This is supposed to be an RPG, meaning that you get to play your character the way you want it. This is especially true in this game's case, since you don't follow the exploits of Gerald, but of a more generic character that you can mold in the way you want.
The discussion on how many genders are supposed to be is largely irrelevant technically speaking, unless somebody can explain what differences a slider with those supposedly 6 (for some, others will argue that there are over 60) will produce.
This game looks awesome, I love the movies Ghost in the shell and Blade runner and this game has that feeling it's amazing to be able to play in a futuristic world like that. Also in this kind of future where people enhance themselves makes it so much easier to justify the rpg element of upgrading and getting stronger and better. Must buy for me looking forward.
They can take all the good qualities of a GTA copycat game and ruin the entire game with those telegraphed red highlight's that giveaway linear direction game play.
How about let the players discover everything for themselves?
Also the dialogue appears to be open but i feel it is going to be designed so that eventually no matter how you answer you end up at the dialogue/result they want you to end up at,so in reality quite linear dialogue as well.
Even at it's core best,you will only have TWO options,brute force or some side quest to do it friendly like,nothing new there,seen this type of questing system in both SWTOR and other games such as Dishonored.
This doesn't mean the game can't still be fun but it just appears quite linear.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
They can take all the good qualities of a GTA copycat game and ruin the entire game with those telegraphed red highlight's that giveaway linear direction game play.
How about let the players discover everything for themselves?
Also the dialogue appears to be open but i feel it is going to be designed so that eventually no matter how you answer you end up at the dialogue/result they want you to end up at,so in reality quite linear dialogue as well.
Even at it's core best,you will only have TWO options,brute force or some side quest to do it friendly like,nothing new there,seen this type of questing system in both SWTOR and other games such as Dishonored.
This doesn't mean the game can't still be fun but it just appears quite linear.
As opposed to what exactly? What game has the questing system you're looking for?
One pain point... does anybody else feel like the excessive language sounded super try hard edgelord stuff? They need to work on that dialogue. It sounds like a kid cursing for the first time when their parents aren't around.
"A c#$% in a convent"
"I got news as big as my balls"
This takes place in a run down and very dangerous society ruled by crimelords and corporations. Language usually reflects that. To me it would be very odd if they suddenly would talk politely and with concern about whether they would be seen as 'edgy'.
It is kind of like how people tend to throw away more trash on the ground if the surroundings are already dirty. If you live there, you might not even consider looking for a trash can. But from the outside, you would maybe think 'oh they are so edgy by obviously ignoring those trash cans'. With language and other social habits it is basically the same.
I am glad that some creators stick to create their own setting for
their story instead of adjusting it to make it easier to stomach for
some people who can't seem to see past their own surroundings. To me the language fits the society they try to portray in Cyberpunk 2077.
Or, just as likely in a futuristic sci-fi setting, cybernetic modifications to arms and shoulders provide shock absorption and stability strength to reduce or eliminate recoil.
Not to mention if technology has advanced so much that they can do all those things to a human body its rather absurd to think firearm technology hasn't advance significantly from today's standards as well.
With the exception that in over a hundred years of firearm technology, that's something that still exists.....gunsmiths who specialize in action shooting sports, are always looking to make a gun shoot flat, and while there is progress, I don't think anyone expects to achieve flat. Flatter? Sure. As flat as in the demo? Not likely.
Like I said, it'll work for a vast majority of the game playing public, thanks for proving that out. Those folks who have a little more experience with that sort of thing...it's definitely a detail that doesn't work well at all.
Well gee Wally, blindness, deafness, paralysis, death due to non-transplantible organ failure, etc still exist today as well, yet in the realm of cyberpunk are all nonevents, as they really can make you better, stronger, faster. And in some examples of the fiction genre, damned near immortal. So again, if fictional medical technology has advanced to this level, there is no reason fictional weapons tech hasn't followed suit.
Yeah, exactly.
This isn't Arthur C Clark, Larry Niven, and, to a much lesser extent, Heinlein sci-fi which are heavily rooted in science fact. This is PK Dick, Zelazny, Farmer, Ellison, Gibson, Sterling, and others who used science possibilities to explore questions about our reality, what it means to be human, sentience, and where our humanity meets others' existence. What containers qualify for humanity and sentience? What is real and what would it mean to detach our consciousness from the physical reality - in virtual reality, in bio/mechanical organisms.
Science history is littered with reality showing humanity that its limitations are self-imposed. You can't go faster than sound. You can't go faster than light. Projecting mass and energy at other things only works one way.
The argument overall is a bit silly when you think that all the other stuff in the game isn't any more plausible than linear "bullets".
What if the weapon worked like this. There is a superheated plasma round that is fired and kept energized by a laser. The plasma payload, delivered on line of sight because it's travelling near the speed of light, cools just before calculated impact into a molten slug.
Role-playing games and science fiction are about using our imaginations to consider the possibilities.
Hey, folks are still shooting rounds out of a 100 year old M1911a1 Browning design (and iterations). The game did show homing bullets and other technical advancements. And remember that the game demo was showing off early slices of the game. Would not be a particularly good design to start you off with plasma/lazer dongle blasters. Save that for mid game and give the player the agency to choose. Not to mention there are significant examples of stuff in the modern world that is done in a very old fashioned way, not because the tech isn't there, but because the social milieu holds things back.
You don't want to make everything tech incomprehensible, as you have to engage the expectations of the people buying the game.
I'm not advocating incomprehensible. My point is this sub-genre relies a lot more on science fantasy than hard science fact. Authors like Clarke, Niven, and those with engineering and maths backgrounds that used science to explain the plausibility of the fiction. Cyberpunk doesn't as much. It's more like Star Wars and Star Trek that uses sci-fi to explore issues where society and tech meet and how that affects and transforms us.
Well, the Cyberpunk crew is far less interested in focusing on the nuts and bolts of the scientific invention, and more on it's effect on, and use by, society. Present day is filled with stuff that most folks have no idea how it works, they just use it. The style and flair is more important. No reason to assume that the future will unfold differently, especially in the seedy Cyber'd streets.
In the abstraction that is game design, you specifically don't want all the cool stuff at the beginning (which is what this slice is). They put in just enough cool cybernetics to give you an idea of how it will function. The first iteration of the modern Deus Ex followed this sort of path as an example. It also helps to ramp up to the more edgy or peculiar angles of tech progress later in the game.
Oh, and while it may be a bit of appeal to authority, I went to school with Sterling, and played in his D&D campaign (not cyberpunk, Asian fantasy). So yeah, read all the early genre stuff.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I think they have nailed the world, and the environment. For a 48 minute demo, it definitely had the feel of the world down, and it's someplace that I could spend some serious time inhabiting, wanting to explore every little bit of it. As an old Shadowrun fan, this captures a hell of a lot of the vibe, and is top notch. Huge reason I'd want to spend some time in-game.
The dialogue did sound forced, and honestly, it did detract a bit from everything. They tried to put it on the edge, but I think they missed the boat in a few places. Close, but no cigar, and where it's off, just kind of detracts from the entire package.
Gun-play did look weak. Don't get me wrong, the ricochet skill, and other features do look cool. The basic lack of muzzle rise while shooting looks horrible. I realize that 90% of people won't give a damn, and probably think that's how guns work, to them it's a non-factor. Hell, just make it easy, right? Problem is that people who do know better are required to suspend some disbelief, and accept it. Maybe 59 years from now gun smiths will have invented some new tech that eliminates all muzzle rise for a completely flat shooting gun....okay...
For me, and I'm not saying for everyone, if I have to suspend belief because something is so obviously flawed, then it makes it a little harder all the way around to accept the things that have done "right". (I realize "right" is subjective.) Game looks like it'll be a big hit, and I expect I'll probably pick up a copy, but would definitely hope that some of the little details get cleaned up a bit. Those details would go a long way....even admitting they won't be important to everyone.
Or, just as likely in a futuristic sci-fi setting, cybernetic modifications to arms and shoulders provide shock absorption and stability strength to reduce or eliminate recoil.
Not to mention if technology has advanced so much that they can do all those things to a human body its rather absurd to think firearm technology hasn't advance significantly from today's standards as well.
With the exception that in over a hundred years of firearm technology, that's something that still exists.....gunsmiths who specialize in action shooting sports, are always looking to make a gun shoot flat, and while there is progress, I don't think anyone expects to achieve flat. Flatter? Sure. As flat as in the demo? Not likely.
Like I said, it'll work for a vast majority of the game playing public, thanks for proving that out. Those folks who have a little more experience with that sort of thing...it's definitely a detail that doesn't work well at all.
Well gee Wally, blindness, deafness, paralysis, death due to non-transplantible organ failure, etc still exist today as well, yet in the realm of cyberpunk are all nonevents, as they really can make you better, stronger, faster. And in some examples of the fiction genre, damned near immortal. So again, if fictional medical technology has advanced to this level, there is no reason fictional weapons tech hasn't followed suit.
Yeah, exactly.
This isn't Arthur C Clark, Larry Niven, and, to a much lesser extent, Heinlein sci-fi which are heavily rooted in science fact. This is PK Dick, Zelazny, Farmer, Ellison, Gibson, Sterling, and others who used science possibilities to explore questions about our reality, what it means to be human, sentience, and where our humanity meets others' existence. What containers qualify for humanity and sentience? What is real and what would it mean to detach our consciousness from the physical reality - in virtual reality, in bio/mechanical organisms.
Science history is littered with reality showing humanity that its limitations are self-imposed. You can't go faster than sound. You can't go faster than light. Projecting mass and energy at other things only works one way.
The argument overall is a bit silly when you think that all the other stuff in the game isn't any more plausible than linear "bullets".
What if the weapon worked like this. There is a superheated plasma round that is fired and kept energized by a laser. The plasma payload, delivered on line of sight because it's travelling near the speed of light, cools just before calculated impact into a molten slug.
Role-playing games and science fiction are about using our imaginations to consider the possibilities.
Hey, folks are still shooting rounds out of a 100 year old M1911a1 Browning design (and iterations). The game did show homing bullets and other technical advancements. And remember that the game demo was showing off early slices of the game. Would not be a particularly good design to start you off with plasma/lazer dongle blasters. Save that for mid game and give the player the agency to choose. Not to mention there are significant examples of stuff in the modern world that is done in a very old fashioned way, not because the tech isn't there, but because the social milieu holds things back.
You don't want to make everything tech incomprehensible, as you have to engage the expectations of the people buying the game.
I'm not advocating incomprehensible. My point is this sub-genre relies a lot more on science fantasy than hard science fact. Authors like Clarke, Niven, and those with engineering and maths backgrounds that used science to explain the plausibility of the fiction. Cyberpunk doesn't as much. It's more like Star Wars and Star Trek that uses sci-fi to explore issues where society and tech meet and how that affects and transforms us.
Yes it is much more social science fiction than hard science fiction. But that isn't exactly new in the field. It predates popular "B" TV and movies like Star Trek and Star Wars by decades. H. G. Wells did it with the Time Machine and Asimov and Bradbury were masters at it. Even the Source material for Blade Runner, Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was much more about the social issues surrounding robotics that were so advanced as to be indistinguishable from human than how robotics could advance so much from their current solid scientific foundations in just a few decades.
Most good SciFi has just enough science in it to make the technology seem plausible and the scientist / mathematician writers who obsess over details are actually in the minority and not usually as good at it as the writers who research the science. There are exceptions like Clarke, Wyndham, etc., but someone like William Gibson is more typical. Gibson was highly computer illiterate when he wrote Neuromancer... on a typewriter
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
DMKano, its a game. I get the sense you don't like it, and you certainly don't have to play it. Do you think your 20k posts make anything you say more valid than anyone elses' Puhlease!
This isn't Arthur C Clark, Larry Niven, and, to a much lesser extent, Heinlein sci-fi which are heavily rooted in science fact. This is PK Dick, Zelazny, Farmer, Ellison, Gibson, Sterling, and others who used science possibilities to explore questions about our reality, what it means to be human, sentience, and where our humanity meets others' existence. What containers qualify for humanity and sentience? What is real and what would it mean to detach our consciousness from the physical reality - in virtual reality, in bio/mechanical organisms.
Science history is littered with reality showing humanity that its limitations are self-imposed. You can't go faster than sound. You can't go faster than light. Projecting mass and energy at other things only works one way.
The argument overall is a bit silly when you think that all the other stuff in the game isn't any more plausible than linear "bullets".
What if the weapon worked like this. There is a superheated plasma round that is fired and kept energized by a laser. The plasma payload, delivered on line of sight because it's travelling near the speed of light, cools just before calculated impact into a molten slug.
Role-playing games and science fiction are about using our imaginations to consider the possibilities.
Hey, folks are still shooting rounds out of a 100 year old M1911a1 Browning design (and iterations). The game did show homing bullets and other technical advancements. And remember that the game demo was showing off early slices of the game. Would not be a particularly good design to start you off with plasma/lazer dongle blasters. Save that for mid game and give the player the agency to choose. Not to mention there are significant examples of stuff in the modern world that is done in a very old fashioned way, not because the tech isn't there, but because the social milieu holds things back.
You don't want to make everything tech incomprehensible, as you have to engage the expectations of the people buying the game.
I'm not advocating incomprehensible. My point is this sub-genre relies a lot more on science fantasy than hard science fact. Authors like Clarke, Niven, and those with engineering and maths backgrounds that used science to explain the plausibility of the fiction. Cyberpunk doesn't as much. It's more like Star Wars and Star Trek that uses sci-fi to explore issues where society and tech meet and how that affects and transforms us.
Yes it is much more social science fiction than hard science fiction. But that isn't exactly new in the field. It predates popular "B" TV and movies like Star Trek and Star Wars by decades. H. G. Wells did it with the Time Machine and Asimov and Bradbury were masters at it. Even the Source material for Blade Runner, Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was much more about the social issues surrounding robotics that were so advanced as to be indistinguishable from human than how robotics could advance so much from their current solid scientific foundations in just a few decades.
Most good SciFi has just enough science in it to make the technology seem plausible and the scientist / mathematician writers who obsess over details are actually in the minority and not usually as good at it as the writers who research the science. There are exceptions like Clarke, Wyndham, etc., but someone like William Gibson is more typical. Gibson was highly computer illiterate when he wrote Neuromancer... on a typewriter
You don't have to know the nuts and bolts of how teleportation works to write a good story about teleportation's effects on society. Gibson paid attention to the lingo and discourse of the tech field, the engineers, hackers, programmers, etc, to get the feel of how to write about it. But it is pretty funny that Neuromancer was written on a typewriter. A manual one to boot, iirc.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
While you might complain about stilted dialogue, slang and street speech from 50 years ago sounds pretty different. I suspect the same thing about 50 years from now. Got to try to find the right amount of edginess and allure while maintaining comprehensibility.
They certainly shouldn't be using the same slang formation as today, right Bro?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
This isn't Arthur C Clark, Larry Niven, and, to a much lesser extent, Heinlein sci-fi which are heavily rooted in science fact. This is PK Dick, Zelazny, Farmer, Ellison, Gibson, Sterling, and others who used science possibilities to explore questions about our reality, what it means to be human, sentience, and where our humanity meets others' existence. What containers qualify for humanity and sentience? What is real and what would it mean to detach our consciousness from the physical reality - in virtual reality, in bio/mechanical organisms.
Science history is littered with reality showing humanity that its limitations are self-imposed. You can't go faster than sound. You can't go faster than light. Projecting mass and energy at other things only works one way.
The argument overall is a bit silly when you think that all the other stuff in the game isn't any more plausible than linear "bullets".
What if the weapon worked like this. There is a superheated plasma round that is fired and kept energized by a laser. The plasma payload, delivered on line of sight because it's travelling near the speed of light, cools just before calculated impact into a molten slug.
Role-playing games and science fiction are about using our imaginations to consider the possibilities.
Hey, folks are still shooting rounds out of a 100 year old M1911a1 Browning design (and iterations). The game did show homing bullets and other technical advancements. And remember that the game demo was showing off early slices of the game. Would not be a particularly good design to start you off with plasma/lazer dongle blasters. Save that for mid game and give the player the agency to choose. Not to mention there are significant examples of stuff in the modern world that is done in a very old fashioned way, not because the tech isn't there, but because the social milieu holds things back.
You don't want to make everything tech incomprehensible, as you have to engage the expectations of the people buying the game.
I'm not advocating incomprehensible. My point is this sub-genre relies a lot more on science fantasy than hard science fact. Authors like Clarke, Niven, and those with engineering and maths backgrounds that used science to explain the plausibility of the fiction. Cyberpunk doesn't as much. It's more like Star Wars and Star Trek that uses sci-fi to explore issues where society and tech meet and how that affects and transforms us.
Yes it is much more social science fiction than hard science fiction. But that isn't exactly new in the field. It predates popular "B" TV and movies like Star Trek and Star Wars by decades. H. G. Wells did it with the Time Machine and Asimov and Bradbury were masters at it. Even the Source material for Blade Runner, Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was much more about the social issues surrounding robotics that were so advanced as to be indistinguishable from human than how robotics could advance so much from their current solid scientific foundations in just a few decades.
Most good SciFi has just enough science in it to make the technology seem plausible and the scientist / mathematician writers who obsess over details are actually in the minority and not usually as good at it as the writers who research the science. There are exceptions like Clarke, Wyndham, etc., but someone like William Gibson is more typical. Gibson was highly computer illiterate when he wrote Neuromancer... on a typewriter
You don't have to know the nuts and bolts of how teleportation works to write a good story about teleportation's effects on society. Gibson paid attention to the lingo and discourse of the tech field, the engineers, hackers, programmers, etc, to get the feel of how to write about it. But it is pretty funny that Neuromancer was written on a typewriter. A manual one to boot, iirc.
I'm optimistically cautious. I can't count the number of games that had knockout presentations only to deliver major problems at launch, some of which took a year or two later to fully fix.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Comments
How about let the players discover everything for themselves?
Also the dialogue appears to be open but i feel it is going to be designed so that eventually no matter how you answer you end up at the dialogue/result they want you to end up at,so in reality quite linear dialogue as well.
Even at it's core best,you will only have TWO options,brute force or some side quest to do it friendly like,nothing new there,seen this type of questing system in both SWTOR and other games such as Dishonored.
This doesn't mean the game can't still be fun but it just appears quite linear.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
In the abstraction that is game design, you specifically don't want all the cool stuff at the beginning (which is what this slice is). They put in just enough cool cybernetics to give you an idea of how it will function. The first iteration of the modern Deus Ex followed this sort of path as an example. It also helps to ramp up to the more edgy or peculiar angles of tech progress later in the game.
Oh, and while it may be a bit of appeal to authority, I went to school with Sterling, and played in his D&D campaign (not cyberpunk, Asian fantasy). So yeah, read all the early genre stuff.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Most good SciFi has just enough science in it to make the technology seem plausible and the scientist / mathematician writers who obsess over details are actually in the minority and not usually as good at it as the writers who research the science. There are exceptions like Clarke, Wyndham, etc., but someone like William Gibson is more typical. Gibson was highly computer illiterate when he wrote Neuromancer... on a typewriter
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
They certainly shouldn't be using the same slang formation as today, right Bro?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Arglebargle said:
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey