Me neither. But one can hope(?) esp. since some of the restrictions seems arbitrary:
http://www.moddb.com/mods/realistic-driving-and-flying
But the physics in GTA IV were close enough-ish I think. You couldn't just press on the gas pedal and turn.
Havent tried the fifth yet.
It's really important that they get the First person mod in with steering wheels in though.It really helps driving because the wheel gives a frame of reference.
Last edited:
Indeed it should.
I wouldn't even be adverse to an idea of driving vehicles being contextual occurences. That's probably not going to happen, but in any case, I do think that hopping on to the drivers seat and wrooooming off should, to a degree, be more of a privilege than a standard commodity. It gives vehicles - flying or not - a lot more value if you can't just pick and choose.
------------------------
Can't say that I much care about "realistic simulation" be it applied to driving vehicles or combat or anything really. If it is super realistic, then it is, if not so much, then it isn't. The chief thing is that it is fun and good to play with, whether realistic or not. I don't think the "realism" of it should be stressed too much just for the sake of it.
Last edited:
Hm? Good and fun goes without saying kofeii, who would play a game that is not good and fun?
I think the best case for realism is difficulty espescially in driving. The rules are already there and driving physics can be explained mathematically.
Gran turismo is surreal as far as realism goes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=newX-mvGlm8#t=71
Gran Turismo was plain good and fun. You simply couldn't play it like an arcade racing game. For the more challenging tracks, you had to learn its quirks.
It's an extra consideration to take and I take it would encourage perhaps players to plan heists and such in advance or encourage specialization... and thus teamwork.
If each subset of gameplay is deep and requires a lot of time to master, it naturally prevents super characters that are good at everything without an artificial limit like an MMO. If the collision mechanics are realistic, then the getaway driver takes on a critical role and better be darn good.The cops also have a major adventage. You could spend a lot of time mastering Gran Turismo.
If the same philosophy is applied to flying vehicles. OK, you can sit in the cockpit of an airplanes, but do you know what to do? Put him in flying vehicle simulator 2017 instead of giving him a hard limit like a license.
In any case, contextual vehicles would be awful. What's the point of having an open world if there's no freedom?
I think the best case for realism is difficulty espescially in driving. The rules are already there and driving physics can be explained mathematically.
Gran turismo is surreal as far as realism goes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=newX-mvGlm8#t=71
Gran Turismo was plain good and fun. You simply couldn't play it like an arcade racing game. For the more challenging tracks, you had to learn its quirks.
It's an extra consideration to take and I take it would encourage perhaps players to plan heists and such in advance or encourage specialization... and thus teamwork.
If each subset of gameplay is deep and requires a lot of time to master, it naturally prevents super characters that are good at everything without an artificial limit like an MMO. If the collision mechanics are realistic, then the getaway driver takes on a critical role and better be darn good.The cops also have a major adventage. You could spend a lot of time mastering Gran Turismo.
If the same philosophy is applied to flying vehicles. OK, you can sit in the cockpit of an airplanes, but do you know what to do? Put him in flying vehicle simulator 2017 instead of giving him a hard limit like a license.
In any case, contextual vehicles would be awful. What's the point of having an open world if there's no freedom?
Last edited:
Yeah. What meant was gameplay>realism. In my opinion, there's no cause to stretch the design of a game that is intended to be multifaceted to try and compete with dedicated simulations. I don't think it's quite as easy as to just "do it like Gran Turismo". Having a couple of aspects be of such meticulous detail kinda calls for same amount of attention to other aspects. There's a heavy danger you are trying to do too much and in the end you get a game that is very heavyhanded and even cumbersome for all the "realistic simulation" in there, or very onedimensional when it comes to content since the few activities of such effort will almost certainly create the bulk of the content.
I think it's "as much as is necessary" for the intended experience. GT is a dedicated driving sim, and does it's job well. CP2077 strives, as far as we know so far, to be an RPG. It needs to do several tasks at least "well enough" and not put too much focus on any one aspect at the very likely expense of others.
There are different kinds of "deep". I'm more inclined towards simulating the character that the player builds (as a core element if an RPG) as opposed to the various controls that the player must master himself while disregarding the character.
Simulating driving should come at the terms of the character. If he is inept at it, it should be very hard (if even impossible) for the player to compensate; if he is a master at it, it should also be relatively easy for the player. Same goes for combat and the other various activities what ever they may be.
Yeah, well. That would fly in a game like GTA where driving is one of the core activities and the "freedom" (and almost the whole experience) consists only if movement and killing. Where, if you take away the ability to snatch a car, any car, and cruise around, the game would feel very rigid and limited.
I wouldn't want CP2077 to be that much like GTA - an open world simulator of very limited capacity despite the grandiose trappings and with largely meaningless freedom. Driving around isn't, and shouldn't be, the only or the biggest definable freedom the game has to offer.
True, but it goes back to Alfred Hitchcock's quote.kofeii said:
All it does is give you choice. Let's say you don't like racing games,your strategy would revolve around the fact you're a poor driver but an OK shooter/tech/medic/etc. I played a fair amount of ArmA, I still have no idea how to fly helicopters competently in ArmA and any PC that rides with me as pilot is bound to die.
And there's a gradation of skills. it's a mega-city, worse comes to worse,you could take the bus just like billion other commuters do. It's not like it's your only option.After that,it's up to you.
There are probably real technical limitations but I'm just saying don't willfully downgrade driving like Rockstar allegedly did from GTA IV to V from realistic-ish-if-not-quite-up-to-par-with-GT to arcade if there are none.
Simulation doesn't nescessarily detract from roleplaying.It's been a looong while since I played any MP so when I fired up ArmA II, It was surprising to see that some of the most popular servers were actually roleplaying servers(after DayZ). In a way, maybe I should have been expecting it because ArmA is essentially a giant sandbox. You do whatever you want.
Their community seems to be fairly well developed.
But stat-based driving? Man. CDPR are gonna lose a LOT of people there.
And what if you carve the story and character based on your actual abilities and the narrative that comes naturally from gameplay instead of arbitrary stat-based restrictions?
Agreed (but still, I would be pretty happy with Cyberpunk GTA). I hope they add a powerful economy that apparently has been willfully simplified in Witcher 3.
In EVE online and Star Wars Galaxies.You have a strong motive to play the part and you don't have to play pretend because there are real gameplay advantages to go along with the script.
A purpose for the killing and destruction.
Like stealing other people's limbs while they sleep and selling them on the black market.
Last edited:
I never learned those Arma copters nor jets either (they've been a pain since OFP). It was always teehtgridningly frustrating to go about them.
But, see, I'd want these options be viable, enjoyable and consistent with the rest of the experience so that I'm not stuck with a busride for all my characters and subsequent playthroughs. I've got nothing against racing games, nor good driving mechanics, but in the context of the gameplay - that being the RPG - I'd want the character to take the precedence (this comes partly down to the skill based driving) and the game to focus on delivering the experience with as evenly distributed focus on all the varying elements as possible.
There are games out there for all sorts of experiences; GTA style, racing, combat simulation, flying simulation, action, strategy, you name it. I'd hope, if I wanted a cyberpunk RPG experience, I could get a genuine one from a game that calls itself that, and not be stuck with Shadowrun and the bs fantasy elements there.
Well, yeah, there's that. But I'm talking about playing a roleplaying game where the game provides and actively supports the roleplay. I never got into nor understood the digital LARPing and play-pretend some people do with these sorts of games.
Didn't they say the game was not going to be for "everyone"? And it doesn't need to be either, it simply needs to be as good a Cyberpunk RPG as it can; as advertised. If it is designed well, it will find audiences beyond the CP enthusiasts.
And anyway, I wouldn't "restrict" trying out with skills unless the skill was completely untouched. The character should always be able to attempt if he has the idea (at least 1 skillpoint), but I'd have the skill distort the steering of the car in relation to the speed. If the vehicle was a flying one, distort the steering in relation to speed and altitude.
If your skill is low, good luck trying to be the getaway driver and not hit anything; if it is high (enough), it can work as well as it possibly can. Similiarly for flying. It doesn't need to be fluid and realistic, the player just needs to be made to understand why at the current moment it does, by design, suck and how to make it work better. That it is mechanically clear.
If CDPR uses the CP2020 rules the way I recall them being used, you can max out a couple of skills (at the expense of the other skills, of course), so if you wanted to be the pistol toting savant Lucky Luke with your trusty motorcycle or sports car, or a flyer being your proverbial Jolly Jumper, you should be able to. That's a choice to be made there that actually counts for something.
It'd be just an (action) adventure game (kinda like Walkind Dead, but with some gameplay). *shrug*
Might be good, might be bad, but it'd not be the experience I'm looking from an RPG. I don't view the stats as arbitrary. They are the character. They are the tool through which the roleplaying game happens.
I'm sure many other are on the same boat. And I would too, provided it was another, individual game and not CP2077.
I wouldn't mind a strong in-game economy. Great potential there if used right.
Last edited:
kofeii said:
Hm? I'm not sure where that shadowrun reference comes from. I'm not even a fan of shadowrun.
In open world games, it's more about finding clever combos then it is about the individual parts but it doesn't mean that the individual parts should be neglected.
There's a real need for stat-based skills because some tasks are tedious.
But DRIVING?Nah, too many people enjoy driving for it to be relegated to the pits of stat-based gameplay.
If you're not racing, GT is pretty easy As easy as driving your own real-life car. I also expect self-driving cars to be rolled out in the next few years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing
If we stick to the literal definition, it's actually a much better approximation to RP then anything I've seen in Diablo/WoW/EQ/etc. except for dedicated RP guilds.
And sure enough that's because RP in MMOs is utterly lame:.
"Sir Galahad had just come back from the far away land that doesn't exist in-game, talked to a king that has no in-game presence, have a background that exists only on paper and gathered a political meeting that no one actually attended but that other players are very much obliged to acknowledge for the sake of RP."
Strange that you have such an aversion to play pretend.
RPGs even as you define them are play pretend. If you can't power game you are play pretending. If you have to put volontary restrictions on your actions like suhiir regularly does in SP --- you are play pretending. No matter what you say about the character being something of his own and you being bound by his actions, he's always your puppet,your avatar and ultimately your mouthpiece. The character NEVER takes precedence. You get to choose your stats and your strategy .
In EVE online, you had to sell the idea that you were trustworthy enough as trader/spy/soldier/etc,
In my experience, that was pretty much the only circumstances when people could reliably and most importantly credibly "play a role"... when there was a social reason to cooperate, usually against another group of human players.
Yep but....
Name me one game that has stat-based driving and that have achieved even a modicum of success. You can't. The reason being is that it's an awful idea.
Not nescessarily. A narrative can develop out of complex mechanics. EVE online is a prime example of this. I also think that games like Hearts of Iron allow for a narrative to be developped without forcing it(e.g. you play to win and not to roleplay).
I'm a poor, lonesome cowboy, and a long long way from hooooome.....
Last edited:
Do you think there'll ever be a consensus of anything even if we somehow keep it on topic or take it to another thread? No, this is not asked sarcastically. :lol:
Even so, it should be clear that poet and I are looking forward to and asking for a completely polarised experiencens - he this, I that.
And that all of the discussion is technically on topic in some fashion since the overall gameplay is very related to the topic of "flying vehicles". Even if it may seem off at tangents.
Last edited:
Do you think there'll ever be a consensus of anything even if we somehow keep it on topic or take it to another thread? No, this is not asked sarcastically. :lol:
Even so, it should be clear that poet and I are looking forward to and asking for a completely polarised experiencens - he this, I that.
Oh, yeah, all that's accurate. I'm dropping a reminder, since a larger-ish percentage of the conversation was starting to head towards the feared What Is An RPG Land.
And if you think talking about stat based vehicle control brings out polarisation, well, you know how RPG-wot-is goes.
I think consensus can be reached when people realise their way is not perfect and that it's okay to change your mind on this here internets.
For me, I was perfectly willing to go without vehicles in 2077 altogether, but I have to admit, Mad MAx is a big part of Cyberpunk 2020. Just not usually my CP2020.
GTA San Andreas did to some extent.
It's only an awful idea if the games activities and actions aren't built to support such mechanics. If the ability to drive is absolutely paramount to the experience and you can fuck your game up by neglecting the metric (the skill) for the aptitude, then yeah, it is awful. But it is not universally awful. That none of the few games that have tried have not done it particularly well is only a proof that it hasn't been done well yet, not that it can not be done well.
Oooh! So did GTA V. You increased your abilities the more you drove. Pretty cool, actually. Same for shooting.
It did? Hmm, I didn't know, and never noticed anything but stamina sometimes ticking upwards (nor feel anything being "low") and a few occasions on something "gong up" but I was too late to read what it was. Though I also haven't played it all that much. We took turns on missions at a friend on whose Xbox we played it and got to roughly somewhere close to half way through the game (or so I would think). I'll take a closer look once the game comes out on PC.
On that topic... It is understandable if these sorts of mechanics are actually pretty lightweight in a game like GTA and provide but some slight buffs. The concept is sound though, and a game attempting to be an RPG obviously should go for a more heavyhanded implementation on them when it comes to what they do to the gameplay.
The thing is kofeii and suhiir are on the campaign trails.
But I king disagree that it's not relevant to discuss what an RPG is. .
It begs the question: He says because CP2077 is an RPG, then it MUST have stat-based driving.
But who says he gets to decide what RPG means and let it dominate the remainder of the discussion?
To be perfectly honest, even if it was all TB or a Fallout 3 pos of a combat system. I would still play it. A lot of my fav. games were very much stat-based games. It was just that the story was so well written that it counter-balanced the gameplay. I would just play it once for the story, and not bother with it again but I would be very happy with the experience if the story is up to par.
kofeii said:
Perfectly, if you want easily mastered and easily forgotten driving mechanics.
As opposed to a hard to master, memorable, realistic driving experience.
Last edited:
I'd have no problem is there was a driving simulator as long as it's just for travel and gives you the OPTION to play it GTA style.
I don't want to see some important part of the game dependent on the players skill at dodging road obstacles, getting from point A to B in a very limited amount of time, or hitting the right button/key in the correct split second 10-20 times in a row to evade pursuit.
I don't want to see some important part of the game dependent on the players skill at dodging road obstacles, getting from point A to B in a very limited amount of time, or hitting the right button/key in the correct split second 10-20 times in a row to evade pursuit.
Who says it would necessarily inherently be easy and forgettable, who's to say how it would even work mehanically through the controls? The thing there is, you can't master it unless you make your character master it too. And if you make your character master it, it will be at the expense of mastering or even reaching adequate levels on something else that might be useful and needed elsewhere. Not to mention that it might (should) take some effort to max a skill to begin with.
This is a simple matter of disagreeing with the preferred direction of the game. I do not want CP2077 to be the kind of simulator you want it to be. There is nothing inherently bad about simulators as many games try it out and are fun, but I don't play RPG's for that, and with these games I don't find it very memorable to overcome the frustration of clumsy "realism-to-a-tee" only to lose the thrill forever once I've mastered it on an adequate level. One of the things about RPG's, to me, is that you can start over as many times as you want, but you will always need to figure your way out of the ineptitude of the character, fulfill the role so to speak -- the possibilities that open or stay closed through progressing the character. This alone, when well done with multiple choices for skills and paths to take through and past the narratives and their interactions with each other, makes every playthrough a different experience. The inherent challenges and rewards are always there and give the game much longer lifespan than it otherwise would have. It's a different experience from the sim stuff, and it should be too.
And for the record... I never said it "MUST" have stat based driving. I through it out there as a possibility and my preference since that's how it was in 2020 - there was a skill for driving, a skill for motorcycles, and several skills for different aircrafts - though I must admit that I would be happy if there was no manual driving at all, and it was abstracted. If there is a skill for driving, and I think there should be, it should work for what it implies the best it can; if there isn't one, then there isn't. I want CP2077 to be a game that, while does bring some of the "new age" stuff along (some of which is just unfortunate bullshit that comes with the package), it still dares to bow towards and respects its roots of a more traditional RPG experience.
Last edited: