that's perfectly reasonable in a game that's first and foremost a first person action game. CP2077 is first and foremost an RPG.
of course, nothing personal :) as I always say: "it's just videogames we're talking about"

We don't always succeed IRL, but when we fail we have the ability to understand why, learn, and next time adapt. In a PnP, when you fail the master can tell you why, giving a justification to the dice and next time you can adapt.
In a videogame, on the contrary, RNG is just luck, you failed because of it and there's no other explaination. What have you learned? What can you do about it next time? Nothing. This is a limit of videogame, they need to stick to the code. Every media is different, everyone has pros and cons. PnP has fantasy and "unlimited" possibilites that come with it, videogames have real-time interaction and visual representation. Of course a videogame can try to copy PnP mechanics (a lot of cRPG do that) and they're fine since you don't have a "real-control" on the characters, you're just giving orders, but if you have an action RPG (CP2077) the game is giving you direct agency (based on stats) and everything that takes that away from you is perceived as unfair.

In my first 10(-ish) years of gaming I was playing ONLY turn-based RPG, if I heard the world "real-time" it was an immediate no-go. I have absolutely no problems with them, I actually like them. But if the game is an action game based on stats with choices and consequences and dialogues, then the core gameplay is giving me direct agency and stats are telling me what I can do and what I can't (I chose them during character cration, I still have decision power). CP2077 is clearly that, they said it several times during the demo and the previous 3 games from CDPR were the same.
They never planned to make a cRPG with a turn-based combat system, that's why it's called 2077 and not 2020. Setting must be the same, core concepts as well (weapons are deadly and we don't have bullet-sponge enemies, levels shouldn't be there, a realistic approach should be taken), but they have room to adapt this stuff to their idea. Of course if CP2077 becomes a looter shooter where you go around killing enemies to loot them and match their level so that you can kill more and get better loot and unlock abilities levelling up instead of buying cyberware with some multiple choices dialogues, then I'll be the first to complain. I mean, don't give me anthem.
 
Watching this conversation from the sidelines, both of you have good points to support your preferences for what the game ends up being. You just differ on what those preferences are.

To my mind, ultimately this is Mike Pondsmith's vision for 2077. CDPR has stated that they didn't want to deviate too heavily from that (I don't have the exact quote, but I'm sure the mods do somewhere). 2077 won't be a purist's vision of 2020 but it could still be an RPG. We simply don't know. Anything that deviates from 2020 in any way will have done so with Mike's approval. I trust him with his baby.
 
Now I understand some people can't stand the concept of not being personally (as a player) being in control. And that's perfectly reasonable in a game that's first and foremost a first person action game. CP2077 is first and foremost an RPG.

There is not necessarily a conflict between "action" and "RPG" in this regard, even in a pure action game, the player's character has limits, how fast you can run, draw or aim a gun, and so on. These factors all restrict control, adding character stats just makes them variable, rather than fixed.

Also, randomness can exist as a trait of the world, rather than the player's character, and we obviously do not have direct control over the world. So, a persuasion attempt on an NPC may succeed or fail for example depending on what mood the NPC happens to be in, and this can be randomized. Guns can have random inaccuracy and recoil. Loot placed in the world by strangers can be different on each playthrough. And so on. Exploiting the RNG by save scumming is probably not an issue when the consequences to the randomness are minor and very frequent, such as gun accuracy. In other cases, the consequences can be delayed (for example, you only find out if the persuasion attempt was really successful a few hours later), or even pre-determined at the time of character creation. By the latter, I mean "random" values can also be generated from a single actual large random number calculated long in advance, and a unique ID to the given situation (item spawn, dialogue option, etc.), so the result will be the same after reloading the game.
 
Since in PnP/RPG games we can't directly control action like you can in an FPS the RNG represents the times you're not on target with a shot or miss a jump from platform to platform. Now I understand some people can't stand the concept of not being personally (as a player) being in control. And that's perfectly reasonable in a game that's first and foremost a first person action game. CP2077 is first and foremost an RPG.

I think it's a perfectly reasonable position to take in a first (or third) person RPG too. If it's being done right, it should feel like the player and character are in control. That why we call it the "player character," because the player is playing the role of the character. Leaving stuff completely to RNG in my opinion feels like neither the player nor the character are in control, just the fates. As we've discussed before there are certain times that I think character skill / perks / stats / cyberware (or lack there of) should absolutely effect gameplay, but it's manifestation does not have to be a dice role.

I'm gonna give a few examples without making exhaustive list:
  1. Ranged combat: weapon sway; marginally larger hitbox; reload speed; recoil; quick draw.
  2. Melee combat: faster swings; combo moves; hitting harder; larger parry hitboxes; cool finishers; quick draw.
  3. Stealth: less sound output; unseen in "safe spots" (i.e. in the shadows, behind cover); shorter times for "evasion" to work; more stamina for hanging / climbing; silent take-downs.
  4. Dialogue: More intelligence & information leading to more dialogue options; extra information on social cues to make most effective choices (this would probably make most sense coming from cyberware); skill at bartering prices to make negotiating easier for better prices; cool stat effecting ability to intimidate or perhaps persuade others.
  5. Tech Stuff: Ability to access advanced crafting & modifying of various items (weapons; armor; cyberware; medicines; explosives; surveillance devices); repairing items in the field; using the more advanced technical devices (engineered items like the flathead, medical stuff, demolitions, etc); bypassing physical security stuff.
  6. Netrunning: harder to detect while on the net; resistance to being hacked; better at breaching networks; perhaps interface cues to more quickly be directed to desired info.
Now some of this stuff could use RNG behind the scenes to determining stuff like % chance to be detected while on the net, but still leave the feel of the player character being in control. You could use other behind the scenes systems to like a clock that is longer or shorter depending on your skill and the skill of the netrunner defending the system.

TLDR; there are definitely ways to represent character agency without taking away the feel of player agency.
 
My biggest fear is you can't just wander around and check everything out. Like you always have to be for a mission or quest. I like the idea of roaming around and talking to people, or just looking for things and if you happen to be able to complete a quest while you're out and about, great. And you can just continue checking things out.

Timed quest are fine, but I'm nervous that you can't just do whatever. Easiest examples are FFXV for how you just do stuff and you can finish a quest nearby if you want and continue exploring. And then there's Persona 5 where everything you do is timed and you can't waste a second and you can't just explore for the sake of exploring, you always gotta be doing something important.

Just wanna do anything and not feel like I'm running out of time or an opportunity to do something or I'm wasting time having fun.
 
Last edited:

Guest 4323944

Guest
Good question , my biggest fear is that the game won't live up to the ''hype'' . That and other smaller fears , like the story not being that great and so on . I trust CD Red , I'm sure the game won't be perfect but I know they're trying to make the best rpg to date and that's enough for me . I could add other things but that's most of it .
 
My biggest fear is that I have some expectations and they might be shattered; however, I do have trust in CDPR that they will not let me down too much and I will at least meet 80% of those said expectations.
 
TLDR; there are definitely ways to represent character agency without taking away the feel of player agency.

Sure there is, and it has been on the table before.

The problem lies in the potency of the sort of ”control-distortion” features. It’s way harder to find out a balance in, say, sway and recoil throwoff, that doesn’t feel either terrible or ineffective. And the way it usually is, is the latter because heavyhanded would feel awful to most (or so it is assumed).

That kind if stuff should absolutely exist at least. That there is at least something there that says: ”Hey, this thing here tries to be an RPG.”

But, I still latch on to the smart guns and their design just as well as Su on her dual-mode.

Most of the mechanics are already in place. Hit chances for smart guns, recoil etc for others.

It is simply a matter of tying their function and effectiveness to the governing stats, skills and possible cyber (and with SG’s.... refurbishing the design from what it was in the demo, like the reticle and and target choosing, and the ridiculous curving bullets).
 
my biggest fear is that the game won't live up to the ''hype'' .

I share that fear a bit, despite me being sure that the game won’t live to some people’s expectations. Regardless of the validity of their opinions, many will inevitably feel disappointed ("Why can’t I fly aerodynes?"), frustrated ("Argh, melee sucks"), bitter ("This is no true cyberpunk!") or offended ("I’m not OK with many wheelchaired NPCs being fat") by many things in the game, especially if they let the pre-launch hype get to them.

Don’t get me wrong, I believe that hype is fun but up to an extent. I had no huge expectations for The Witcher 3, back then I just hoped it would be a bigger version of The Witcher 2, but thanks in part to those toned-down hopes the game eventually turned into my (current) favorite videogame of all time, despite its many flaws.

It’s important to set one’s expectations to a moderate level. Am I waiting for the greatest game of all time? Am I waiting for the most accurate adaptation of the PnP? Or am I simply waiting for a good game?

That being said, I still fear that other people’s disappointment towards the game will sour this community.
 
Last edited:
my biggest fear is that CD PROJEKT RED will start to stray from the vision that we have seen in the gameplay/trailers so far. This game has the possibility to change the gaming industry for the better and that is good. from what I've seen CD PROJEKT RED is not looking to make money, they are making an ACTUAL VIDEO GAME. Rather than a stupid season pass or some dumb crap like that to sell the game, they just make the game. I mean it looks amazing, it basically sells itself! I just hope that nothing changes, I think this game will be amazing.
 
I share that fear a bit, despite me being sure that the game won’t live to some people’s expectations. Regardless of the validity of their opinions, many will inevitably feel disappointed ("Why can’t I fly aerodynes?"), frustrated ("Argh, melee sucks"), bitter ("This is not true cyberpunk!") or offended ("I’m not OK with many wheelchaired NPCs being fat") by many things in the game, especially if they let the pre-launch hype get to them.

Don’t get me wrong, I believe that hype is fun but up to an extent. I had no huge expectations for The Witcher 3, back then I just hoped it would be a bigger version of The Witcher 2, but thanks in part to those toned-down hopes the game eventually turned into my (current) favorite videogame of all time, despite its many flaws.

It’s important to set one’s expectations to a moderate level. Am I waiting for the greatest game of all time? Am I waiting for the most accurate adaptation of the PnP? Or am I simply waiting for a good game?

That being said, I still fear that other people’s disappointment towards the game will sour this community.

All valid points. There will never be a game that no one complains about. In general, people seem unable to enjoy a game for what it IS instead of what they WISH IT WAS.

That isn't to say we should support all games. Only that we should set our expectations. We should just support the games that most closely align with what we enjoy. 2077 isn't being made to cater to any of us as individuals. But it's a great sign that CDPR will consider our thoughts in their decision making process.
 
Last edited:
They said "RPG first, everything else second."
Did they? I'm pretty sure I've "story comes first" a lot more than "RPG comes first."

For example: "Pietras adds that everything starts with story at CDPR, and that every department, from quest design to cinematic animation, has an intimate working relationship with the writers." https://www.pcgamer.com/story-comes-first-in-the-making-of-cyberpunk-2077/ But I've seen language like this in a lot of interviews.

Now that being said, I do think the game will fit comfortably in the RPG genre. It's not like RPG and story are mutually exclusive, thus it's a "story driven RPG." Having said that, from everything I have read the mechanics and systems are made to fit the story, not the other way around. So if FPP works better in their opinion and seamlessly representing the combat encounters in the story, then that's what they'll do. I could be wrong, but that's the impression I've always had since 2012.
 
They did that exactly in answer to the "Cyberpunk is a FPS" declaration by PCGAMER and is also in the wiki so yes they said that.
And Again story is important in RPG but RPG are never supposed to be movies.
By that logic even "Life is strange" is an rpg because story comes first.
You can even do a story driven fps but in the end stays an fps.
And again the system is not only distant in gameplay from the source material but the problem is is also distant in the spirit of the source material that is a big issue.

In fact if this title were an original CD projekt ip and not based on a beloved pen and paper rpg and setting you won't see so many people complaining.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom