Cyberpunk 2077 Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Sykar]

Good. It is retarded that you cannot even try to use a weapon because you do not meet a "requirement".

Hear hear. Penalties are fine when they make sense of course -- and there could be special weapons with requirements (for example, a smartgun could require cyberware). But "you can't pick up and shoot this rifle because you haven't put any skill points in rifle/don't have sufficient STR/it's above your level/whatever is retarded.

By this logic, a waif girl could pick up a 40kg minigun and use it. Doesn't sound realistic to me. Strength requirements are perfectly fine.

The other things you mentioned I agree with.

Making an utterly absurd exception to prove a point? The vast majority of weapons can be used by anyone. That was part of the reason they were made in the first place apart from the increase in killing power.

How is that absurd? A 1-strength character in any of the Fallout games has the strength of a waif girl pretty much, it's not absurd at all. What you're saying is that it makes complete sense for a 1-strength character in Fallout to wield a fucking minigun, or a rocket launcher, or a gatling laser. Absurd my ass.

Because I know you're going to wriggle out of it like a little bitch, here's what Sykar wrote:

"It is retarded that you cannot even try to use a weapon because you do not meet a "requirement""

And you wrote 'hear hear'. You didn't say 'hear hear except for heavy weapons'. You agreed 100% with what he said. So stop with the desperate backpeddling.

Sweet fucking Christ now you are obtuse on purpose, is it fun acting like a retard? The vast majority of weapons, like 95% and some games some like Underrail do not even sport those because, are NOT rocket launchers and miniguns and that is a fact in basically any RPG which sports modern day weapons. What is more you CAN fucking wear those guns in Fallout 1 and 2 even with a strength 1 character. Way to ruin your already flimsy argument into oblivion.
Also there is no backpedaling since you completely either ignored or failed to comprehend what "try" means. Does that word imply to you "use it with 100% accuracy" or do I have to spell it out to you what it implies?

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Strength

Strength is primarily relevant to two in-game mechanics: Carry Weight and satisfying the minimum Strength requirements on weapons. Each point of it grants 25 lbs. of Carry Weight (with the Small Frame trait, it is 15 instead). Not meeting a weapon's minimum Strength requirement penalizes aim accuracy with that weapon by -20% for each missing point in Strength.

Are you getting it yet, dimwit?

 

[Prime Junta]

Rocket launchers don’t need any more strength to use than rifles btw.

Source: personal experience

 

[Sykar]

Rocket launchers don’t need any more strength to use than rifles btw.

Source: personal experience

Yeah they are indeed quite light for their size, forgot about that. I was surprised when I used some during basic training while serving in the Bundeswehr. But even if it were theoretically a heavy weapon using let us say howitzer shells it still does nothing to my point that you should not be barred from not even being able to touch a weapon because of retarded magical restrictions.

 

[Yosharian]

And you wrote 'hear hear'. You didn't say 'hear hear except for heavy weapons'. You agreed 100% with what he said. So stop with the desperate backpeddling.

Dude, I specifically mentioned that there could be exceptions if they make sense, such as smartguns requiring cyberware. An anime handheld howitzer would def fall in the same category. I’m sure you can think of others. We were talking about the very common gamey trope of slapping arbitrary stat or skill restrictions on normal weapons designed for normal human beings.

Your exception example had fuck all to do with str reqs. Backpeddling.

A 1-strength character cannot handle even a heavy assault rifle without losing effectiveness. That's what 1 strength means: a complete wimp who can barely lift a shotgun.

Stat requirements are perfectly realistic and actually help define characters strengths and flaws. One of the big reasons that F4 sucks balls is the simplified SPECIAL system where anyone can wield any weapon, it doesn't matter what your strength is, or your perception, etc.

 

[Sykar]

And you wrote 'hear hear'. You didn't say 'hear hear except for heavy weapons'. You agreed 100% with what he said. So stop with the desperate backpeddling.

Dude, I specifically mentioned that there could be exceptions if they make sense, such as smartguns requiring cyberware. An anime handheld howitzer would def fall in the same category. I’m sure you can think of others. We were talking about the very common gamey trope of slapping arbitrary stat or skill restrictions on normal weapons designed for normal human beings.

Your exception example had fuck all to do with str reqs. Backpeddling.

A 1-strength character cannot handle even a heavy assault rifle without losing effectiveness. That's what 1 strength means: a complete wimp who can barely lift a shotgun.

Stat requirements are perfectly realistic and actually help define characters strengths and flaws. One of the big reasons that F4 sucks balls is the simplified SPECIAL system where anyone can wield any weapon, it doesn't matter what your strength is, or your perception, etc.

Good. It is retarded that you cannot even try to use a weapon because you do not meet a "requirement".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/try

Definition of try
tried; trying
intransitive verb
: to make an attempt

• you can do it if you try

transitive verb
1: to make an attempt at —often used with an infinitive

• try to fix the car

2a : to put to test or trial

• try one's luck

—often used with out

• try out a new method

: to subject to something (such as undue strain or excessive hardship or provocation) that tests the powers of endurance
c : demonstrate, prove
3a : to examine or investigate judicially

• try a case

b (1) : to conduct the trial of
(2) : to participate as counsel in the judicial examination of
4a : to melt down and procure in a pure state : render

• try out whale oil from blubber

b obsolete : purify, refine
: to fit or finish with accuracy
— try one's hand
: to attempt something for the first time"

Words have meaning you moron.

 

[Yosharian]

What they should do is let you pick and use any weapon (except those that might need installing cyberware to use of course), but without enough gun skill points your airming will be pretty garbage, and it gets less shitty as you get closer to the required cap.

Mainstream can't handle this concept at all, and CDPR are chasing the mainstream console audience. Why else would they screen the first ever demo on a controller with bullet damage numbers and all that other garbage. Console players are shitting themselves in anticipation, CDPR couldn't aren't gonna give two shits about some kind of realistic weapon skill system.

Don't get me wrong, I would love that kind of system, but devs just don't have the balls to put that in a modern triple A game.

Mainstream games can't handle this feature that's been in many mainstream games? Tell me more.

Name like five mainstream games where you can't precisely shoot a gun exactly onto a target because of lack of skill with that gun type.

Happy to be proved wrong, but I'm sceptical.

 

[Daedalos]

How quickly this thread turned into pure autism.

I wish we'd get abit more gameplay soon. and maybe a release date. kek

 

[Prime Junta]

Your exception example had fuck all to do with str reqs. Backpeddling.

That's because I was discussing stat reqs in general, not STR reqs specifically.

Also it's "backpedaling" you illiterate. Peddling means going door to door selling vacuum cleaners. Pedaling is what you do on a bike. Backpedaling is pedaling backwards.

A 1-strength character cannot handle even a heavy assault rifle without losing effectiveness. That's what 1 strength means: a complete wimp who can barely lift a shotgun.

Have you ever actually picked up an assault rifle? Things aren't heavy. If you're too weak to handle one, you're too weak to pick up a carton of milk to pour yourself a mug. While it should be obvious that Stephen Hawking in his later days would have had some trouble firing an assault rifle, we weren't talking about that either.

Firearms that are heavy enough for strength to matter aren't designed to be fired hand-held; there's always a bipod or tripod. A machine-gunner does need a certain amount of strength to carry the weapon, but it won't affect his shooting ability the least bit.

Stat requirements are perfectly realistic and actually help define characters strengths and flaws. One of the big reasons that F4 sucks balls is the simplified SPECIAL system where anyone can wield any weapon, it doesn't matter what your strength is, or your perception, etc.

Why do you keep bringing up the Fallouts? The originals did not have hard stat requirements. You could pick up any weapon and shoot it regardless of your stats. While the original SPECIAL had its issues, it did not have this problem, and in fact was better than many stat systems I can think of.

 

[Yosharian]

Good. It is retarded that you cannot even try to use a weapon because you do not meet a "requirement".

Hear hear. Penalties are fine when they make sense of course -- and there could be special weapons with requirements (for example, a smartgun could require cyberware). But "you can't pick up and shoot this rifle because you haven't put any skill points in rifle/don't have sufficient STR/it's above your level/whatever is retarded.

By this logic, a waif girl could pick up a 40kg minigun and use it. Doesn't sound realistic to me. Strength requirements are perfectly fine.

The other things you mentioned I agree with.

Making an utterly absurd exception to prove a point? The vast majority of weapons can be used by anyone. That was part of the reason they were made in the first place apart from the increase in killing power.

How is that absurd? A 1-strength character in any of the Fallout games has the strength of a waif girl pretty much, it's not absurd at all. What you're saying is that it makes complete sense for a 1-strength character in Fallout to wield a fucking minigun, or a rocket launcher, or a gatling laser. Absurd my ass.

Because I know you're going to wriggle out of it like a little bitch, here's what Sykar wrote:

"It is retarded that you cannot even try to use a weapon because you do not meet a "requirement""

And you wrote 'hear hear'. You didn't say 'hear hear except for heavy weapons'. You agreed 100% with what he said. So stop with the desperate backpeddling.

Works better in Fallout anyway because of the less granular stat scale. When each number reflects a wider range of the feature, being one off feels less dumb (6 vs 7 on a 10-scale as opposed to 69 vs 70 on a 100-scale)

It's always better to apply a penalty that scales off how far short you fall from the requirement anyway.

As I said in an earlier post, I agree that the sliding scale is way better than a binary 'wield it effectively or not at all' system.

By this logic, a waif girl could pick up a 40kg minigun and use it. Doesn't sound realistic to me. Strength requirements are perfectly fine.

Yeah but things like you only have 27 str and this weapon requires 28 is kind of goofy, I think a say a threshold of a couple points wherein you can still equip and use said weapon albeit at increasing penalties the further away from the required stat would be better than all or nothing.

Ok yeah, that I do agree with.

My point is that stat requirements are a core part of an RPG experience, when you do away with them you start to lose the definition of what a low strength character can do versus a high strength character. Strength used to be an important stat in Fallout games but in FO4 a 1-strength character can wield a missile launcher without any penalties whatsoever, I think that's lame and it helps make strength less meaningful when you're comparing it with the other stats, and meaningful attribute selection is a core gameplay pillar of the Fallout experience.

Real life stats:

RPG-7: 7kg (14lbs) + warhead 2.6 kg (5.7 lb)
FGM-148 Javelin: 22.3 kg (49.2 lb) + warhead 8.4 kg (18.5 lb)
Barrett M82: 13.5 kg (29.7 lb)
M134 Minigun: 39 kg (85 lb) (half that if modified)
SAW: 10kg (22 lb)

Even the RPG-7, a very light rocket launcher compared to the other weapons, still weighs in at nearly 10kg with the warhead, a 1-strength character could easily have trouble lifting that, pointing it accurately, moving around in combat while wielding it.

 

[Yosharian]

Your exception example had fuck all to do with str reqs. Backpeddling.

That's because I was discussing stat reqs in general, not STR reqs specifically.

Also it's "backpedaling" you illiterate. Peddling means going door to door selling vacuum cleaners. Pedaling is what you do on a bike. Backpedaling is pedaling backwards.

A 1-strength character cannot handle even a heavy assault rifle without losing effectiveness. That's what 1 strength means: a complete wimp who can barely lift a shotgun.

Have you ever actually picked up an assault rifle? Things aren't heavy. If you're too weak to handle one, you're too weak to pick up a carton of milk to pour yourself a mug. While it should be obvious that Stephen Hawking in his later days would have had some trouble firing an assault rifle, we weren't talking about that either.

Firearms that are heavy enough for strength to matter aren't designed to be fired hand-held; there's always a bipod or tripod. A machine-gunner does need a certain (quite moderate) amount of strength to carry the weapon, but it won't affect his shooting ability the least bit.

Stat requirements are perfectly realistic and actually help define characters strengths and flaws. One of the big reasons that F4 sucks balls is the simplified SPECIAL system where anyone can wield any weapon, it doesn't matter what your strength is, or your perception, etc.

Why do you keep bringing up the Fallouts? The originals did not have hard stat requirements. You could pick up any weapon and shoot it regardless of your stats. While the original SPECIAL had its issues, it did not have this problem, and in fact was better than many stat systems I can think of.

> That's because I was discussing stat reqs in general, not STR reqs specifically.

Alright, alright.

> Also it's "backpedaling" you illiterate. Peddling means going door to door selling vacuum cleaners. Pedaling is what you do on a bike. Backpedaling is pedaling backwards.

My bad.

> Have you ever actually picked up an assault rifle? Things aren't heavy.

I've used a shotgun. It was pretty heavy, and I had trouble hefting the thing around to be accurate. If I was stronger, I could use it better.

> If you're too weak to handle one, you're too weak to pick up a carton of milk to pour yourself a mug.

Oh come on. That's a ridiculous analogy.

> While it should be obvious that Stephen Hawking in his later days would have had some trouble firing an assault rifle, we weren't talking about that either.

What does a 1-strength SPECIAL character look like to you? You said Hawking as a joke, but he's not a million miles away from what a 1-strength character looks like, in my opinion.

> Firearms that are heavy enough for strength to matter aren't designed to be fired hand-held; there's always a bipod or tripod. A machine-gunner does need a certain (quite moderate) amount of strength to carry the weapon, but it won't affect his shooting ability the least bit.

In Fallout: New Vegas, the minigun isn't wielded on a tripod, it's carried by hand, and you don't need Power Armor to wield it.

A SAW weighs 10kg (22 lb) loaded, there's no way a wimpy person could heft that thing around without suffering a loss of accuracy.

It's not just wielding it for 1 minute and then dropping it on the floor while you catch your breath, the stat requirement implies the strength required to carry it around all day long, and in combat.

> Why do you keep bringing up the Fallouts? The originals did not have hard stat requirements. You could pick up any weapon and shoot it regardless of your stats.

I've already stated that I'm in favour of a granular system rather than a binary wield/not wield system.

I just realised I mixed up yours and Sykar's responses earlier on in the thread, sorry about that.

 

[Prime Junta]

My point is that stat requirements are a core part of an RPG experience, when you do away with them you start to lose the definition of what a low strength character can do versus a high strength character.

It sounds like you've played about two role-playing games in your entire life, both of which happened to have hard stat requirements.

Strength used to be an important stat in Fallout games but in FO4 a 1-strength character can wield a missile launcher without any penalties whatsoever, I think that's lame and it helps make strength less meaningful when you're comparing it with the other stats, and meaningful attribute selection is a core gameplay pillar of the Fallout experience.

Okay, make that three, where the third one didn't and made your butt hurt.

Real life stats:

RPG-7: 7kg (14lbs) + warhead 2.6 kg (5.7 lb)
FGM-148 Javelin: 22.3 kg (49.2 lb) + warhead 8.4 kg (18.5 lb)
Barrett M82: 13.5 kg (29.7 lb)
M134 Minigun: 39 kg (85 lb) (half that if modified)

Even the RPG-7, a very light rocket launcher compared to the other weapons, still weighs in at nearly 10kg with the warhead, a 1-strength character could easily have trouble lifting that, pointing it accurately, moving around in combat while wielding it.

Bro, I've shot an RPG-7* and you're full of shit.

Yes, hauling one around is taxing. However, what you need is stamina, not strength. I didn't bench all that much when I did my military service, but I always was pretty good at endurance stuff, and lugging around one was not particularly onerous. I've also handled a shoulder-launched AA missile launcher (although I did not fire it), and while that does have a fair bit of heft to it, here again the difficulty is lugging it around, not firing it.** As to heavy machine guns and such, you don't "move around in combat while wielding it," you lug it into position, set it up, and fire from there. Once again: the physically taxing part is carrying it around, not shooting with it. In a stat system which aspires to realism, this is already addressed through carry limits.

Firing any of those weapons is very easy and not physically taxing at all. The RPG-7 rests on your shoulder. You face in the right general direction, move your body to line up the sights, and squeeze the trigger to fire off the round. Basically, all of these are infantry weapons designed for normally abled people, not steely supermen of steel.

So once again: if someone has trouble lifting an RPG-7 to his shoulder or handling an assault rifle, then he is functionally disabled: he will have trouble standing up and walking without assistance. If that's what STR 1 means in your system, then fine -- but if STR 1 still represents someone who can function normally in most circumstances (stand, walk, pick up a carton of milk, turn a key in a lock etc) then he bloody well should be able to aim and fire any of these weapons as well.

*Okay technically a clone of an RPG-7, not the actual piece of Soviet hardware, for you gun autists out there

**With heavy weapons such as shoulder-launched missiles and rocket launchers, though, I think a hard training requirement might be realistic. Missile launchers in particular aren't necessarily so transparently easy to use you could just pick one up. And of course your training should affect your effectiveness with any weapon.

 

[aweigh]

I think F:NV already proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that "open world" can work beautifully for RPGs. Like anything else, a good open world RPG is extremely hard to get right, and it'll only happen once every blue moon just like with anything else that's of any merit.

 

[Master]

Yeah, too bad Fallout 1 and 2 weren't open world. Luckily New Vegas showed us it can be done.

 

[Yosharian]

My point is that stat requirements are a core part of an RPG experience, when you do away with them you start to lose the definition of what a low strength character can do versus a high strength character.

It sounds like you've played about two role-playing games in your entire life, both of which happened to have hard stat requirements.

Strength used to be an important stat in Fallout games but in FO4 a 1-strength character can wield a missile launcher without any penalties whatsoever, I think that's lame and it helps make strength less meaningful when you're comparing it with the other stats, and meaningful attribute selection is a core gameplay pillar of the Fallout experience.

Okay, make that three, where the third one didn't and made your butt hurt.

Real life stats:

RPG-7: 7kg (14lbs) + warhead 2.6 kg (5.7 lb)
FGM-148 Javelin: 22.3 kg (49.2 lb) + warhead 8.4 kg (18.5 lb)
Barrett M82: 13.5 kg (29.7 lb)
M134 Minigun: 39 kg (85 lb) (half that if modified)

Even the RPG-7, a very light rocket launcher compared to the other weapons, still weighs in at nearly 10kg with the warhead, a 1-strength character could easily have trouble lifting that, pointing it accurately, moving around in combat while wielding it.

Bro, I've shot an RPG-7* and you're full of shit.

Yes, hauling one around is taxing. However, what you need is stamina, not strength. I didn't bench all that much when I did my military service, but I always was pretty good at endurance stuff, and lugging around one was not particularly onerous. I've also handled a shoulder-launched AA missile launcher (although I did not fire it), and while that does have a fair bit of heft to it, here again the difficulty is lugging it around, not firing it. As to heavy machine guns and such, you don't "move around in combat while wielding it," you lug it into position, set it up, and fire from there. Once again: the physically taxing part is carrying it around, not shooting with it. In a stat system which aspires to realism, this is already addressed through carry limits.

Firing any of those weapons is very easy and not physically taxing at all. The RPG-7 rests on your shoulder. You face in the right general direction, move your body to line up the sights, and squeeze the trigger to fire off the round. Basically, all of these are infantry weapons designed for normally abled people, not steely supermen of steel.

So once again: if someone has trouble lifting an RPG-7 to his shoulder or handling an assault rifle, then he is functionally disabled: he will have trouble standing up and walking without assistance. If that's what STR 1 means in your system, then fine -- but if STR 1 still represents someone who can function normally in most circumstances (stand, walk, pick up a carton of milk, turn a key in a lock etc) then he bloody well should be able to aim and fire any of these weapons as well.

*Okay technically a clone of an RPG-7, not the actual piece of Soviet hardware, for you gun autists out there

The fact that you even use the word 'bench' implies that you're nowhere near a strength 1 type of person. Strength 1 is like some scientist dude who barely steps outside his lab and eats mostly pot noodles, someone who lifts test tubes all day instead of RPGs. Yes, that dude has trouble lifting an RPG. That's the point.

You're talking about lugging it around like it's a separate thing to using it, but the context of an RPG is a game where you.. lug stuff around. Which you need to be strong to do. Yes, there's an argument about strength vs stamina, but bottom line is that you need muscles to lift things and carry them around, even if it's on your back.

I think you're not stopping to consider just how fucking wimpy some guys are, and don't forget that there are women characters too, that's not abstracted in a gendered sense in games like Fallout but it can be considered part of the strength system.

Again, in games like Fallout you don't stop to set up a machine gun, you fire it while moving around and stuff. Same thing while wielding a missile launcher, or any other gun.

If those games had subsystems where you could deploy a weapon and use it that way then yeah, little or no strength requirements would make a lot of sense - and actually that could be a really cool mechanic.

 

[Yosharian]

Class and race-based restrictions on item usage are peak RPG.

Nah, there's no reason that a scientist can't learn how to use an assault rifle.

Wielding it instantly with no training is one thing, but having a class completely locked off from a weapon is bullshit.

Race-based restrictions... what? How do those make any sense?

 

[Prime Junta]

I've used a shotgun. It was pretty heavy, and I had trouble hefting the thing around to be accurate. If I was stronger, I could use it better.

Unless you're borderline disabled, the problem is your technique, not your strength. Big shotguns are heavier than assault rifles, but they're very well balanced; if you're holding it right, it doesn't take much strength to point it accurately.

What does a 1-strength SPECIAL character look like to you? You said Hawking as a joke, but he's not a million miles away from what a 1-strength character looks like, in my opinion.

A 1-strength character, to me, is near the minimum of what we call "abled." Somebody who is still able to function normally in daily life, but would need help, for example, lifting up a bag to an airline overhead storage locker. He should certainly be able to pick up and point a rifle.

In Fallout: New Vegas, the minigun isn't wielded on a tripod, it's carried by hand, and you don't need Power Armor to wield it.

And I already said that strength requirements would be fine for ridiculous anime hand howitzers. Not what I was talking about. Although that too should already be handled by carry limits.

A SAW weighs 10kg (22 lb) loaded, there's no way a wimpy person could heft that thing around without suffering a loss of accuracy.

You don't fire a SAW handheld. It has a built-in bipod. Normally you'd set up a firing position for it, stay put, and fire from there. It can be used in mobile combat, but in that case you'd charge, dive down, and fire from a prone position, with the gun resting on the bipod. Once again, your strength would have no bearing on your ability to hit a target with it. If you're in poor physical shape you'll get out of breath while trying to move with it of course -- but the problem isn't the weapon, it's that you're carrying more stuff in general than you can handle.

It's not just wielding it for 1 minute and then dropping it on the floor while you catch your breath, the stat requirement implies the strength required to carry it around all day long, and in combat.

As I said. in a realistic-ish stat system, that would already be covered by carry limits. If you're hauling around too much stuff, you can't run, then you can't walk normally, then you can't move at all.

(And once again, you keep harping on your 40 kg minigun when I already conceded that it's a special case. That's not what we were talking about: we were talking about arbitrary stat requirements for normal weapons designed for use by normal humans.)

 

[Prime Junta]

The fact that you even use the word 'bench' implies that you're nowhere near a strength 1 type of person. Strength 1 is like some scientist dude who barely steps outside his lab and eats mostly pot noodles, someone who lifts test tubes all day instead of RPGs. Yes, that dude has trouble lifting an RPG. That's the point.

Carry. Limits.

Plus an endurance mechanic if you want.

Your STR 1 nerd would be out of breath in one second of sprinting, and couldn't carry anything heavier than a milk carton further than across a room. He could still pick up and shoot a Kalash as well as any other untrained nerd; no need to slap on additional penalties on top of that.

 

[Yosharian]

The fact that you even use the word 'bench' implies that you're nowhere near a strength 1 type of person. Strength 1 is like some scientist dude who barely steps outside his lab and eats mostly pot noodles, someone who lifts test tubes all day instead of RPGs. Yes, that dude has trouble lifting an RPG. That's the point.

Carry. Limits.

Plus an endurance mechanic if you want.

Your STR 1 nerd would be out of breath in one second of sprinting, and couldn't carry anything heavier than a milk carton further than across a room. He could still pick up and shoot a Kalash as well as any other untrained nerd; no need to slap on additional penalties on top of that.

I'd like to see that proven in practice. I just don't believe it.

 

[Prime Junta]

----> tangent about stat systems in general

Different kinds of games need different types of stat systems. Obviously gamey shit makes sense in obviously gamey games: a turn-based isometric game will require different rules than a first-person game. In a first-person game you "become" the character in a different way than in an isometric party-based one. There it's much more important that the rules feel intuitively right -- it's much more jarring if you can't do something that you normally ought to because of some arbitrary rule.

IOW for a game like 2077 I would hope that they go for a ruleset which attempts verisimilitude. Arbitrary stat limits go very much against this. I'm not categorically against them in different types of games.

 

[unfairlight]

I wonder if there are genetically engineered catgirls for domestic ownership in 2077?

 

[Jarmaro]

I wonder if there are genetically engineered catgirls for domestic ownership in 2077?

Only if we don't have Socialism.

 

[Prime Junta]

I wonder if there are genetically engineered catgirls for domestic ownership in 2077?

Only if we don't have Socialism.

What manner of reactionary propaganda is this?

Spoiler

 

[Falksi]

I think F:NV already proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that "open world" can work beautifully for RPGs. Like anything else, a good open world RPG is extremely hard to get right, and it'll only happen once every blue moon just like with anything else that's of any merit.

Agreed. Sad thing is it isn't that hard to get right if they just remember the basics.

What's amazing about most OW games is that they should be all about discovery, wonder & reward, yet so many cheapen everything with appraoches such as copy-paste & level scaling that they kill all that.

I want to find the "Sword of Zenthrive", a unique item which does things that no other sword in the world does, and which I can obtain at level 20 but at level 50 still gives me a reason to use it in certain circumstances. Maybe it lets me levitate so I can solve puzzles otherwise unsolveable, or gives me x-ray vision for a few second etc.

I don't want to craft these things, I'm an adventurer not a builder. I want to discover things which add to that sense of wonder & uniqueness.

Cue The Witcher 3's plethora of junk swords & armour lying around everywhere. Over to you CP 2077

 

[Jarmaro]

I think F:NV already proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that "open world" can work beautifully for RPGs. Like anything else, a good open world RPG is extremely hard to get right, and it'll only happen once every blue moon just like with anything else that's of any merit.

Agreed. Sad thing is it isn't that hard to get right if they just remember the basics.

What's amazing about most OW games is that they should be all about discovery, wonder & reward, yet so many cheapen everything with appraoches such as copy-paste & level scaling that they kill all that.

I want to find the "Sword of Zenthrive", a unique item which does things that no other sword in the world does, and which I can obtain at level 20 but at level 50 still gives me a reason to use it in certain circumstances. Maybe it lets me levitate so I can solve puzzles otherwise unsolveable, or gives me x-ray vision for a few second etc.

I don't want to craft these things, I'm an adventurer not a builder. I want to discover things which add to that sense of wonder & uniqueness.

Cue The Witcher 3's plethora of junk swords & armour lying around everywhere. Over to you CP 2077

I hope Cyberpunk will learn from F:NV mistakes and make better difficulty curve, at 20~ lvl in NV you are already invincible, and it isn't even half of the game. Also, I am sure there will be weapon customizations.

 

[unfairlight]

What manner of reactionary propaganda is this?

Spoiler

I said girls, as in females.