Your Fears For the Game - Combined Thread

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Meccanical;n9609701 said:
Number one way to slow down the violence in my opinion is to make combat lethal as all hell. In the original PnP game, RTG went into exhaustive details on actual firefights in order to create something that's believable and treated with the proper gravitas. If you wanted to be a super hero you had to invest heavily in turning into one, and even then a bullet to the head would still kill you. Given the unique direction in PnP game took regarding combat, I would hope the game at least includes some resemblance to that.

I guess one of my fears for the game is that I don't want it to fall for the trap of doing what everyone else is doing just because it's popular or comfortable.

Violence should be only one of possible outcomes, I think. Aside from typical rpg quests, the world exploration/content should be separated into three segments: worldbuilding content( environmental storytelling), dynamic encounters and having more complex sandbox mission zones.

For first, all CDPR has to do is look at Mankind Divided.

When you look at most open world encounters ( and as a matter of nearly all rpgs), nearly all are designed around combat( and what's funny nearly all do it poorly).
Instead, diplomacy, specific options as your role( cop will be able to use authority), using the environment to your advantage( like in Dark Messiah), or open world interaction/simulation, should be as valid options.

Last will be the hardest part.

CDPR has little chance "beating" other action games or shooters in that giving that sense of fluid, "high octane" gameplay...all of those games have features that would feel completely out of place here, to keep that adrenaline pump non stop going.

This should be more of a thinking man's game(play) where "fun" comes from planning, discovering your "openings" in level design, experimenting with how your build changes your approach...and then execution.

I could see a typical mission playing like this:

Step 1: Acquire information on location/your target through your contacts or on the net.
Step 2. Prepare for the mission based on what info you have...full 3d map, type of security, patrols, alarm level, entry points, specific personnel background/information ( for dialogue), etc
Step 3. Live reconaissance. Make maps purposedly flawed/incomplete, like in Thief, so the player still has to come with a plan, live, on site
Step 4. Choose your own entry...blow up a power grid, create distraction, stealth, disguise, diplomacy, grapel line, etc.

As I see it, even character completely decked for combat cannot go in guns blazing like an idiot, no matter your skill or gear.

Sort of Deus Ex meets Shadowrun meets MGSV.

To do this right, they will need a sizeable team of people working on this exclusively, and cooperating with gameplay, quest and level designers.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Meccanical;n9609701 said:
Number one way to slow down the violence in my opinion is to make combat lethal as all hell. In the original PnP game, RTG went into exhaustive details on actual firefights in order to create something that's believable and treated with the proper gravitas. If you wanted to be a super hero you had to invest heavily in turning into one, and even then a bullet to the head would still kill you. Given the unique direction in PnP game took regarding combat, I would hope the game at least includes some resemblance to that.

I guess one of my fears for the game is that I don't want it to fall for the trap of doing what everyone else is doing just because it's popular or comfortable.

My hopes are that combat is lethal as well, with long recoveries after injuries to direct more of the players attention to what you should do before battles and your preparations for different encounters so combat has weight to it. As long as the game can provide the necessary gameplay balance so the game itself isn't screwing you over in cheap ways during combat. This would also keep the game from being a trigger happy FPS and preventing you from jumping from battle to battle just mindless shooting an blowing shit up, roll credits.

A FPS/TPS style of gameplay could still work, but I think only if your bullets are very lethal to the enemies, as well and ammo being expensive so every time you pull the trigger and fire that bullet, you think about what you had to do to earn it. Then it comes down to being a good shot, and using your skills in combat to conserve your ammo and resources. If enemy your firing at has body armor and you're hardly hitting any flesh, of course you're wasting ammo, but if you're good and hit the targets weak spots and can take em down with just a couple rounds depending.

Everything in the game needs to feel heavy, meaning everything you do matters. Its the simple stuff like maybe your really expensive gun you've bought and upgraded got damaged in some bullshit encounter you've just survived and now you got to fix it, well now you have to earn some money to repair your gear. There should be a high risk/reward system in the game for being patient and thinking things through vs just going full throttle... which may work at times but not many.

I guess one of my fears is the game using tired old mechanics from every other game out there. Hoping maybe this might be one of those games that changes video games for ever. If that's not asking too much...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Guest 4149880

Guest
Thinking about gaming as it exists today and one thing I hate, and hope CDPR is against are micro transactions. Its the fucking virtual apocalypse. CDPR views on free DLC and paid expansions seems like they've got a clear understanding on what is acceptable and reasonable when it comes to what they should charge for their content and sooo... hope they don't consider bringing micro transactions into Cyberpunk 2077.

And it really goes against what Cyberpunk is about. Micro transactions in the game is like saying for example, that the blood sucking corporations (CDPR) are taking (money) everything they can from the people (gamers playing Cyberpunk 2077) that depend on them. But in reality CDPR call themselves Rebels and stand against the corporations.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Good ol Angry Joe rant on Micro transactions in single player games. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSSNkexZ-C4. CDPR, show the rest of the industry you can succeed without fucking over your fan base. Its simple, Vote with your wallet, don't support these companies and their bad greedy business practices. Every dollar spent on this crap will eventually bite you in the ass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeastModeIron;n9652971 said:
Good ol Angry Joe rant on Micro transactions in single player games. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSSNkexZ-C4. CDPR, show the rest of the industry you can succeed without fucking over your fan base. Its simple, Vote with your wallet, don't support these companies and their bad greedy business practices. Every dollar spent on this crap will eventually bite you in the ass.

I hope to god CDPR doesn't ever do shit like this. I've gave up on 3-4 games all cause of microtransactions.
 
I don't really mind micro-transactions IF they're only for cosmetic and/or faster experience gain stuff.
As long as there's a way (be it ever so long) to obtain the exact same gear during normal play.
 
Suhiira;n9668321 said:
I don't really mind micro-transactions IF they're only for cosmetic and/or faster experience gain stuff.
As long as there's a way (be it ever so long) to obtain the exact same gear during normal play.


If they're shoving microtransactions, into a singleplayer game..., that means they're taking away from gameplay and items you would have had normally. I LIVE for customization in games. To dress up, accessorize, to feel like a part of the world. I'm not wealthy, I'm dirt poor, I get enough misery in real life watching others dress in nice things, some people may get their rocks off to a guns blazing power fantasy, but the dressing up side is a big part about what I love about RPGs. I don't want a dress up simulator, those are trash and for 8 year olds. I want immersive worlds to be a part of, be fabulous one minute and then go wreck something in time for afternoon tea. (With no limit to the extent I would love more domestic elements in an rpg without sacrificing smooth controls and combat).


You can't excuse "Cosmetics", except in free to play games, where you didn't pay to play the game in the first place. Cosmetics are part of the game experience all the same.

There's an exception to be made for full DLCs released within a reasonable time after launch. But if it's launched along side the game or too soon after, you must wonder, just when did they decide not to include that with your full game purchase as it was...
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Suhiira;n9668321 said:
I don't really mind micro-transactions IF they're only for cosmetic and/or faster experience gain stuff.
As long as there's a way (be it ever so long) to obtain the exact same gear during normal play.

Yeah well that's always the argument that as long as it isn't pay to win its ok, and its not, even for cosmetics or exp. And cosmetic's are suppose to play a big part in 2077. Its a balance issue and the simple fact that that content is being withheld just to have you pay for it later or day one for every item and defeats the purpose of like 75 percent of the game. The loot gain systems in the game are pointless if all you have to do is buy the content rather then earn it in game. Extra content should be built into expansions that actually add value worth paying for, not per item. Not for a retail game.

CDPR's view on free DLC and paid expansions, I don't see them taking this road, one of the view remaining companies that actually see it for what it is.

Claylex;n9668091 said:
I hope to god CDPR doesn't ever do shit like this. I've gave up on 3-4 games all cause of microtransactions.

I've been ready to play many games until they've announced micro transactions. And then other people buy it and hate it anyways and the game falls flat. I'm one person but I buy and support developers that make great games with good business practices. So I call them out as much as I want when game devs pull this shit, I don't support it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't touch microtransactions. Never have, never will. If the game is worse for not buying that shit, the developer should be ashamed.
 
Sirenapples;n9668411 said:
If they're shoving microtransactions, into a singleplayer game..., that means they're taking away from gameplay and items you would have had normally...
BeastModeIron;n9668451 said:
Yeah well that's always the argument that as long as it isn't pay to win its ok, and its not, even for cosmetics or exp.

My apologies.
I neglected to say for MMO types games.
For single-player, I totally agree. Expansions (worthwhile ones, not the crap Bethesda is currently trying to pawn) are one thing, but for a single-player game, you paid for it you should get it all.
 
metalmaniac21;n7062920 said:
exclusion of Nomads/Rockerboys/Media and other unpopular votes on the forum discussion poll.

I feel like RED might not make their decisions based on the five people who vote on polls on these forums, so this shouldn't be a problem.
 
BeastModeIron;n9668451 said:
Yeah well that's always the argument that as long as it isn't pay to win its ok, and its not, even for cosmetics or exp. And cosmetic's are suppose to play a big part in 2077. Its a balance issue and the simple fact that that content is being withheld just to have you pay for it later or day one for every item and defeats the purpose of like 75 percent of the game. The loot gain systems in the game are pointless if all you have to do is buy the content rather then earn it in game. Extra content should be built into expansions that actually add value worth paying for, not per item. Not for a retail game.

CDPR's view on free DLC and paid expansions, I don't see them taking this road, one of the view remaining companies that actually see it for what it is.


I've been ready to play many games until they've announced micro transactions. And then other people buy it and hate it anyways and the game falls flat. I'm one person but I buy and support developers that make great games with good business practices. So I call them out as much as I want when game devs pull this shit, I don't support it.


kofeiiniturpa;n9668721 said:
I don't touch microtransactions. Never have, never will. If the game is worse for not buying that shit, the developer should be ashamed.
This is how I feel, but I feel like publishers at large are constantly pushing to make it more and more acceptable to gouge games as deeply as they can.

Suhiira;n9668891 said:
My apologies.
I neglected to say for MMO types games.
For single-player, I totally agree. Expansions (worthwhile ones, not the crap Bethesda is currently trying to pawn) are one thing, but for a single-player game, you paid for it you should get it all.

Sorry, maybe if I read more in detail the preceding posts I might have determined that. I don't post as much as I might because there's a lot of topics with lots of replies that I don't have time to read through, when normally I read everything in a topic before replying.

I don't like them in MMO's either, but at least if they're free to play then you didn't pay for an experience before hand. If they're in MMO's you paid for though... . . Black Desert's cash shop is irritating. You get next to no benefit for paying for the game, it feels like being a free player in a f2p game. And the game wasn't fee-to-pay before it came to the West. They just went out of their way to make our western version of the game have both models while retaining the cash shop in order to make the most money.
If you have to pay to get into a game with a cash shop f2p economy, the game better give you the premium currency regularly for free and you just have the option to buy more if you please. Something like a weekly or monthly stipend, log-in rewards, and/or earning some from quests along side normal gold and xp.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Suhiira;n9668891 said:
Yeah well that's always the argument that as long as it isn't pay to win its ok, and its not, even for cosmetics or exp. My apologies. I neglected to say for MMO types games. For single-player, I totally agree. Expansions (worthwhile ones, not the crap Bethesda is currently trying to pawn) are one thing, but for a single-player game, you paid for it you should get it all.

It seems the only place it has value is in MMO's and free to play which is acceptable, I think. And Bethesda is losing my trust. I'm not looking forward to seeing what they'll do in the future when it comes to how they'll handle their business.

Sirenapples;n9670841 said:
This is how I feel, but I feel like publishers at large are constantly pushing to make it more and more acceptable to gouge games as deeply as they can.

It is the publishers to blame I think, they're are the reason for partially finished games, later to be updated and fixed. They're the reason for these cons people have come to believe that's just how games are these days. These publishers are to blame and so are the developers for going along with it. And they keep pushing the line to see how much they can get away with, to see how much they can squeeze out of their consumers. And the line between AAA games and mobile one day, no one will even see the difference, unless people stop supporting it.

Imagine Witcher 3, awesome game you play for hours and hours but guess what, the time it takes to level up is now 10 times longer, the loot you find is random RNG, and usually garbage (Destiny) so the extent to how far you can get to the end is limited now because your gear sucks. But guess what its ok, just go to any of the shops in town and buy loot bags $10, loot chests $20, and loot storage locker $50, any colors, gear or exp boosters you want for actual money. But its justified because there is a 0.5% chance any enemy or chest will have the gear you need, earned in game without ever buying anything. This is the future of games ladies and gentlemen.

At the end of the day, many developers aren't worried about giving players a good experience, its about how they can rope you in and line their pockets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeastModeIron;n9671031 said:
Imagine Witcher 3, awesome game you play for hours and hours but guess what, the time it takes to level up is now 10 times longer, the loot you find is random RNG, and usually garbage (Destiny) so the extent to how far you can get to the end is limited now because your gear sucks. But guess what its ok, just go to any of the shops in town and buy loot bags $10, loot chests $20, and loot storage locker $50, any colors, gear or exp boosters you want for actual money. But its justified because there is a 0.5% chance any enemy or chest will have the gear you need, earned in game without ever buying anything. This is the future of games ladies and gentlemen.

At the end of the day, many developers aren't worried about giving players a good experience, its about how they can rope you in and line their pockets.
In most cases it's publishers pushing this stuff not the developers, but yes, you're right.

With the free-to-play multi-player game model (mostly MMOs) they have to do something to make money, I have zero issues with that. It's HOW the choose to monetize that's the issue. Some do it in an acceptable/reasonable manner, say "Secret World" (YES, you have to grind forever, and inventory space is severely limited, but you can do it without $), most however lock needed content behind cash walls.
 
I'm afraid Cyberpunk 2077 will only be a beautiful world to look at, and there will be no random events or interactions during the world exploration.
 

Guest 4149880

Guest
Lisbeth_Salander;n9671461 said:
I'm afraid Cyberpunk 2077 will only be a beautiful world to look at, and there will be no random events or interactions during the world exploration.

I'm sure they're not that foolish to make a giant world with nothing in it. CDPR's future of the company is relying on the success of their games and they've committed themselves to Cyberpunk 2077, so I believe they will do anything and everything to make it a huge success as much as possible. From a company that didn't even start in game development to a AAA game in like 12 years from the start of Witcher 1 is amazing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeastModeIron;n9671631 said:
I'm sure they're not that foolish to make a giant world with nothing in it.

Of course it will not be empty, it will have the cyberpunk equivalents of smugglers' caches, bandit camps, monster nests and hidden treasures. :) But the question is whether there will also be something more interesting than those, outside the quests.
 
BeastModeIron;n9671631 said:
I'm sure they're not that foolish to make a giant world with nothing in it.

It's a shame that almost no developer these days put interactions, events and activities in their games' open world.

BeastModeIron;n9671631 said:
CDPR's future of the company is relying on the success of their games and they've committed themselves to Cyberpunk 2077, so I believe they will do anything and everything to make it a huge success as much as possible. From a company that didn't even start in game development to a AAA game in like 12 years from the start of Witcher 1 is amazing.

CDPR was a shy developer with Witcher 3, they were aiming high but they were unsure if the game would be a success...now that Witcher 3 was a success they're going to be more confident. You know what the hell does that means? CDPR might not be afraid to try crazy interesting innovations with Cyberpunk 2077.

Remember that time a CDPR guy said they were about to create a new dialogue system? “It’s about telling story via what happens, not cutscenes or other features,” -CDPR Mateusz


You know what makes me believe CDPR really cares about details when creating worlds? This recend world designing documentary about Witcher 3:

[video=youtube;oSS5T4od-GQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSS5T4od-GQ[/video]






 
sv3672;n9672181 said:
Of course it will not be empty, it will have the cyberpunk equivalents of smugglers' caches, bandit camps, monster nests and hidden treasures. :) But the question is whether there will also be something more interesting than those, outside the quests.
I know with W3 I got sick of seeing/killing drowners and wolves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom