bjornk
-
Content count
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Recent Profile Visitors
356 profile views
-
What is a computer role-playing game and what isn't? How to tell?
bjornk posted a topic in General Gaming Discussions
Here is a rather controversial topic on what a role-playing game is and what isn't... What I think of it anyway... Some people define role-playing (in games) as "acting out a given role", but I think that's not only an insufficient definition, but it would also apply to *all* games that have a single player-controlled character, from Pac-man, to Super Mario, the latest EA sports games. In all those games you are "acting out a given role", but they're not all RPGs. I can't give you an encyclopedic definition of what a computer role-playing game is, but I think I can tell you a way, well, my way of identifying them. I simply ask this question, "How much of the character I control is of my own making?". In order to make the character "your own", the game must actively present you with "choices" regarding your character. If these choices aren't present in the game, then it's safe to assume that it's NOT an RPG. What are those possible choices you need to be presented with to make the character your own? Here are some of the ones I can think of... Cosmetic choices (e.g. choosing gender, hair style/color, armor/clothing) Character development choices (e.g. getting a particular trait/perk, investing on a particular skill) Game-play choices (e.g. handling a problem/quest in multiple different ways (e.g. by peacefully, by stealing, by violence etc.), siding with the faction A or B) However, just having one or more of these may not be enough to call a game an RPG. It's the amount of variation or difference between all possible player characters is what determines the amount of role-playing possibilities a game provides you with. If the difference is very little, then it's either barely an RPG or not at all. -
-
There is NO Mass Effect game that is superior to others in every way. If you liked ME2 more, it's simply because what they focused on in that particular game appealed to you more. Quest design definitely got better in the 2nd game and yet they completely removed many other things (inventory, armors, attachments, exiting through the airlock etc.) that made the first game good, well, relatively speaking. They "streamlined" the game and turned it into something that appealed to casual couch gamers who don't want to get involved with the game all that much. Then they brought back some of it in 3 probably due to protests. In other words, execution matters, but not always in a positive way. Some like it, some don't. As if this is a goddamn movie. It's not "shit storm" when people simply express their disappointment and thanks for the advice, we're so stupid we wouldn't be able to figure it out without you.
-
They clearly have a particular story line that they want you to follow in the game. Can't think of any other reason for not having a random guy with no name as the PC. Edit: Uhh, yeah, there is one reason, they needed a voiced protagonist that other NPCs also refer to by name, a la Shepard or Geralt. This time it's V. "I'm commander V and this is my favorite store in NC!"... https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2018/06/13/cyberpunk-2077-e3-gameplay-demo/ Right, you now have a "customizable Geralt", still witchering but now in another world. I suppose it'd be foolish to expect anything else from CDPR. I have a feeling that the key people at CDPR are massive Bioware fanboys. I see some people defending FPV as being "immersive". It's not. FPV in games aims to emulate human vision in video games, and that's probably what makes people think it's "immersive", but that's only in theory, it's actually not the same thing as your real-life vision at all. It's a lot more restrictive and you feel it. IRL, you can immediately scan a much larger area with your eyes just by turning your head slightly and it doesn't even take a second for you brain to adapt it. In FPV your vision is not only limited by the size of your monitor and its closeness to your eyes but also by your character's "FOV" or viewport. This is the reason why people use multiple monitor setups, TrackIR etc. to play games and that VR is a thing. At least, TPV gives you a larger view range of the environment that surrounds your character, when you can turn the camera around your character, you basically eliminate one step between your brain and what you want to see in game.
-
That was the same excuse for the people who defended FO4 and its horrible dialogue system along with other things BEFORE launch, as they didn't want to see it even if it was right in front of their nose. We're obviously not talking about hard facts here, these are all personal preferences. I may call something shit and other people may be perfectly fine with it, but liking something and attacking and insulting at people who don't, are two different things. What fanboys do is the latter. I never ask those people "how can you like it?" but they keep asking "how can you not like it?!". 3rd person view and the female player character option were two of the questions people asked the WH devs during the Kickstarter process. They refused both and not because of the cost reasons but because "muh vision!". I recall it perfectly well because I was interested in both and their answer was the reason I lost all my interest in that game. And you say there's "a mod" that enables 3rd person, then there's your answer, the cost clearly wasn't the reason. Hell, M&B, a fucking indie game made by two people with no budget whatsoever had dual view option since day 1.
-
I've played most of the good RPGs on the PC since the late 90's and can't recall a single one that was "1st person only". Don't know about you, but I think a smart developer should have realized that, before agitating fans of their with this sort of shit. You are probably giving CDPR more credit than they actually deserve. Unlike you, I doubt they'll ever add a 3rd person option in the game cause I bet they also have some smartass leads who think they know best, much like the asses at Warhorse. TBH, they are all fuckin amateurs surrounded by idiotic fanboys who keep trying to find laughable execuses for their beloved developers. And if you think you'll get better games in the future, heh, who's going to make them?! These guys? Dream on...
-
To clarify, this is going to be a game played in "first person view only" other than driving and probably cutscenes. In other words, you won't be switching between 1st and 3rd person like you can in Beth games etc. It'll be like "Kingdom Come:Deliverance". When WH Studios pulled the same trick early in development, they refused to listen the people complaining about it. I'm afraid this going to be a similar case. I stopped following that game the moment that happened and never looked back, never cared for it. Cyberpunk may be the greatest game ever, but I won't be playing it, as a 1st person only RPG is simply not for me. I could possibly ignore some other potential issues with the game, but this is definitely a deal breaker. There are several discussions about the issue on their forum here. Have to admit, CDPR has managed to gather quite an obnoxious fanboy crowd around them. Quite literally dogs, who lick their master's asshole every now and then and bark at everyone who dares to criticize their master. Much like the ones owned by Bioware and Bethesda.
-
Ugh, rumor is it's a "First Person" RPG with pretty shitty looking characters... https://twitter.com/CyberpunkGame/status/1006625930884739072 Think I'll pass this one too... By the way, you play a particular character called 'V'. It's not like you can be *anyone* you want, which suggests that this isn't going to be a sandbox game, instead you'll probably get some "cinematic" shit with lots of cutscenes... another reason for me to avoid this game. I'll probably just watch a LP of it and that would be more than enough.
-
Obviously there are others who thought the same and picked her as one of the screenshots at cyberpunk.net. Kinda reminds me of TW3 girls, you know, Triss, Yennefer, Ciri and Shani. Let's hope they'll all make it into the CC presets for the female PC... Nah, I prefer full adult content out of the box... and then I'd get my girl an STD proof vag implant and we'd fuck our way through the NC! BTW, there may be a gameplay demo kind of thing today at E3. Should keep an eye out for that. Edit: They've posted (previously inaccessible) e3schedule.inf on twitter. Not sure if they'll show anything new, but you might want to watch those anyway.
-
It's just my opinion, but the E3 trailer is actually much better with Perturbator's Future Club. Play both videos together and turn off the sound for the E3 trailer... Hope someone had taken notice...
-
I like the music played during the hacking, which was also used in the 2013 trailer. I also like the number they did in the MS event. I hope "ethical hacking" or hacking for the benefit of public type of thing is a theme in the game. As for the music they used for the trailer...well, it was pretty generic and boring. In fact, it sounds suspiciously similar to the fan made music below for the old tailer. The fan made music for the 2013 trailer: The music in the E3 2018 trailer: Female characters looked good in the trailer, CDPR's females are always superior to, ahem, a certain other dev, and the fact that there's pregnant NPC is always welcome! Is this and this the female PC? Judging by the brows it's the same person... "Beautiful and deadly"... Hmm... It says "game engine footage" but I doubt that this is what the game will look like. A bit too colorful for me. It's probably something like one of those TW3 trailers with Geralt and Yennefer. Anyway, still not very hopeful about the game as it'll be a class-based tabletop conversion, but at least the dev is decent enough. PS. I'm also worried that the depiction of the future USA by a Polish developer might not sit well with the American audience. The world of TW was alien to everyone but this one isn't. Another worry is that how they will handle combat featuring firearms. Ironsights? Cover shooter?
-
A small correction, it's "PC *Building* Simulator". I mean, buying a PC game that simulates a guy playing games on a PC would be really weird... but who knows, we might see something like that sold as a game in the future... Actually, The Sims already did that, if I'm not mistaken. As for the "game" itself, I'm not sure if it has any value as a learning tool but it's not really my idea of fun.
-
Thanks, I knew someone would appreciate it. Here, you might like this version even more! Enjoy!
-
Nya nya nya nya nyaah... Not sure if this is the proper place to post annoying piece of shit but who knows, someone might love it still...
-
I think of building a new PC now and then, but most PC components these days are way overpriced and I'm not even sure if the prices will ever go down. I'll probably have to buy a pre-built one or a laptop at some point, as they are a bit cheaper...
