Cyberpunk 2077 has a date! 4-16-2020

The original The Witcher? I haven’t actually played that one; only 2 and 3. And less than an hour of 2: it starts with a fairly tedious and linear tutorial segment that demotivated me before the rest of the game (and indeed with lots of non-interactive cutscenes). There was much less of that in W3, and by all accounts, CD Projekt Red greatly improved the mechanics from game to game.

I certainly advise not preordering before you see reviews, but I’d take your experience with the original The Witcher with a grain of salt, since they improved things so much even between sequels.

Ignore Witcher 1. It’s not a good game, but more importantly, it’s an *old *game, and not representative of modern RPGs. *Witcher 2 *is better, albeit problematic in parts, and is from more of a transitional period. I suggest going right into Witcher 3, which is one of the best of its genre. If you like it, you can go back to 2 for background.

Note that like most Western RPGs, it starts out a bit on rails, to teach players the basics and get the story started. Like several other games, it even has a smaller “trainee map” to wander about and get your bearings in before moving on to the main game map.

wasn’t cyberpunk 2077 originally a pen and paper game like Shadowrun was/is?
for some reason, I wanna say Steve Jackson games made it …

In what is a vaguely humorous name now, the 2nd edition of the pen and paper game was called Cyperpunk 2020. (The 1st edition I believe was just called Cyperpunk and was set in 2013.) It was published by R Talsorian Games. Not sure if they’re still going or not.

No, Steve Jackson’s game was GURPS Cyberpunk, which come out around the same time.

Based on that last sentence, I’m guessing that what we each like about (and consider) RPGs and “open worlds” is very different.

Witches 2 is on sale for $3 on Steam. I’ve got $3 I can afford to throw out in the street so I’ll check it out. (I’m a Mac guy, so no W3 for me.)

As I say tho, I am immediately turned off by having to be someone else, an already pre-defined someone else, for a game. That isn’t what I mean by “role-playing game” at all. And endless cut scenes to establish a background/story arc for this person (who I don’t know & don’t care about) makes me want to shut the game off and play something else. I don’t want to watch movies/cut scenes; I want to play a game.

I’ll give Witcher 2 a try later today after I get some stuff done. I’ll try and keep an open mind during the intro and all and at least get to 30 minutes or so of gameplay.

Again, 2 is not representative of 3. It’s only semi-open world, for one. For another, the dialog at times sounds like it was translated from Polish to English using Google Translate.

But at least you’ll get some full-frontal nudity, so there’s that.

One thing to keep in mind is that CDPR is keeping everything close to the vest about '77. The best assumption is that it will model close to the Witcher 3 in design, but nobody really knows much of anything yet.

Yes, but is the other way around, we would have laughed because an A-List actor would be playing a fluff-text NPC from a game we were more or less the only ones playing in the entire continent of South America (we had photocopies of the rulebook ) :stuck_out_tongue:

What you like is, of course, subjective, but “open world” and “RPG” have objective definitions that don’t match the way you’re using them.

Can you give an example of a game you consider to be an Open World RPG?

I 100% get what you’re saying because I feel the same way. The only difference is that I’ll still play a game anyway, if it has enough redeeming qualities.

But given the choice I do like to make my own character; set his/her appearance, play them how I want, set their class/profession/specialization/whatever.

I love Witcher 3 (and 2 was also good, I couldn’t stand the first one) and you are definitely stepping in the shoes of a pre-made character. You’re going along with a scripted story, though it’s more of a Choose Your Own Adventure format than a novel, and you’re free to roam about and take on whatever challenges you like. And there is some limited character development/talent customization.

But given your previously-stated preferences, I think you’ll be frustrated. I’m wondering if like me, you have a tabletop RPG background which means you want to make your character, not play someone else’s. I totally get that.

Yeah, The Witcher 3 (but emphatically not either of the first two games) occupies a pretty unique place in this conversation. On the one hand, this is not Skyrim. You’re stepping into a specific person’s shoes and he has a history and established relationships. He looks like he looks, and other than some cursory beard-and-haircut alternatives you can’t change it much. There are cutscenes, although other than the way overlong opening cutscene they’re usually not overly intrusive.

BUT.

This is not God of War either. The world is large and organically connected. There are thousands of things to do, and nearly every one of them is scripted to force you to make choices. They’re big choices, sometimes, even buried in seemingly small sidequests - choices that define who your Geralt is, morally and ethically, but also that can completely reshape the world and everyone in it. A choice you make in Act 1 can reverberate down through the entire playthrough, and then bounce off other choices you make so that the possible branches are myriad. And they’re not superficially different branches.

The best way I can think of to put it is this: you and I could both play a game of Skyrim, and our characters would look very different and have different adventures, but at the end of the day we’d be having more or less the same experience, and the game world would be changed in more or less the same ways by our actions. If we both played Witcher 3, we’d be controlling the same dude the whole time, and there’d be certain kinds of limitations imposed by that. But our two playthroughs would be drastically different, as a function of the choices we made throughout.

It’s two different kinds of “role playing,” I think, and I like them both but I liked Witcher 3 more.

How am I using them? Tell me how I am wrong.

I try but so far I haven’t found any that caught my fancy.

Yes, I started playing D&D a little over 40 years ago.

I thought EverQuest was excellent. World of Warcraft is no longer excellent but is still quite functional (I have extensive experience with Wow; most of our threads on each WoW expansion were begun by me). I’ve played Elder Scrolls Online for 190 hours (I just checked) and enjoyed that but thought it had a ton of shortcomings.

I would consider all of those good open world RPGs.

ETA: Warhammer Online was an RPG but was not open world, if anyone else played that (it wasn’t a good game).

The classic definition of RPG, derived from table top games, is a game where you assume a character, and interact with other players or the environment as that character. This can be either a character you created from scratch, or a pregenerated character put together by the Game Master. In an earlier post, you tried to distinguish between role-playing and play-acting, but there’s no distinction there. Role-playing is play-acting.

The other thing that RPGs introduced around this time was the concept of “leveling up,” where the more you played a specific character, the more powerful that character became.

When they started making RPGs for computers, it was really, really hard to code complex interpersonal interactions. But it was relatively easy to write systems where characters became more powerful as the game progressed, so early RPGs focused instead on the leveling up aspect. In those early RPGs, your characters usually had no personality at all, and nothing you did could really affect how the story unfolded. Player choice mattered in terms of figuring out combat tactics and optimal build strategies, but the game would always end with The Heroes fighting the Evil Dragon and saving Fantasylandia, or whatever.

By the 90s, that started changing. Games like Baldur’s Gate started including complicated, branching dialogue trees where your responses could effect how the plot proceeded. The player was given some agency in determining what sort of person his character was, and that personality mattered. This was much closer to the original meaning of “RPG” - you could say, “My role in this playthrough is an honorable paladin, my role in the next playthrough will be an evil wizard,” and the experience of playing the game would be noticeably different in each playthrough.

“Open world” simply means that the game allows you to go to (almost) any part of the setting whenever you want, instead of presenting content in a linear series of stages.

The Witcher 3 is widely held to be one of the best open world RPGs ever made. I’m personally not that big a fan of it - while the writing and world-building are top-notch, I really struggle with the combat system, making the experience more frustrating than anything else. But whether or not it’s an RPG or open-world really is not a matter of opinion. If you say you don’t think it’s an RPG, people are going to look at you funny. Like this: :dubious:

yep and they even own the rights to the witcher tabletop rpg which is probably tied in with making cyberpunk 77
heres their catalog https://talsorianstore.com/

This might be my favorite bit of news so far:
You can finish Cyberpunk 2077 without killing anyone

I really enjoyed the Deus Ex games, in particular the fact that you could play them almost or entirely non-lethally. It makes the game harder but more satisfying, IMO.

Obviously there are different kinds of “role-playing”, but in the context of gaming, part of “role-playing”, for me, is the fact that you play a role in a group. “Healer”, “warrior”, “scout”, etc. Without that aspect, it’s just playing. You have no role in a group, providing a crucial aspect necessary for the group to achieve goals: you’re just a solo adventurer. A solo RPG? So Mario Galaxy was an RPG? Banjo-Kazooie was an RPG? :dubious:

There’s enough aspects to what an RPG is tho, that it prolly could be talked about at length in a separate thread.

So when you finish or achieve the main goal in Witcher games, what do you do? Is the game just over? Like, cut scene and roll credits?