Why there will be at least 7-8 side activities in Cyberpunk 2077

[BabalKabak]

From my perspective the game play mechanics could be outstanding. If the narrative is hot garbage I am going to notice it. I'd dock the game points over it too. I might lose interest in it completely if it's so bad the entire game consists of arbitrarily engaging in the mechanics, with no real goals in mind.

The contrary exists, when a narrative-strong game is boring because there's no gameplay to play with. I'm having issues with many visual novels because the story and narrative can be wonderful, no one tries to put gameplay bits to cut in between two reading sessions, and each reading session can take forever and get boring when the player doesn't have a single word to place. And by gameplay I ain't talking about placing the circle shape in the circle hole, that's not what a decent gameplay is to me hahaha.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I do not think you can isolate the narrative in this type of game and classify it as "non game play".

Yeah, it depends on how it is done. It has (way too) often been the case these days that the developer has set out to tell a story, way too enthusiastically I might add, and waved a hand to gameplay. This has resulted in a lot of games with good or passable story, but lousy or excessively mundane and unintriguing gameplay (talking just about RPG’s here).

Like I said, in an optimal situation the story/narrative is composed such that it works as part of the gameplay.... and not made at the cost of it.

In other words, you build your story around your desired gameplay (this does not mean you can’t preplan your stories and concept ideas; just to make sure I’m not misunderstood here), and with that in mind, you shouldn’t compromise your gameplay for the story.

If the narrative is hot garbage I am going to notice it. I'd dock the game points over it too. I might lose interest in it completely

Well, I can’t argue for tastes or preferences, so I try to speak on a general level (mostly always unless I state otherwise). The crux of my point is that ”games” are made to be played, hensforth gameplay is at the dead center of them. Anything more can, in relative terms, be counted as supportive features.

 

[DontEatMe]

yeah umm... NO THANKS

I was thinking something with more of an emphasis on speed, like Mirror's Edge, but I can see where you're coming from. Foot racing was just the best thing I could think of that was based around athletics. The only other thing I could think of is weightlifting, which just seems boring and completely pointless.

I don't actually expect much in the way of minigames beyond what we've been told. Doesn't seem like the CDPR style to throw stuff into the world for no reason. I expect more of a standard open world interactivity, nothing too deep but enough to entertain people between quests and story beats.

 

[fr33kSh0w2012]

Deleted

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Yeah, it depends on how it is done. It has (way too) often been the case these days that the developer has set out to tell a story, way too enthusiastically I might add, and waved a hand to gameplay. This has resulted in a lot of games with good or passable story, but lousy or excessively mundane and unintriguing gameplay (talking just about RPG’s here).

Like I said, in an optimal situation the story/narrative is composed such that it works as part of the gameplay.... and not made at the cost of it.

In other words, you build your story around your desired gameplay (this does not mean you can’t preplan your stories and concept ideas; just to make sure I’m not misunderstood here), and with that in mind, you shouldn’t compromise your gameplay for the story.

Well, the impression I am getting is you're saying game play should not ignored or sacrificed in favor of a well built narrative. I would not dispute this claim. The point was the inverse is equally true. At least it is when talking about a well designed RPG. Particularly when it's hyped up as heavily as this one. The narrative or the game play could be outstanding. If the other is garbage the game is most likely going to range from average to bad.

If anything, the above is how I think about RPG's I've played in the past. The few resting at the top of the list delivered across the board (for the time anyway). What they did not do is make compromises and sacrifices everywhere in the name of "limited resources". The narrative, game play mechanics, character depth, character progression, gear systems and, yes, side activities are all a relevant there. Given what certain past games have been able to do in these areas individually the only reason future games fail in any of them is because A, it's hard, and B, they are making cuts somewhere in the interest of time or money.

 

[SigilFey]

Given what certain past games have been able to do in these areas individually the only reason future games fail in any of them is because A, it's hard, and B, they are making cuts somewhere in the interest of time or money.

Bingo. And don't forget to factor in simple, human error. A production this huge, with this many moving parts, is an unbelievable undertaking. Add creative process into it, with all of its surprises, good and bad...and no one, no matter how experienced or skilled themselves, can ever be prepared for what the final piece will eventually become.

And, I'd argue that such regimented planning would be simultaneously stifling the production. The truly skilled folk in the creative industry don't know what's going to happen next, they simply learn to surf the wave without falling. They know when they have an opportunity to pull off a cool move and seize it.

Of course, like anything with a budget, if I choose to use resources and funding for one thing, that automatically means I will not have those resources or funds for anything else. Ever. It's about maintaining balance on the metaphorical surfboard. It will never be any other way. In the most ideal situation, time is still a limited resource.

 

[AlexiaRevan]

Saint Row come to mind (GTA too but I hate that game), stand in a road and collect money when cars hit you . Grab a poop-truck and paint the town ? play in this shooter game and earn gold ? race fast and get a medale ?

Honestly, I find all the mini-games boring over time . Its no different then doing daily in MMO lol mind numbing boring .

The only mini game I never tire of...is drinking at the bar

 

[-Naver-]

For me are side activities like spices on a main dish, enhancing the experience. But if you are finished with your meal you don't need anymore of them.
There should only be enough side activities to add some flavour to the main game.

When it comes to gameplay, I can live if it's a bit wonky or half-baked when the story is gripping otherwise. It still leaves you with a good feeling when you finish the game, even if the playing itself was a bit frustrating.
But a top notch gameplay can only blind you so far if the story fails on all accounts (debatable example ME:A). If you finish a game like that, you'll not feel satisfied. on the contrary, you'll probably feel like you've wasted a lot of time.

 

[gogmeister777]

I doubt there's going to be too many side activities and if that's the case I'm fine with it.

Activities based on existing mechanics (shooting, melee, driving, spider-bot assault course etc,) are what I'm used to seeing in games and are more than enough for me but, obviously, how they're implemented will decided how fun they are and how much time I'll spend on them.

For example, a shooting range doesn't sound that exciting, but I've played games that include them and had fun. Resident Evil 4, Evil Within 2 spring to mind. The latter had shooting that incorporated some kind of puzzle element. I can see that happening in a futuristic arcade, a neon lights/tetris style type thing, you know? In fact, given it's sci-fi, there's no reason a 'shooting range' has to be some static activity, blasting card board cut outs.

I've also played games where I wished I could try before I buy. Sure, you can always quickload, but in a game like this you might spend 30mins after leaving the shop before getting into combat and testing it out.

Motivation plays a part in the satisfaction too. Xp, money and, in the case of CP, street Cred? Special items/clothes? They have options.

Still, the side activities aren't that big a deal to me. I really enjoyed Gwent but, in all the ways that truly count, I'd have enjoyed TW3 just the same without it.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Well, the impression I am getting is you're saying game play should not ignored or sacrificed in favor of a well built narrative.

Yes and no. Gameplay should NOT be sacrificed, but there’s more to it than that. The way I understand that, is that it’d imply me having something against well built narratives.

What I’m saying is that you should build your narrative (well) around your gameplay and by the terms of your gameplay, not the other way around because when you focus too much on your story, you will come at a point where your story starts dictating gameplay (by limiting it) and then you start cutting your mechanics and features down to fit the story and it’s specific trappings (and so, coming back to the point about games with good stories and bad gameplay).

Narrative is a much more flexible component and easier to wrap around mechanics than the other way around.

 

[brocolymaniac]

If there's no playable pool in bars then i will be very disappointed.

 

[SigilFey]

If there's no playable pool in bars then i will be very disappointed.

So...anti-gravity billiards with exploding balls?

 

[brocolymaniac]

So...anti-gravity billiards with exploding balls?

I'd be okay with that. Very okay.

 

[CyberBrett]

So...anti-gravity billiards with exploding balls?

That sounds painful

 

[fr33kSh0w2012]

Deleted