Cyberpunk 2077

[Rustedsaint]

Yeah, seems like a difficult balance to strike. It just looks like arms moving around too quickly. Like they are not coming from the shoulders but are basically wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube man like movements.

Oh really theres multiple voice actors for male and female? I havent heard of that

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/her...cyberpunk-2077
Might be old info but it mentions atleast 2 voices for each gender

[Tech614]

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/her...cyberpunk-2077
Might be old info but it mentions atleast 2 voices for each gender

That might be why it's shit if the script is identical across the board. Normally you let VAs take some liberties to fit their style and adjust script as needed if they are all forced into the same mold don't be surprised when it turns out they all sound awkward and terrible. This is similar to why a lot of english dubs are bad.

[Makabreska]

Exactly, an FPS is going to require engaging and responsive combat. Cant remember this studio ever pulling that off before.

Yes, because this studio never did an FPS before.

Wall running has been scrapped.

[Koriani]

Its amazing to me how much people decide - good or bad - in what is *literally* only the starter quests to a 50-60 hour game.

Good or bad. The first five hours the pre-release people got to play were only the three quest options available for the PROLOGUE/Tutorial.

Does everyone really make their judgement of a game based on the tutorial?

Sure, the fighting isn't FPS "great" but this game is an OPEN WORLD RPG, fighting is secondary and that's pretty clear. Yes, there are a few, rare, games that do both well - but there's a reason this is the exception and not the rule.

Yes, the genre is cyberpunk. Clearly. So yes, I would say if you're not a fan of the genre then this game may not do it for you. But that should be a given. I don't like fighting games, personally (i.e. Mortal Kombat/Street Fighter/type games). So a company could be releasing the most innovative fighting game in the last 30 years - I still wouldn't be interested because I don't like the genre. So yes - if you're not into scifi or cyberpunk then this game just may not be what you have fun playing, no matter how much you may enjoy the RPG/Open world elements.

I certainly am not saying the game doesn't have its hype - and hype is just that - hype and usually a bit 'much' for 99.9% of games. I'm not saying this game will be amazeballs.

But just seems excessively judgemental or just a display of personal bias (i.e. you are sticking to the aspects of the game that already justify your decision about it) to make out and out judgements about the entire rest of the game because you played through the prologue/tutorial. But hey, you do you.

I'd just encourage those on the fence to remember this is 1% of the actual game and at least to wait on more reviews after release before deciding for yourself.

I am pretty sure I'm going to enjoy this game - love open world, enjoy cyberpunk, no worries. But I'm also a gamer since 1980 and learned before the year 2000 to rarely to never buy a game on release day without seeing how those first few weeks of feedback go.

[Edge-]

Its amazing to me how much people decide - good or bad - in what is *literally* only the starter quests to a 50-60 hour game.

Good or bad. The first five hours the pre-release people got to play were only the three quest options available for the PROLOGUE/Tutorial.

Does everyone really make their judgement of a game based on the tutorial?

I mean, if the game doesn't look good enough to hook me outta the tutorial...kinda, yeah.

Don't get me wrong, I've played and enjoyed games with garbage tutorials. FFXIII being a signature with its like 15 hour long snoozefest before things start getting good. But I don't defend that 15 hour snoozefest because it's garbage, no matter how good the game gets once the combat system really starts shining.

This is a big reason why you often see big set-piece action sequences in the intro experiences in many games - tutorials are inherently not the most exciting things around, so wrapping them in a big action/narrative set piece to provide an actual hook helps immensely. Recently played Rise of the Tomb Raider and Uncharted 4, admittedly both games set around a lot of big set pieces, but both introed with pretty big action sequences to try to get players invested within the first 20-30m.

I think some of it is just poor expectation management on both ends, players and CDPR. The game has been so incredibly overhyped, and these kinds of "crashing back to reality" reactions aren't uncommon for games that fail to manage their own hype trains.

[bbr]

There's a cyberpunk giveaway about once a month up on GGP (the one in my signature).
New one up today - but by the time you read this it'll probably be full already. ~300 entries.


For the game, do we even have an approximation of the system requirements yet?
I fear it's being overhyped - and by the time it actually releases we'll just be,. oh - is that it?

[Gallahadd]

You also could type "killall" into the consolecommands, the game doesn't stop you

Doesn't mean the combat is bad

That's a false equivalence. One is using console commands to skip combat, one is using a valid in game build that anyone can access, that is horrifically unbalanced and breaks combat. That is a huge flaw in the games combat.

[Jastall]

Couple things did look positive though. It is pretty cool what they have done with the the technology aspect of the game. Foreign languages translating in real time above peoples heads, I can defiantly see that being a realistic neural upgrade in the future. And Plugging in headphones / PoV in the car looks very immersive. And the hacking aspect of the game could have the potential to salvage the combat.

If there's one aspect I expect CDPR to nail, it's the look and feel of the setting. They did great in TW3, every location felt real and lived in rather than a level in a video game and the atmosphere was always top notch, especially in Skellige. I very much about they will dissapoint on that front.

[Gallahadd]

It's the same in the sense you're choosing to trivialise combat and then complain it's boring

Except the word boring was never used. The word used was BAD. Lack of balance in combat IS a sign of a bad combat system.

Especially when you're comparing a cheat with a legitimate ingame build. That's like saying "The combat in D2 is bad. I hacked to game to make myself immortal and there's no challenge!" that's not a valid statement, because you're choosing to BREAK the game, rather than playing 100% within the rules, and still ending up totally overpowered and unkillable.

One is a sign you cheated, the other is a sign that game balance needs work. One is on the player, the other is on the devs.

[-aiko-]

Doesn't mean the combat is bad

I mean, I specifically said I wasn't trying to jump into the overall argument those two were having, and the word "bad" was never used by me, but a fact is a fact. TW3 combat certainly wasn't balanced very well. You could make similarly OP builds by maxing out on Alchemy.

We probably shouldn't derail this thread with TW3 combat arguments, though.

[Gallahadd]

Is it bad if there's an option to make the game easier?

That's there because some people NEED a lower difficulty. Also worth noting, not everyone is obsessed with difficultly and feel the need to play every game on the hardest difficulty to get enjoyment out of it.

There's literally nothing CDPR, or any dev - can do about cheesing mechanics

Except we're not talking about cheesing mechanics, we're talking about a build that is legitimately broken and makes you Immortal. That's a balance issue.

We probably shouldn't derail this thread with TW3 combat arguments, though.

That's a fair point, my bad. I'll stop replying on this topic now.

[Volatilis]

Name me a game that doesn't have a playstyle that's easier than others

Any RTS game.

Warcraft, starcraft, age of empires

Sekiro.

[Gallahadd]

Name me a game that doesn't have a playstyle that's easier than others

WTF does that have to do with anything? Seriously, it's like you're picking random replies out of a hat...

It's not about having easier or more difficult playstyles, it's about having playstyles that are utterly overpowered, and break the game. W3 actually has more than one build that is capable of being functionally immortal, even on the hardest difficulty setting.

If there's one tweaked build that requires a VERY specific set up, or abuses a game mechanic, then that can be forgiven. If there are multiple builds that are all broken, that shows bad game balance.

Dragon Age Inquisition is another case of this. Rogue, Warrior and Mage all have at least one utterly broken spec, that makes even the hardest difficulty trivial.

But now, seriously, we need to move on, because this is hugely off topic.

[Andonais]

People need to take note its an RPG first and formost not a shooter, like Deus Ex and Skyrim it will stand on the story and character customisation rather than pure shooting/combat

[Gallahadd]

You realise though, stamina doesn't regen if you dodge/roll - and it takes a good 10 seconds to get back to full in combat. So basically if you spam quen you get a free hit every 10 or so seconds, it really isn't that broken

Feel free to stop replying if you want to stop lying

Again, your reply seems totally off topic. 5 mins on google will show you there are numerous builds that are nigh on immortal. Seriously, look into it. Balance in W3 is a JOKE.

[Gallahadd]

Again, find me an RPG that doesn't allow for that

Fun fact. One of THE most balanced RPG I've ever played, is also one of the most underrated.

South Park: Stick of Truth.

Seriously, just played through it again, and the balance between builds in that game is surprisingly solid. Played through all four classes and while there are a couple of builds that are a bit stronger (Backstab Thief, armour stacking Fighter) they aren't THAT much ahead of the game as to break it, or cause the other classes to feel unplayable, in comparison.

Fractured but Whole was also fairly well balanced, although that game had a couple of really busted Buddies. But in terms of actual classes the player could pick, they were all pretty good. Even once you reach endgame and can essentially build your own class from all the available abilities, which could so easily have resulted in some broken builds, they're all pretty balanced.

Dragon Age was also pretty good, until DAI. Origins has the one outlier in Arcane Warrior, but even then to become as tough as you do requires basically sacrificing your damage and a LOT of the utility that comes from the other spell schools.

DA2 was fairly balanced too, but mostly because every class in that game sucked ass. But that's a whole different issue, honestly...

So, yeah. There are actually a handful of balanced RPG's to pick from. It's just that Witcher 3 and DAI aren't amongst them.

Kinda feels like we've gotten WAY off the original point, though. Which was "Using a busted build that's available in game is NOT the same as just cheating to get through combat"

I think I've quite conclusively proven that point, don't you?

[Justpassing]

Man can you just agree with this guy so we can get back on point.

[Gallahadd]

Man can you just agree with this guy so we can get back on point.

Sorry, my bad. I really should have stopped feeding him after about the second reply.

Back on topic: I AM a little worried about melee. I know they SAID that after this demo they weren't happy and had made some big changes to melee.

but, seriously, without totally redoing the engine, what kind of changes can you even make?

[Orby]

Let's all remember this is an RPG first and foremost.... I can bet you 100% that people are going to be bitching on release about this fact. The fact that the combat might not be that great isnt my main concern :P

[Cyclone Jack]

Skyrim
Oblivion
Morrowind
Fallout 3
Fallout 4

It is a well known fact that Bethesda couldn't balance a scale, let alone a video game. They are one of the laziest studios out there, and don't even try to balance their games.

That said, balancing an open world sandbox with open builds is an extremely difficult task. Most RPGs that are balanced, only have a few skills per class, and have a very linear storyline. JPRGs typically fall into this category; though there are certain combinations that the devs clearly did not look at in some games. Other games allow for powerful combinations, but require extensive knowledge of the game mechanics, require meticulously planned out characters, and may even require quite a bit of a time investment. The Wizardry 6-8 trilogy would be a good example of this; you can make an incredibly powerful party, once you've put dozens of hours into the games, meticulously planning out each character in advance. In addition, many of these RPGs don't have many known major balance issues out of the gate. It takes some time before all of the little nuances are figured out, which then allows the min-maxers to map out builds and post them online for the casuals to look up and use.

However, the variety of builds available to sandboxes is typically one of the bigger draws to the game. Looking at the Bethesda games again, the main story is tertiary to the overall game experience, and can be completely ignored. They're really more focused on exploration and encounters, and give the player the freedom to make a wide variety of character builds that all play differently. Some off those builds are going to be completely overpowered (ie: crafting, stealth archer), while others will be quite balanced, or even underpowered at times. Speaking of, crafting in Bethesda games is the equivalent of in-game cheats; the crafting mechanics are just so horribly busted in those games, lol.

ARPGs, like Diablo, Grim Dawn, etc, are all balanced around basic builds (except for Path of Exile, I think they've mostly given up on balance). Once you invest a huge amount of time to get all of the specific items you need for one specific build, then that build can become quite powerful and trivialize the game. But once you make a new character, that process starts all over again. That's the entire premise of that genre. You can put 100s of hours into a single character, farming for the right drops, inching up those numbers, to get the maximum potential out of any one build; then you do it again for another character.

As for Cyberpunk, with the main of focus on FPS combat, I would expect it to be fairly balanced overall in that regard. Cyberware combinations will probably have a big impact on this, especially in regard to melee combat, and the more mods there are the higher chance that we'll see some builds outshine others. Now stack hacking on top of that, and we'll definitely see certain combinations outshine others. The more layers there are, the more difficult it is to balance, and the more of a chance certain combinations will be more powerful than others. Will there be broken builds? We won't really know until after launch, but I won't be surprised to see a few outliers.