Cyberpunk 2077

[Kathandira]

FP-RPG that did Boss battles well? Destiny.

[Fencers]

Bullshit.

I guess "immersive gameplay" is just a word that doesn't exist because you decided it doesn't.

If you think that is BS, you are not thinking correctly about game design.

"Immersive gameplay" is a phrase describing the gameplay as immersive. Not an actual function. Immersion is a player's emotional reaction.

But even if you ignore that, AI is far more than just "gameplay" or how I do a shootout. It's how you interact with characters and how characters interact with you.
And if you think that doesn't have an effect on immersion, I can't help you.

Of course, it has an effect. There is no argument otherwise. However, the developers might not think X or Y behavior breaks immersion or is worth prioritizing over another element they wish to express.

You can see this commonly in a system like breath meters underwater. Some games have no breath meter, and some do. Some have generous breath meters, others less generous.

There is no right or wrong of it. It's up to the developer to set what they think is important in the gameplay expression. A given player might think it breaks immersion some games allow underwater breathing, so to speak. Some players don't care about the breath meter and just want the interaction of that section or whathaveyou- the gameplay.

[rhorle]

"immersive gameplay" is a phrase describing the gameplay as immersive. Not an actual function. Immersion is a player's emotional reaction.

Emotional reaction of the consumer is definitely a function of game design and something developers actively chase.

[KrayZ33]

Immersion is tied to one's suspension of disbelief. This can vary from player to player.

So what?
That just means AI is directly tied to it, lol.

You only have suspension of disbelief if whatever you encounter, isn't looking or feeling real, otherwise you wouldn't even have the need to.
AI not working like a real human being when it's supposed to represent a human being and is used in the game like that means that you need to be more willing to immerse in that illusion than otherwise.
If AI is especially bad, you have to actively remind yourself that this is okay and normal and how stuff reacts over and over again.

"Oh it's totally normal that they didn't see me here, after all this spot in the corner is *especially dark"

"Oh it's totally normal that this stranger I hide behind while a cop is aiming at me doesn't panic while I hold a gun near his face - I use him as a human shield!"

There is no right or wrong of it. It's up to the developer to set what they think is important in the gameplay expression. A given player might think it breaks immersion some games allow underwater breathing, so to speak. Some players don't care about the breath meter and just want the interaction of that section or whathaveyou- the gameplay.

Gawd damn... that's just another whole truck full of nonsense.
It's just common sense to include proper AI and AI interactions in a game that is 99% about those interactions.

If you design a underwater mission where you are 20 minutes under water you should at least include oxygen one way or another. Even if it's unlimited for the sake of gameplay, oxygen is still being used. If you don't even bother doing that, then don't bother doing an underwater mission with a human being that still needs to breath air and doesn't have cybertech or something related to it that allows for underwater breathing, if you want to call it *immersive*. It's unrealistic and not something established in the universe that my character can do. In fact it's the opposite. That means I have to SUSPEND my DISBELIEF to still feel immersed.

Same thing with the AI. If you make a game about it where you have to sneak, fight and interact with NPCs in every single corner, make sure it's properly done and doesn't stop working. Doing gunfights with NPCs that are suposed to act like human beings and those NPCs don't fight back is immersion breaking, because the immersion here is supposed to be about YOU being in a gun fight against other people. You are supposed to feel the thrill and adrenaline, or feel realy cool about whatever you do, among other things - you are not supposed to laugh at NPCs running against walls screaming spanish catchphrases or whatever because their AI stops working.

Saying there is "no right or wrong"... - don't flipping bother, lol.
It's absolutely wrong for CDProject to "exclude" (unwillingly) proper -up to date standard - AI in a game which world completely relies on AI interactions.
This is not about them thinking something else is more important. There is a reason why just about every single patch has AI improvements.

This isn't anything special. This is happening in bad books or shows all the time, what the heck are we even discussing here.
It's a breach of contract (between writer and reader, or between devs and gamer) that happens... and it throws the viewer/player/reader/ whatever back to reality.

[Fencers]

It's just common sense to include proper AI and AI interactions in a game that is 99% about those interactions.

To you it might seem like "common sense". The practical and artistic conceit are another matter that you have no say or input over but the creator's alone.

If you design a underwater mission where you are 20 minutes under water you should at least include oxygen one way or another. Even if it's unlimited, oxygen is still being used. If you don't even bother doing it, then don't bother doing an underwater mission with a human being that still needs to breath air and doesn't have cybertech or something related to it that allows for underwater breathing.

That is just your opinion on how to do an underwater section. Obviously so, developers have not all agreed as such. Some design it that way, and some don't. Both approaches have resulted in commercially & critically successful games.

Same thing with the AI. If you make a game about it where you have to sneak, fight and interact with NPCs in every single corner, make sure it's properly done and doesn't stop working.

There is no industry standard of "proper". That's like saying "fun movie" or "good song" are object things people can just make with a button press. They can't. Creators make concessions to this or that aspect based on what they think is most important in their work.

Doing gunfights with NPCs and those NPCs don't fight back is immersion breaking, because the immersion here is supposed to be about YOU being in a gun fight.

If the developer cares about that enough or over the commitment to another aspect.

Saying there is "no right or wrong"... - don't flipping bother, lol.

It's an artistic medium. They make it up, there is no rule or governing body about what you can or can't do in a game regarding its gameplay and "immersion".

[KrayZ33]

There is no industry standard of "proper". That's like saying "fun movie" or "good song" are object things people can just make with a button press. They can't. Creators make concessions to this or that aspect based on what they think is most important in their work.

That's such a flimsy attempt... you are trying to win an argument on the internet way to hard.
"proper" is something that actually works how it is intended to work - at the very least.
And CP AI doesn't even work the way THEY want it to work.

Not agreeing to that is just bollocks... stop wasting everyone's time.
There are accepted standards for sure. Your denial won't change that.
You can willingly break those standards, but that's a choice then.

My statements about AI were about *nothing* else other than *bugs* with AI. Everything else you think it was about, is just your imagination.
Bugs are immersion breaking. What is your point here?

Are you perhaps one of the guys the other poster was mentioning?

If there's AI glitches that means its a glitch and not intended my immersion isn't broken. I was playing it the other day and one person was floating above the ground, not intended obviously but I'm not moaning about Immersion breaking. Not to mention no game these days is going to be bug free, someone is going to encounter one eventually.

Yeah, something like that totally doesn't kick you out of an immersive moment right?
If you see the actual greenscreen in a movie, or the polygon skeleton of some CGI it surely doesn't have any effect on you, am I right?
Especially when it happens every other encounter or so. Just like when you can tell the props in a movie aren't real but bend when they hit each other and the metal does look like styrofoam. AI is part of the canvas you are looking at when you play a game like this m8.
"You just ignore it"

The AI just goes from "I'M GOING TO KILL YOU AND SMASH YOUR HEAD IN" - to - "Hmm? What was this? Must have been a bird"...
Surely doesn't break your immersion in that moment... sure.. sure.

Nah man, you guys are full of shite, I'm out of here. Cheers.

[Kathandira]

That's such a flimsy attempt... you are trying to win an argument on the internet way to hard.
"proper" is something that actually works how it is intended to work - at the very least.
And CP AI doesn't even work the way THEY want it to work.

Not agreeing to that is just bollocks... stop wasting everyone's time.
There are accepted standards for sure. Your denial won't change that.
You can willingly break those standards, but that's a choice then.

My statements about AI were about *nothing* else other than *bugs* with AI. Everything else you think it was about, is just your imagination.
Bugs are immersion breaking. What is your point here?

Are you perhaps one of the guys the other poster was mentioning?




Yeah, something like that totally doesn't kick you out of an immersive moment right?
If you see the actual greenscreen in a movie, or the polygon skeleton of some CGI it surely doesn't have any effect on you, am I right?
Especially when it happens every other encounter or so. Just like when you can tell the props in a movie aren't real but bend when they hit each other and the metal does look like styrofoam. AI is part of the canvas you are looking at when you play a game like this m8.
"You just ignore it"

The AI just goes from "I'M GOING TO KILL YOU AND SMASH YOUR HEAD IN" - to - "Hmm? What was this? Must have been a bird"...
Surely doesn't break your immersion in that moment... sure.. sure.

Nah man, you guys are full of shite, I'm out of here. Cheers.

If you do care to continue the discussion, i'd be curious what your definition of immersion is. I ask only to understand the level of immersion you require to enjoy a game. I mentioned earlier that this can vary from player to player. So i'm curious what you require to meet your definition of it.

[KrayZ33]

If you do care to continue the discussion, i'd be curious what your definition of immersion is. I ask only to understand the level of immersion you require to enjoy a game. I mentioned earlier that this can vary from player to player. So i'm curious what you require to meet your definition of it.

I'm not really interested, because I think you are completely talking about points I'm not making.
If you have to apply your suspension of disbelief, it means you are fighting against something immersion breaking already.
If you can accept AI that *does - not - work* how it is supposed to, even for CDProject's standards, then that's fine. That's how hard you can accept it.

Yet, you still have to tell yourself that "this is fine and how it should and could happen".
The fact is that even *your* brain (as in the brain of someone who gives everyone the benefit of the doubt - that enacts his own "suspenion of disbelief protocol") tells you it doesn't happen like that and that it shouldn't work like that.
If the AI doesn't work the way its supposed to or how a human being *EXPECTS* a interaction to go.... the further it strays from that path of what is "real", the more likely it is to break immersion. There are types that already lose it when an odd hand movement was made (A), there are types that only can't fathom it anymore when the NPCs do handstands in the middle of a gun fight. (B) The more it goes from A to B, the more people will break immersion because that is how the human mind works. In your life, you learned how human interactions are like, they are different from everyone to SOME degree, but at one point its the same for just about everyone but a negligible rest

Example: The expected outcome of the NPC to act when I shoot at him is to take cover, shoot back maybe alarm the others - maybe they run away, it depends. etc. etc.
If the NPC starts doing that, and then stops doing it in the middle of it, there has to be a reason for it other than "The AI script stopped working". If that is the reason however, it's immersion breaking. If you accept it, you tell yourself a big lie so you can stay immersed. I however will realize that this scene lost all the integrety it just had. I start second guessing the next move the AI does. I start to exploit their unnatural behaviour, almost unwillingly. I have to hold myself back so that I can "play" the "play" I'm orchestrating. I'll try to avoid situations where the AI would flunk out, so that I can tell myself that it was my excellence that made this possible, not the disfunctional scripts.

etc. etc.

And thus - AI is important for immersion and a big part of it.

[Fencers]

That's such a flimsy attempt... you are trying to win an argument on the internet way to hard.

There is no argument. You made a few posts about shoddy AI that broke your immersion. I said it might have been the case CDPR didn't prioritize that aspect of gameplay that was important to you.

It might just as well be the case someone else played this game and hated the driving, for example. Such a player might have felt the driving mechanics broke their immersion or marred the experience in some way.

CDPR could have built a very detailed driving model for the game if they desired to do so. But they did not do so and focused more on some other aspects of the game.

That's just how it is in game development, my dude.

"proper" is something that actually works how it is intended to work - at the very least.

Is it intended that way? How do you know?

There are accepted standards for sure. Your denial won't change that.

Where? Who is handing out these guidelines?

Bugs are immersion breaking.

For you. That's what I was getting at- this might be the thing you cared about over X or Y. But that doesn't mean CDPR cared about it to the same degree. That should be obvious given how CP2077 had numerous bugs and some systems are only developed so far; such as vehicles or AI reactivity in your case.

What is your point here?

Developers don't always focus on all gameplay aspects (such as AI) to the degree players expect. They might, and often do, prioritize some other aspect of the game.

Are you perhaps one of the guys the other poster was mentioning?

I don't know what you are saying here?

[Razamith]

You look at CP 2077, The Outer Wilds, to Fallout, Deus Ex, etc.

Outer Wilds, though, was just a massive disappointment on basically every possible level.

Technicality i know but both of these are talking about Outer Worlds (the FPS) not Outer Wilds (the virtual goty exploration game everyone should play)

[Endus]

Technicality i know but both of these are talking about Outer Worlds (the FPS) not Outer Wilds (the virtual goty exploration game everyone should play)

Oh god yes. Stupid confusing names. I mean the one by Obsidian, that completely failed to live up to what people thought that studio could do after FO: New Vegas.

Outer Worlds, where every joke is "uhyuk, corporations stupid". Its writing made Fallout 76's story look like Shakespeare. So completely frustrating and without any meaningful choices.

[KrayZ33]

snip

Okay, lets roll this up.

Please explain to me why you even quoted my very first post.
What do you think I have said in those and what my intention even was? What did I imply, what did warrant your post and what you wrote in it.

You said gameplay has nothing to do with immersion. That's *quoting* you when you say

Immersion is not gameplay

That's the thing I called bullshit. I have now given plenty of examples as to why gameplay for sure has something to do with immersion.
Right now you are saying nothing of value for this discussion.

Gameplay is part of immersion and thus immersion is also gameplay. How do you deny this?

I didn't give a rats ass about what CDProject thought was more important, you are just throwing baseless assumptions around that I didn't even care about?
The fact remains that the AI isn't robust, it's full of errors and that is immersion breaking.
It *doesn't matter* for whom or for whom not. It IS immersion breaking because that's how life works.
If you can overcome this, that just means your ability to ignore it is bigger than the error that reduced/devalued the immersive experience.
If you think an AI can act like that in my clip or in my example I have given without deploying countermeasures in your head you are de-facto not thinking like a normal human being, because that would mean you think human beings act completely normal in CP2077, just like they would in real life.
Something being immersion breaking doesn't mean that it kicks out everyone out of their experience, what I'm saying is that it adds to the amount of disbelief they have to accept. It's a sum of things that will eventually fill up the barrel until it overflows. Each person values different things as more important, but that doesn't matter.

Maybe that's where you got the wrong idea from what I said?

As for all the other questions, I don't feel like it's worth answering tbh.
Guidelines for standards? That's not even what it means in the first place for example.
If you want to create a realistic human-like AI, a standard feature would be to make them look for cover because humans fear pain.
Development in recent years made it possible and known enough that this is considered a genre standard.
AI not doing that is below industry standard if it wants to emulate human-like thought processes, which in Cyberpunk for example, is what the developers said they want(ed) to do - in trailers and interviews

Just to give you one example....
As I said, you are just throwing around useless questions that completely distract from the discussion we started.

[Kathandira]

@KrayZ33 For me, and I think what Fencer is also aiming at (I could be wrong tho), is that the gameplay isn't what immerses me. For me, it is the setting, the aesthetic, the sounds/music, the directing of key scenes, and most importantly the story that immerse me into a world. The action portions aren't really part of my immersion in the grand scheme of a game. Like watching a movie where everything looks, and sounds amazing, but the fight scenes are simply unbelievable (No way would a guy stand there are let themself get punched in the face like that). If everything else is great, then the jank of the fight scenes is excusable to me.

But you may need more than I do to feel immersed, or at least require a deeper level of immersion than I do to enjoy a game. And that is perfectly ok.

[KrayZ33]

The things you mentioned are all things that immerse me as well. It's actually part of why the AI is even more bothersome because the contrast becomes even easier to spot.
Contrast or breaking canon, after all, can cause immersion breaks as well.

A silly example: In this universe a dwarf is supposed to be mean and drink beer. All of them have very long beards and they would never cut them! If they do, it would bring shame.
In the next epsiode however, you see every other dwarf without a beard and declining the offer to drink because they don't like alcohol.

Something is expected of something.
If it doesn't work like it's supposed to (in this case AI thats supposed to emulate at least some degree of humanity simply stops working) it will hit a dent in what is otherwise a solid framework of a universe.
If this happens once it's easy to overlook... "okay, there was this one dwarf that was different, whatever - heck, he might even have had a reason - whatever!"
If this happens with every dwarf you meet, but the in-universe story still tells you "hey dwarfs are these creatures that drink bear and have long beards" you start saying - "NO THEY are NOT?!? What else doesn't match up? *looks around*". All of a sudden you see that dwarfs are not even smaller than you. That the reason they are supposed to be small doesn't make sense, they couldn't even work in the tunnels they dig! etc. etc.

It would've been fine if you are supposed to realize that dwarfs are different, but in CP you are not supposed to see the glitching AI, as it serves no purpose to do so. There is no "virus" messing with the cyberdecks or something.

[Fencers]

Okay, lets roll this up.

Please explain to me why you even quoted my very first post.What do you think I have said in those and what my intention even was? What did I imply, what did warrant your post and what you wrote in it.

I thought it was an interesting talking point how a gameplay aspect (AI reactivity in your case) can mar the experience of a player independent of what either player or developer desired or intended. We can assume CDPR didn't intend these bugs, correct?

Hence, "disinterest in the gameplay itself" as you said the AI turning to you in the diagram ruined the experience. Or in other words, immersion-breaking for you.

As I said, there is no argument. It's a talking point about design choices and how they might affect one player or another relative to what the developers may/may not have prioritized.

CDPR COULD have poured effort into the AI or any number of aspects in the game one might feel lacking. Though in practice a developer has to choose what they want to really focus on and what is passable as presented. All media has to make this concession actually- it happens all the time in film, television, literature and so on. Editing room floor, so to speak.

You said gameplay has nothing to do with immersion. That's *quoting* you when you say

I said no such thing actually. Perhaps re-read what I wrote and think about it for a moment?

Even expressly said, "Of course, it [gameplay] has an effect [on immersion]. There is no argument otherwise." to your assertion above.

What you are likely confused by is where I said immersion is not gameplay. That is factual. Immersion is an emotional reaction to gameplay. Game design is the intention behind those functions to produce X or Y effect. Might be to present immersion in a world or narrative, to scare or thrill, to be soothing or comedic. Et cetera.

That's the thing I called bullshit. I have now given plenty of examples as to why gameplay for sure has something to do with immersion.

Again. I did not actually say this but you seem unclear on that point. So I am restating.

Speaking to this question;

People mistake how they feel about gameplay, or how gameplay makes them feel in another sense, with the functional design of the gameplay. These are not the same things.

The gameplay of Amnesia or Resident Evil isn't horror. The devs might be trying to horrify you through design choices, certainly. But that is different from the gameplay and what you do to interact with the respective games. And why players can have very different experiences with those games as well.

This is not a matter of right or wrong, also restating for clarity. Not every player is going to be scared by the same things, find the same jokes funny, or have their immersion in the game broken by the same things.

Right now you are saying nothing of value for this discussion.

I am sorry you feel this way and will not engage further in conversation. Have a good one.

[Feltima]

I'm gonna disagree when it comes to Fallout, but only because the it doesn't even really have "boss enemies", for the most part. You'll get stronger named enemies, and in later games Legendary enemies which just means they're bumped up in stats and have a regen effect. But they're not meant to be "bosses" with unique mechanics, just tougher variants of regular enemies. Most often, the end of a "dungeon" isn't capped with a big boss fight, it's capped by a major interaction with the location or broader setting; you get to the core of the facility and shut down the out-of-control AI that's been spamming bots, or shut down the reactor that's poisoning the waters, or what have you. A lot of locations are just about the little stories they encapsulate. I wouldn't say Fallout is failing at making "boss monsters", I'd argue it doesn't ever make the attempt, because it's just flatly not that kind of game. Fallout's very much about the setting and its history, and even Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't come close to that open-world approach (because it's not trying to, to be fair).

Outer Wilds, though, was just a massive disappointment on basically every possible level.

Well said, very well said.

[KrayZ33]

I said no such thing actually. Perhaps re-read what I wrote and think about it for a moment?

Even expressly said, "Of course, it [gameplay] has an effect [on immersion]. There is no argument otherwise." to your assertion above.

What you are likely confused by is where I said immersion is not gameplay. That is factual. Immersion is an emotional reaction to gameplay. Game design is the intention behind those functions to produce X or Y effect. Might be to present immersion in a world or narrative, to scare or thrill, to be soothing or comedic. Et cetera.

Okay I just want to understand this though

I still don't grasp that line of thinking in the slightest in regard to what I have written in my post and you were refering to in context when you wrote that at the beginning.

"immersion is not gameplay" is like saying "A tree is not an apple".
A is not B... what does that mean in context?
Gameplay creates immerson however... it's part of it and can't be NOT part of it. I thought you are talking about something completely different than what you just said now because I don't see what I have written would warrant that "answer" to my "problem" or how they are even connected.


Your original post is not a wall of text or anything. There isn't much to read between the lines here so it's not like I'm ripping stuff out of context when I ask this:

"my disinterest in the gameplay itself" - what does that even mean when I complain about AI bugs? I just don't get it.. where do I lose you. Complaining about bugs and bad AI has nothing to do with disinterest.
The "gameplay" the devs intended, maybe? But that makes no sense, a lot of the game is about shooting, looting, gunning and doing stuff against AI.
Obviously other aspects are features as well such as exploration, moving around in NC etc. But when most of your game is interacting with combat (open or not) against AI, the AI should be solid and important. After all it's about how you do missions and missions rely on robust triggers, scripts and AI reactions. It's important for balance, skills, all kinds of aspects a game can have.
Why do you think they add patch after patch with AI improvements if they think it's not as important to their "design". I just don't understand how you come to that conclusion that warrants saying "maybe the devs prefered to focus on something else instead". The game isn't a Pokemon Safari.

You don't *start* ceveloping games with the AI, so obviously it's going to be queued up later in development and thus it's probably the feature that suffers the most when develop time gets short.... there is no such conclusion you can make in terms of what they wanted to do instead, implying that it wasn't important to them to create a robust AI and even assume that they could've done it when after 2 years, they still can't. I think it's far more likely that the engine just can't handle

I mean, I'm just quoting here:

"We've greatly enhanced our crowd and community systems to create the most believable city in any open-world game to date
The city streets are bustling with crowds of people from all facets of life, all living their lives, with a full day/night cycle."
"According to new CDPR interviews, Cyberpunk 2077's new real-time AI systems will allow for incredible dynamism. Thousands of NPCs will have actual daily routines throughout Night City's six districts, including a ton of robust and varied characters with cyborg implants, unique designs and animations, and day and night cycles."

So obviously their vision was that the AI would be very believable?

[Feltima]

It is hard to find solid info about what happened after December 2020 in CDPR, but it looks like company suffered MASSIVE brain drain. So massive that they had to terminate their adventure with their own REDengine and switch to UnrealEngine.

You're having a hard time finding data because CDPR didn't suffer a brain drain. They retained most of their staff as they are all well-paid and weren't working beyond the regulations set by Poland. There were several months in which the company was frozen though due to a hack that eventually led to the source code for REDengine and other assets being leaked, as well as their HQ being plagued by ransomware. The reason they're switching from REDengine is that it's just too costly, time and labor-intensive to develop AAA high-production value games and an engine at the same time when UE is right there to use and will butter you up with partnerships and working with you to tailor UE to your studio's specific tastes.

It's an ingenious business model, actually. For example, look at Square Enix. Square Enix has had a rough time throughout the late '00s and most of '10s. Why? Because of Luminous Engine. Square is also a studio notorious for developing its engines in-house and has been doing so for decades. Due to the difficulties of the Luminous engine, they had cut a great deal of content from FFXIII, leading to it being the most critically panned FF game. If I remember correctly, the OG FFXIII had enough content cut that dwarfed the final product three times in size, ergo FFXIII being turned into a trilogy. They used the cut assets to build the second and third titles. This also lead to the delay of Versus XIII which eventually lead to being repackaged as another critically panned mainline FF title.

Square was having a rough time, and their luck didn't start to turn around till they released Kingdom Hearts III which was built in UE. The game wasn't great, but it did sell well and from a technical perspective, felt far less clunky and a disjointed mess than any of the games they had released in recent years at that time. Things really started to turn around for square though with their second UE game: FFVII:R. The game was critically acclaimed, and while divisive among many fans, is the technically tightest Final Fantasy title since the PSX golden era. Square is now on fire again. They have a much better turnaround on their games now, and people are starting to trust them to make good games again.

If Square didn't transition to UE, they might not be around today. While CDPR and Square have different financial situations, this move is probably one of the best things CDPR could have done, and a strong sign that they're in good health is the fact that despite still making multiple in-house Witcher titles, they let a studio of former Witcher devs use the IP to make their own full-fledged RPG. When studios have brain drains, they don't retain good relationships with the lost talent, let alone let them use IP to make new games.

There is no studio making AAA games that are critically acclaimed, on in-house engines anymore, with the exception of Capcom, and I think part of the reason for their success is that RE-engine is perfectly suited for RE titles because they are technically modest in comparison to massive open world RPGs. It's just good business sense to use an engine like UE which has an entire company constantly improving it, and are willing to work with studios of caliber to further enhance the engine to suit their needs, freeing their devs to actually work on their videogames instead of tinkering with game engines.

In an alternate reality, Cyberpunk 2077 was built on UE4, and is considered one of, if not the greatest video game of all time because CDPR spent the entire decade on actually building the game they wanted to, instead of mucking about trying to get REDengine working.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

I dunno I think having their own engine isn't a bad thing IMO. But you're right the hack doesn't help(Not that people cared at the time, the rage was on the game)

[Very Tired]

Always confused me seeing all the work they put in designing this massive city with a wide variety of cars, yet they didn't embrace actually using it to it's full potential. It just a means from getting from A to B, they never embraced the potential for street racing like GTA. The only thing we got involving was one really bad and easy quest line with cars outright teleporting behind you. Honestly hope that's something they eventually add in the future.