The most recent info comes from the 'deep dive' video I think, but I don't remember any detailed explanation on the skill system, dialogs and combination of those two from it. We were told just the basics for now. The game mechanics still requires much of explanation at least for me.
I would imagine its going to be somewhere between The witcher three and Starwars the old republic
The gun play is supposed to be skill based, but I'd imagine that there will be skill checks and improved functionality related to net running, engineering, or dialogue.
If there are any non skill RPG elements added to weapons, they may be damage buffs or special feats added to certain classes of firearms.
Define "RPG Elements" The definition may vary, whether you ask Sard, Kofe or Suhiira, or me, or anyone else 
Define "RPG Elements" The definition may vary, whether you ask Sard, Kofe or Suhiira, or me, or anyone else
BOY is that true.
Define "RPG Elements" The definition may vary, whether you ask Sard, Kofe or Suhiira, or me, or anyone else
Reading your comments my mind thought of the cyberpunk genre situation at the begging. We really need someone, or someones, to set in stone what defines a rpg.
I gave up on thinking what is a rpg for me, because is so deflating to think something and what I get is totally different rpg from what I know.
Like most things in life it's subjective.
What one person considers a defining characteristic another considers a minor element.
So ... not gonna happen.
I don’t think it is subjective any more than calling Grand Turismo a racing game. More complex, maybe, but not subjective. It’s not a matter of opinion, being a roleplaying game.
The subjectivity is ”very often” subjective itself, and wrong. Giving subjectivity too much leeway only leads to silly things... like pong being turnbased, or being turnbased being a matter of opinion, or that ”nearly all games are RPG’s because you almost always control a character of some sort”. (Those are all actual arguments I’ve seen.)
It has”X”, thus it is an RPG. It has ”Y”, thus it is an RPG. I like it, thus it is an RPG. That’s what is often heard, but that is not how it goes.
An RPG is a sum of its parts, the lack of any will diminish the whole.
A CYOA style branching storyline isn’t enough alone. That only makes for an interactive storytyme. Statbased TB combat alone won’t cut it. That only makes for tactical combat simulation. And so on...
There is definitely a definition for an RPG.
The subjectivity is ”very often” subjective itself, and wrong. Giving subjectivity too much leeway only leads to silly things... like pong being turnbased, or being turnbased being a matter of opinion, or that ”nearly all games are RPG’s because you almost always control a character of some sort”. (Those are all actual arguments I’ve seen.)
It has”X”, thus it is an RPG. It has ”Y”, thus it is an RPG. I like it, thus it is an RPG. That’s what is often heard, but that is not how it goes.
An RPG is a sum of its parts, the lack of any will diminish the whole.
A CYOA style branching storyline isn’t enough alone. That only makes for an interactive storytyme. Statbased TB combat alone won’t cut it. That only makes for tactical combat simulation. And so on...
There is definitely a definition for an RPG.
So much this.Define "RPG Elements" The definition may vary, whether you ask Sard, Kofe or Suhiira, or me, or anyone else
EDIT: I personally like this definition from sinister design: A game is a computer RPG if it features player-driven development of a persistent character or characters via the making of consequential choices.
Last edited:
Personally, I would define an RPG as a game where I can successfully (as in: being able to interact with the world like him would) embody someone who is not me.
That would cover the base.
I'd go with this or Kakita's definition. His idea of successfully and mine will vary though.
An RPG is a game where roleplaying is the game. Simply enough. Not story simulation, not combat simulation, not action adventure where the player "can" roleplay if he wants to. But one where the roleplaying of the character happens - actively and comprehensively throughout - through the systems, story and gameplay intent regardless of the players set of mind.
The character with its current capabilities, strengths and weaknesses, is a kind of a lense to the gameworld the player has to look through and bare with the smudges that are there interfering the sight (or "clean" some of them up through progressive mechanisms).
Without making an autistic wall of text with all the nitty gritties involved.
The character with its current capabilities, strengths and weaknesses, is a kind of a lense to the gameworld the player has to look through and bare with the smudges that are there interfering the sight (or "clean" some of them up through progressive mechanisms).
Without making an autistic wall of text with all the nitty gritties involved.
It had a decent idea going on for it, but.... Too many cooks along with a couple of other mistakes (like overestimating the hatred towards the original's filler combat and similiarly overestimating the love for "lots and lots and lots and lots of text").
Personally I hope it's like New Vegas. There skill level had a marked impact on gameplay and dialogue as well. You did not get stuck if you didn't have GUNS at 50 but that sweet extra XP always felt nice and you felt like an actual veteran courier who had done and saw a lot.
Or played one dumb as a rock, which admittedly was a completely different sort of fun.
Or played one dumb as a rock, which admittedly was a completely different sort of fun.
I don’t quite like these parameters because that cuts out one of the best RPGs ever, Skyrim. You don’t have to roleplay. Maybe we gave differing definitions of roleplay.
Post automatically merged:
Yeah FO:NV had a great way to play an RPG. I usually like skill checks but maybe for CP2077 I’d prefer % based skill checks, closer to FO4, because the stat system is sooo different from NV.
CP2077 has Stats like Body, Intelligence, Nerve/Cool, ect I don’t remember them all, those stats affect Skills which can be further augmented by Perks.
The example we were given was with a high enough Body stat we can carry bodies as a Skill, and with a perk we can run with bodies. That’s 3 layers of customization. This style if stats isn’t as conducive to skill checks, maybe stat checks but that would be really basic like Int and Cool checks.
Cool might work, I can see an alternate path for the way the Maelstrom quest played out if V had less Cool/Nerve, maybe V would have jumped the gun.
Last edited:
This is absolutely true. The players set of mind is his own thing. What I was saying was that roleplaying happens through gameplay regardless of that. And it shouldn't bother the player if he simply wants to play a game that plays like that.
we know every time you level up you get an attribute point that you can put into one of the 5 core attributes: body, reflexes, intelligence, technical, and cool. Each one of those attributes has at least one skill associated with it. Using that skill will increase the skill's level up to the level of the attribute it is listed under. Leveling up a skill will allow you to use perk points to unlock perks for that skill. We do not yet know how perk points are earned.
an example of this would be using an attribute point on body, which then through gameplay you increase the level of your athletics skill, which will allow you to unlock an athletics perk to sprint while carrying a body.
an example of this would be using an attribute point on body, which then through gameplay you increase the level of your athletics skill, which will allow you to unlock an athletics perk to sprint while carrying a body.
