AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH

>still having trust into anything cdpr touches after witcher 3
You only have yourself to blame if you get disappointed again.

Yep.

some people like it when their game doesn't run into dead ends because they happened to kill a guy on the side of the street 20 hours ago only to find out he would matter 40 quests later

I can tell them you're a spy and they will kill you.

Attached: 1539809037218.png (517x894, 677K)

True that. Who wants to face any consequences for his actions in an rpg? I want to be railroaded into the content and experience it all at once.

Attached: d9de52508edde7cd5cb34ad14651ab5e--kids-playing-video-games.jpg (600x632, 63K)

Morrowind literally fucking got around this nearly two decades ago

>YEAH THAT FAGGOT WAS IMPORTANT. YOU CAN KEEP PLAYING BUT YOUR QUESTLINE IS BORKED.

>witcher 3
>disappointing
what? did you put in the wrong game by mistake?

>fallout 3 tier
So you can just mod it in then.
Ez.
Delete thread and consider suicide.

New Vegas solved this problem you retarded cuck.

It doesn't really matter.

>consequences
>literally a messange saying that you cant progress any further in the main quest, effectively making your game unbeatable is a consequence.

>>So you can just mod it in then.
>CDPR
>Mod tools

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA

MY FRIENDS

IT JUST KEEPS HAPPENING

Attached: heston laughing.jpg (251x240, 5K)

>I WANT PERFECT IMMERSION BY BEING ABLE TO KILL ANYONE
>OH WOW WHEN I KILLED THAT GUY A BIG FUCKING POPUP SHOWED UP TELLING ME HE WAS STORY IMPORTANT; HOW IMMERSIVE

hello mr. Epstein

Attached: 1523620395391.jpg (700x700, 207K)

>zoom zoom doesn't know what a save is
I too was once this young but thankfully never as stupid as you.

Wow, when did Yea Forums turn into a bunch of cry babies? You really think you are any different than the SJWs bitching about games to get their way?

I wasn't aware that killing people was immersive. Do you know what it's actually conductive of though? A game with good roleplaying mechanics, instead of some shitty cinematic ARPG that's pretending to be as deep as a tabletop.

>sissies who never played the original fallout games

I never used the opportunity but it is a level of immersion and it also made you much more careful when there was a kid in the way because he could die and you would suffer for it.

If they can't die like everything else in the game, what's the point of having them at all?

You're really way behind, shitpost-kun
witcher.fandom.com/wiki/Modkit

>consequences
>when you can reload an earlier save and don't be so stupid
You'd prefer having to start a new game because you killed some random faggot that was important? or having the important NPC's glow neon lights and a big fucking disclaimer on the screen at the start of the game that says "GLOWING NPC'S ARE ESSENTIAL TO SOME QUESTS, DON'T FUCKING KILL THEM YOU DUMB FUCK". Or just don't do anything so the game gets shit on for years for having such a backwards way of thinking.

I can't believe retards like yourself are able to play videogames in the first place.

Attached: 1498095235322.jpg (666x635, 43K)

I fucked ciri in my modded Witcher 3 game and yennefer is always nude
Checkmate tranny go dilate

go suck off your tranny "gf" faggot

It does matter, because it's just further proof this is not a roleplaying game based on the mechanics of the tabletop but instead a glorified action shooter. It tells me that the quests are going to be linear movie garbage where choices aren't going to make a lick of difference besides which forgettable NPC gives me quests later.

Attached: 1557248758349.jpg (480x480, 15K)

Attached: v was so autistic a mod had to confirm it.jpg (1213x362, 119K)

>Doesn't know the modkit was downgraded for Witcher 3

Attached: cruise laugh.jpg (600x400, 45K)

>9gag

What if I want to play a mass murderer? What if a character should rightfully be an enemy of my character under specific circumstances created by roleplaying?

You are advocating for the removal of player choice and agency in what is supposed to be an RPG. You are a cancer.

>first thing that comes to your mind is sucking tranny dick
really makes me think

If this is true, that means you're a middle aged arguing your superior intelligence to a video game website full of children.

Why haven't you killed yourself yet

backpedaling already? I expected you to be persistent

Attached: 1453607317869.jpg (443x383, 20K)

>literally commit murder
>turns out it was a bad thing
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW how was I supposed to know?

Really makes you think.

Attached: Untitled.png (593x371, 96K)

So is there anyone that didn't kill him in at least one playthrough?
You can't tell me you haven't at least quicksaved then killed him for the catharsis.

Attached: 1406169019477.jpg (450x380, 47K)

>MUH CONSEQUENCES
>actually there is none and just reload a save lol
kys

>I don't like killing random NPCs only to find out I was locked out of content later on
>Here's the literal solution
>LMAO THAT SHIT IS GAY WHY WOULD DEVS DO THIS?

Attached: 1554697619045.png (610x591, 192K)

Shitty games are obviously gonna get even shittier, please cease.

to be fair, even Fallout 3 wasn't too bad with the whole "essential character" shit. Most characters could still be killed save for a relative few.

It wasn't until Skyrim and FO4 where Bethesda got super lazy and went full retard, essentially making it so every named character couldn't be killed. It's not even fun to do shit like going around as a raider killing an entire town when only the generic non-named NPCs can even fucking die

>zoom zooms can't even read
You're too young to even be here. Isn't it bed time for you already?

not being able to kill kids or softlock the plot proves something isn't an rpg to you? I think you may want to learn what an rpg is

>I can't believe retards like yourself are able to play videogames in the first place.
>whi8le he wants to dev to protect him rom making any mistakes in the game
The irony is with you, tough I doubt you have the capacity to realize it.

New Vegas did it well

Yeah because killing kids it's the absolute pinnacle of immersion.
Why would you want to play as a fucking mass murderer? Just an entire playthrough devoid of content that consists only of slaughtering NPC's that won't defend themselves? and if a character should rightfully be your enemy it means you're probably with a faction and the game should let you kill it at some point in the questline. What you're asking for is a complete mess of a game.

You're missing the point. Being able to kill important NPCs is an indication that the devs actually took the time to script their games to account for player choices such as this. When important NPCs aren't killable, generally it indicates lazy writing (see: fallout 4) where they don't want to ever have to deviate even a little from their railroaded plot, so they just block off any chance completely.

Protect me from what?? from being retarded and locking myself out of content? Explain to me the benefits of being able to kill an NPC that would fuck my quests instead of just not letting me kill him.

Reminder that mongoloids like this the problem

I want to rip little children's heads from their necks in a video game. Why are cucks so upset by several lines of code getting killed?

The ability to harm children unfortunately is limited more likely because of law in various release countries and not explicitly from a self-censorship standpoint. The ESRB, PEGI and other agencies will likely not stand for player instigated and clear violence against children by players, so trying to include this largely trivial 'feature' is choosing to die on the hillside of mount retard.

Killing vital NPCs being possible is a design choice; having them be essential is the easiest solution with the fewest spoilers to the player; if they did something like the original Dishonored which gives a non-standard gameover, you can find out a character matters (and sometimes, how) by simply killing people at random. This is a similar problem with the Morrowind style 'continue in your doomed world' setup; and both of these rely on strong player control of saving and loading. Cyberpunk likely uses in some significant amount auto-saving and 'continue in your doomed world' would be confusing and frustrating to less savvy (read as: stupid) players.

There are valid concerns with Cyberpunk 2077's development and features; I don't believe doing the literal same thing virtually every other WRPG has done in the past decade to solve a story-line problem is fair critique. I'm more concerned with the limited roles and choices the game may feature, but I can't strongly condemn the limitations without a CLEAR AND WELL DOCUMENTED EXPLANATION OF THE FINISHED GAME SYSTEMS THAT WE WILL NOT EVEN BE CLOSE TO HAVING UNTIL WE AT LEAST GET A BETA, ADVANCE COPIES OR REVIEW COPIES.

So suck it I guess. Don't preorder it if you're worried, and make an informed decision when the fucking game releases. I would have been happy to get it for free out of the steam sale, but I'm not paying a dollar into it until it's >98% finished and I can see it.

>Not having different people take the place of the quest giver for different rewards/different quest content

>Not realizing that an MMO has a 'plot' that nearly every npc will be a part of.

>Not realizing the fact that if you shoot somebody and if they die they don't have a holotape like deputy beagle from fallout nv.

Nigger there are so many ways to continue the plot if someone important dies. It's how RPGs work you Mongoloid. Please cease playing video games with your yard tier brain.

This is the flip side of the coin or characters you’re forced to kill. It’s like saying that absolutely having to kill paarthurnaxx was good for an open world game.

>and if a character should rightfully be your enemy it means you're probably with a faction and the game should let you kill it at some point in the questline.
No, how many RPGs have you played? Unless it's the literal head of that faction and his underlings and at the exact correct time of "when the devs feel like it", then Bethesda games which are the most egregious for this shit won't let you kill someone who has quests to still hand out. You can't kill Jarl Balgruuf in Skyrim for example when he's giving Ulfric shit and refusing to surrender Whiterun. He is literally coded to be invincible at all times.

How is this immersive? How is this an improvement over just letting me kill the fucking faggot? Oh right, because it undoes like six quests of trying to convince him to surrender.

The only reason you're so against the idea is because your point of reference is fucking Fallout 4, a game that's complete fucking dogshit.

I'm not upset by any means, if there's a game that let's you murder and rape kids go ahead and play it for as long as you want, it's just retarded to ask other games to have your very specific kind of entertainment.

The original Fallouts let you kill children and still got an M.

if you can attack random NPCs thats still more than the witcher

>it's just retarded to ask other games to have your very specific kind of entertainment.
"It's retarded for developers to respect my agency."
Go gargle balls in an alley.

What is with Yea Forums's obsession with this game? This is the kind of thing nobody would bat a eye at with a modern "rpg" but for whatever reason when it's Cyberpunk people start spamming threads about it sperging out about it.

>Why would you want to play as a mass murderer?
You never ask "why" the player would want to do something, you just ask how to make it possible. Anything less is an insult to the "RP" part of RPG.

Yeah because it would be so realistic for you to kill a guy and then 40 hours in you need him and you can still find his corpse with his belongings in a game full of scavengers.

A good game would have the corpse despawn and give all his loot to a random bandit or in a cementery or some crap like that after a while, but you're never EVER going to get that nowadays. It's a retarded complaint in games that are already massive.

>The only reason you're so against the idea is because your point of reference is fucking Fallout 4, a game that's complete fucking dogshit.
It's just one example, retard. Some of the best aspects of other competent RPGs is how certain NPCs may die (whether by your hand or through a quest or whatever) and the game will actually reflect this. The quest progression may be slightly altered, there may be changed dialogue with someone else, a new NPC might fulfill the role of the previous NPC, other various changes to the game world may occur, and so on.

It's quite literally just a handful of autists, user.

>immerse yourself in a large body of water

Attached: 1559771789741.png (573x399, 28K)

Same goes for FNV though

You cannot take Bethesda as a reference for RPG's, especially fucking Skyrim and Fallout.

>fucc
>bois
Why do Americans insist on speaking like niggers?

Attached: 1549954441399.jpg (248x203, 11K)

Source OP, always post source otherwise you will continue being a faggot and a cocksucker

>cannot attack children
Don't worry OP. I will make a mod that will allow you to kill any black, tranny, or muslim children. In minecraft, of course.

>respect your agency
My bad I worded that bad, you can ask for developers to grant you killing kids in their videogames, it's just completely retarded and you will look retarded.

I can when fucking Cyberpunk 2077 is following in their footsteps just like countless other modern RPGs who make quest givers immortal totems.

Attached: 1551614124746.png (246x246, 121K)

Don't lump me in with that mentally ill faggot.

They are all, at least, 25% black.

underrated

I feel like you're the one who's retarded here for denying the ability to do something because you feel emotionally attached to a child-like bundle of meshes and textures.

You got trannies on your mind, user? That's very cringe.

>ppl in this thread
You realize you will be able to murder all the children to your heart content probably by the end of day 1 thanks to the mods?

You sick fucks.

you could kill every single character in NV

>There are literally people in this thread saying it's better for a game to make quest-giving NPCs invincible instead of allowing you to kill them if you desire but letting you know you may have broken some quest chains
This is why RPGs have almost no ruthless evil options anymore, which was pretty much the "vent" gameplay style. It's always just shades of lawful to chaotic good these days.

It's a game where you create your own character for christ sake. CDPR is trying so hard to force this stupid emotional connection between a character that you design yourself and the player. I can understand not being able to kill EVERY NPC in RPGs like Witcher 3 where they pre-determine the story progression with Geralt and his interactions with others but you play as a complete nobody that you design yourself, you should be able to design the stuff you do in the story as well.

>missing the point
Even if mods disable essential NPCs, it doesn't change whether or not the game is scripted to reflect these changes in the way older proper RPGs did.

Someone should make a child killing/raping simulator to dab on everybody.

>CDPR mod tools releasing anytime soon after the game's release
>Having decent functionality beyond creating outfits and texture mods
EL EM AY OH

I concede honestly, but considering the state of videogames these days and the big mass of retarded faggots that consume them it's no wonder they're following Bethesda's steps when fucking Skyrim is considered one of the best RPG's of all time.

It was a different time and for better or worse rating agencies have become more sensitive about it. In Fallout and Fallout 2, the violence was constrained to a number of pixels of gore you could count if you were feeling particularly frisky. At the time games were also not as prolific as entertainment for younger children who today have unprecedented access to allegedly 18+ video-games.

Right or wrong, the inclusion of injury of simulated children in videogames has gotten to be a lot more of a problem and it's nothing new. Halflife 2 cut content including children in even a very limited capacity (literal cut-scene tier 'look at these kids in an alien sweatshop behind bulletproof glass' window-dressing) simply because of these concerns.

Once again, I don't feel like it's worth unzipping my pants and whipping my cock out over the ability to kill simulated children. For one thing, they realistically should pose no challenge or sport and thus killing them is tantamount to guro or sadistic gratification. Additionally, it can't be played for humor like chickens on cs_italy exploding into a puff of feathers when you intentionally or unintentionally merk them with 5.56.

Will it? Do normies care about it, even with the Keanu reveal?

You literally cannot murder children in vanilla Fallout: NV

but you didn't have to kill paarthurnaxx

I already told you, I don't give a shit if you like killing or diddling lines of code resembling children, I just don't think it's an important aspect that should be added into the game, dumb asshole.

>dab on
Damn, that's one epic pop culture reference, fellow millennial.

Attached: 1550503567583.jpg (2048x1364, 376K)

>Do normies care about sci fi The Witcher 3?!
are you retarded, spend some time outside of Yea Forums lul

Ignoring a quest is not the same as saying "no" to an NPC and them actually heeding your choice.

>Yeah because it would be so realistic for you to kill a guy and then 40 hours in you need him and you can still find his corpse with his belongings in a game full of scavengers.

>Not instantly looting someone after killing them.

>It's a retarded complaint in games that are already massive.

Yes because having people be able to run and gun through the game isn't allowed, and because games are big people don't need to have good games that realistically portray how things would happen.

Seriously dude? CDPR has hundreds of people working on this and they for sure have enough time to polish it and add features like that, it's just that they won't as shitty writing will dominate the fact that you aren't allowed to kill who you want.

I am a proud zoomer. Millenials are cucks

Mods will change it so who gives a fuck?

>Should we cater to retards or skip a headache?
And they say Pollacks are dumb.
There is nothing wrong with learning from your betters.

ESRB would rate it an A for that, you just aren't allowed to.

>CDPR players won't stop killing muslim and lgbq npcs

>I am a proud buzzword! Buzzword are buzzword!

>It's a game where you create your own character
Lmao no. If you thought the witcher devs were going to make another game that didn't have a set protag then I don't know what to tell you.

Well then you're a fucking cancer that's ripped all the cool interactive features out of video games by being a passionless asshole. I can imagine you playing e.g. Metal Gear Solid 3 and thinking "God why did they make it so if you keep eating poisonous food it builds up your tolerance to it? That's dumb, what a waste of time."

That or the game has some bullshit railroaded evil option that is totally not to the taste of what you want your idea of an evil character to do.
I really wish games would stop with this railroading shit and being so afraid of the player killing important NPCs. It's not even that hard to come up with proper solutions. Have important quest-giver NPCs have notes on their bodies that you can loot that can be used as an alternate start point for a relevant quest, or for progression in a quest.

The only zoomers who take the "dab" shit seriously are not even zoomers, they are 13 year olds.
There's also millennials who are getting older and older and try to remain "cool".

fair enough, athough they're irrelevant anyway. At least it's not like FO3 where the main quest is cockblocked by the little cunts at Little Lamplight and you literally don't even get the option to barge your way because they're unkillable.

So basically every game on dlsite.

user we both know the reason that happens is because casuals get mad at being retards and accidentally breaking their game after 3 hours without saving. Did you honestly think CDPR was going to take that chance and not just idiotproof the game?

You're comparing immune system building to being able to kill lines of code that resemble children, AND you're passionate about killing said lines of code that resemble children? That's a cool feature? I can't really tell if you're baiting or you're absolutely retarded.

If violent sadism and random viciousness is your definition of ruthlessness, I don't see the point. Evil playthroughs of games that allow for them need more than wanton violence to be engaging; games like Overlord focused on saturday-morning cartoon evil and others incentivized evil practice or made such ruthlessness a necessary and fun game-play element.

It's got to be more than just shooting hapless dudes; if you want that in a game there are more than enough existing games that allow you to vent in such a fashion.

Basically: Killing kids is insufficient to be an enjoyable 'evil' experience, so including it without the other necessary means of power-fantasy is a waste of time. To make a bad example, what's the point of being able to shoot a kid if I'm just doing it because I can? If I wanted to really get some kind of kick out of it I'd better be able to do it because his father is behind on his rent and in front of his whole family as part of some slum-lord simulation in a bid to become the most ruthless battery-operated gangster in the city to ever sport a massive silver revolver engraved "bad motherfucker" and to have a small 12 gauge shotgun for an eye.

I could take off your underwear and rape the shit out of you, and there is nothing you could do about it.
We call those generation X I believe.

There is absolutely no consequnce other than getting that message.

On the plus side if you did get that message you get to live in a comfy doomed timeline and skip the shitty MK ending*.

* Ending for the series not Morrowind

>it doesn't change whether or not the game is scripted to reflect these changes in the way older proper RPGs did
The game is made to appeal to as much wide portion of customers as possible, murdering NPC's that will void potential quests is not appealing to that customer base. Sure, they could solve that the way Morrowind did, but I am unsure whether that will make a diference ''enjoyment'' wise for base customers. I remember that I did not murder those NPC's in Morrowind because quest would be lost, so for me for instance making them not killable won't make difference.

Maybe people wouldn't want to kill kids if developers didn't think the

>they're immortal lol

approach means that gives them free reign to make the kids as obnoxious as possible. Basically walking insult dispensers that drop more shade than bandits.

Attached: 1553620036419.gif (477x348, 627K)

>it's just retarded to ask rpg games to have roleplaying mechanics.

Attached: 1560327600835.png (497x576, 212K)

You will never experience the true joys of seeing the fear on NPCs faces, as you open the save menu and make a new file named "pre-nuclearoption.sav". But we all know that you have, and you're only posting contrarian shit for epic lulz.

Attached: smonk.jpg (600x600, 38K)

No, I'm pretty sure what people annoyed about this see is a flesh and blood living creature not dying when it gets hit with a .44 round to the skull. Kind of breaks immersion when you start seeing immortal figures walking around.

So you're mad that lines of code that resemble a kid shittalked you and you couldn't do anything about it?? Fucking hilarious

Attached: Crash face.png (957x720, 493K)

Small-brained take. Stop trying to boil it down to "lol u just want to go around murdering everyone". While that can be fun, that's not even a thought that crosses my mind. I want a game that reflects choices I make. I want to be able to join Faction X and gun down everyone aligned with Faction Y, our sworn enemy. I want to be able to do things in unconvential ways, like perhaps in FO3 instead of doing Colin Moriarty's dirtywork for him to get info on Dad, I just fucking shoot him, loot the password of his corpse, and go into his computer to find the data.

I just want a fucking RPG that feels like an actual ROLE PLAYING GAME rather than a theme park where you just get whisked from quest to quest and "experience it all" in the most podunk way possible, like the game is railroaded to make sure you experience 100% of the content on the first play.

>I will randomly shoot a kid in the head for absolutely no reason
>oh shit it didn't die wtf that's so unimmersive, even though I randomly just shot a kid in the head for no reason, dropped.

>they're too lazy to write various outcomes of quests

But muh tranny dicks

>NPC basically repeatedly calls you a faggot and was only written that way because they're immortal
>lol you find this grating and want to shut them up? How gay
I guess I can do the developer's job for them and just mod the NPCs out of existence if they're not going to add anything to the world besides getting on my nerves. No actual in-game options to shut them up.

>even though I randomly just shot a kid in the head for no reason
So that's unbelievable but an immortal child is totally fine.

seething ones are consolekucks
thats why

>ANOTHER WANDERER HERE TO LICK MY FATHER'S BOOTS? GOOD JOB.
>ANOTHER WANDERER HERE TO LICK MY FATHER'S BOOTS? GOOD JOB.
>ANOTHER WANDERER HERE TO LICK MY FATHER'S BOOTS? GOOD JOB.
>ANOTHER WANDERER HERE TO LICK MY FATHER'S BOOTS? GOOD JOB.

Mods don't actually fix the issue. Sure you can kill NPCs with mods, but the game still isn't scripted to take their deaths into account.

Just walk away from the fucking NPC? you seem like the same kind of person that would complain about cyber bullying. Besides it's a fucking snotty kid, just ignore him like you would in a real scenario.

Both are unbelievable, that's why it's a fucking game, you wouldn't randomly shoot a fucking kid in real life and the kid wouldn't be immortal either.

Also, they said ''essential'' NPC's, so I assume NPC's that are tied to core lore, main quest line etc. might as well turn out that killing ''not'' essentail NPC's that give quests won't be a problem.

Regarding adjusting the game to reflect choices of killing certian NPC's - sure, it could be done given amount of immersion and depth planned for the game, but somewhere they've got to stop. I think they decided that they won't be developing to such extend immersion/story and world construction to reflect choices tied to essential NPC's because they would have to give player option that is simply too troublesome.

So yah, they might be lazy, but as well maybe they figured out the game has so much content and things to offer that it's good on its own without adding that extra changes.

>Just walk away from the fucking NPC?
And if they're standing next to an important NPC or populate the shortest route? You know, like every annoying Skyrim NPC?

>you wouldn't randomly shoot a fucking kid in real life
I don't do drugs in real life. I don't engage in firefights in real life. I don't do 120mph on the freeway in real life. I don't murder people in real life. Oh look, I do it in a video game because it's fucking fantasy.

To what extent? If you're referring to cutscenes or extensive dialogue trees pertaining to those actions then sure but if you mean parameters that take into account murder or notoriety it can absolutely be modded into the game.

>you wouldn't randomly shoot a fucking kid in real life
Possibly the dumbest fucking point ever made when the subject is doing imaginary shit in video games.

>You hit the child and transform him into a mangled heap!
>You hit the little girl and transform her into a mangled heap!
>You hit the child and transform him into a mangled heap!
>You hit the little girl and transform her into a mangled heap!
>You hit the child and transform him into a mangled heap!
>You hit the little girl and transform her into a mangled heap!

Sure, it's a matter of degree. I don't demand every game needs to be like NV where all non-child actors can be killed. But what I fear is the game going the route of Skyrim and other more modern "RPGs" where everyone even slightly related to a minor quest is unkillable.

I'd actually be fine if it were more like FO3 or Oblivion. In those games there were essential NPCs, but MOST by far were not, even important ones.

And immortal NPC's is unrealistic but randomly killing kids isn't?
You're running around in circles.

the big factor is the dialogue. Characters still talking about a character as if they're right next to them and still alive. Quests not having alternate scripts to take a characters death into account, along with an alternate path through the quest, etc.

One is a player choice and the other is not. Why is this so hard for you to get? I, the player character, get to choose what is realistic for my character to do. That's the entire point of a roleplaying game. You're not as clever as you think you are.

>And immortal NPC's is unrealistic but randomly killing kids isn't?
Are you retarded? This is complete false equivalence. Randomly killing anybody isn't something a sane individual would do, but maybe I'm roleplaying as a crazed psycho who just wants to murder everybody? Oh wait, kids are off limits.

Christ, you're like the writer behind Cait in Fallout 4.

>My parents abused me mentally and beat me up every single day, they hated my guts and wished I were dead... Oh but they explicitly waited until I was eighteen before they sold me into sexual slavery.

>one is a player choice and the other not
And because the player is retarded the developer should accomodate to him?? You're pathetic.

Yes, how dare the player get to make decisions for himself. We should also just get rid of stats and dialogue options and streamline games to corridor shooters. Don't want people doing the wrong thing, now do we?

You're so retarded you'd actually be a perfect for modern AAA game development.

>Player choice bad
>Scripted linear events good

How dare the player be completely braindead and going completely OOC breaking completely the world for "muh fun I want to kill everything"

Stick to action games where you can shoot at anything retards.

>The Witcher 3
>Game

Enjoy your movie

Attached: 1562215717895.webm (1280x720, 1.42M)

Absolutely based and redpilled

Your build is shit.

>and going completely OOC
Who are you to determine if they're acting "OOC?" Oh sorry, are you thinking of shitty RPGs where the MC is a predetermined faggot which defeats the entire purpose of an RPG?

>OOC
if GTA2077 were really an RPG, whether actions are OOC or not would be up to the player

Funny, because Cyberpunk 2077 is confirmed no longer an RPG but instead an action game with little choice.

Having characters be literally immortal breaks the world far more than a person killing someone.

You're not RP'ing if you're killing random npc's for absolutely no reason at all. Or you're playing the wrong RPG for that,
You guys are completely braindead

Why the fuck are you even playing RPGs in the first place? The genre clearly isn't for you. Go back to your linear corridor shooters.

>You're not RP'ing if you're killing random npc's for absolutely no reason at all
I am roleplaying as a psychopath raider/bandit. This is something I've done occasionally in most Bethesda RPGs, even Fallout 4 after Nuka World was added. The game literally gives you the freedom to make that choice, and it spits in my face with immortal NPCs. I know you're a child who can't make decisions for himself and hates the finality of an action, but many other people don't.

Attached: bait.png (308x308, 128K)

>roleplaying as a psychopath raider/bandit
Yeah that randomly kills everything in it's path with not a single consequence?? You, as a player, are an absolute retard and there's no reason games should accomodate to your retarded decisions

>Yeah that randomly kills everything in it's path with not a single consequence??
Pretty sure the consequence, if you let me kill the NPCs, would be the complete cutoff from specific quests. You fucking wank stain.

role playing. sometimes people don't want to play the main quest anymore and want to just mess around. all this essential shit exists because of retarded children who shouldn't be playing games with m rating.

"what do you mean killing this character makes my game unbeatable? i just want to kill him and then finish his quest anyway lol! i want both to have the cake and eat it! wait, i can't beat the game anymore now?! fuck this game sucks, 0/10 worst game ever"

it's because of dumb kids with no concept of actions having consequences that devs are coddling and babying the players by making actions impossible anymore. and you can't roleplay as a raider and wipe out diamond city or an enclave agent purging ghouls and mutants in a random fuck around save without mods because half of the characters are immortal.

Yeah I'm sure getting blocked out of content is really fun, instead of the game becoming nearly impossible to play since you're a retard killing everything in your path instead of people ganging up on you and killing you with a permanent game over. You're just being retarded.

>the whole point of the setting is maximum degeneracy
>they've already demonstrated that with a poster featuring a cross dressing dude sporting an erection as an advertisement
>but killing kids? TOO FAR
Too many negatives are happening lately, this is definitely no longer pre-order tier for me because if it's going the Bethesda route for that, what else are they doing to break immersion, lower risk, and so on?

>Yeah I'm sure getting blocked out of content is really fun
I made that choice, fun is fucking subjective and irrelevant.

>instead of the game becoming nearly impossible to play since you're a retard killing everything in your path
That is my choice with this character. If I want to experience the content, I won't fucking kill people.

Holy shit, are you actually brain dead? Does the concept of free will baffle you?

You don't deserve free will because you're a retard.

>I want to not experience the content of the game
Dont play it then

>VTMB doesn't let you kill essential NPCs and gets praised to high heavens as a GOAT RPG
Sucks, but it isn't a defining feature for a RPG to have every NPC be killable.

but I want to play a psychopath who murders and rapes little kids
why is it only okay to do this in europe if I say I'm a refugee?

>DURR JUST PLAY THE GAME IN ONE WAY ONLY
Or maybe I can fuck around in one save and play another way with a different save.

No, I'm pretty sure your child-like mentality is what's retarded here. You consistently advocate for game developers to coddle and stifle player agency. N-no daddwy devewoper, don't wet me accidentewy kill dat NPC becasuse Iw be sad!

Not if the game is about Roleplaying as a specific character. Imagine if the game is about a guy that starts by entering a country, but as soon as you get control you get assblasted saying "WAHHHH I DON'T WANT TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY I WANT TO GO TO OTHER PLACE THIS GAME IS TRASH WORST RPG EVER"

>did I tell you I also have an active sex life
do you though? regardless of the shitposting

It's nothing short of a miracle that game even exists and most praise is usually about its atmosphere and soundtrack. By your example it means that Cyberpunk is unable to outperform a half finished title from the early 2000's.

>Not if the game is about Roleplaying as a specific character.
So why are you arguing about this when we talk about 2077? V is a complete blank slate from origin to creation.

I actually do believe it or not, stopped being an incel 6 months ago. Nothing very special though, I expected a life changing experience

These types always use these bad faith arguments.
>It's ridiculous people are being banned for saying gg ez
>FREEZE PEACH! YOU'RE JUST MAD YOU CANT SAY NIGGER!

I love saying it though.

Retard

Congrats on losing the argument shill

youtube.com/watch?v=Mlu5C0PT4kQ

Cope

Dilate

Cringe

>you won't be able to attack children or NPCs
>children OR NPCs
So, wait up. This essentially confirms that there WILL be playable child characters in the game?! Holy fucking shit! CDPR are GODS if they actually manage this. I'd buy 5 fucking copies of the game out of sheer respect.

Attached: relevancy.jpg (478x358, 19K)

let's be honest they did it to save budget, vtm had the excuse of having zero budget and developed in short time, what's theirs?

...Are you serious?

We'll never have a game again like Fallout 1 & 2 where you can consistently kill all the children in a settlement

Go back, redditard.

Make me, bitch.

Attached: 1538170037911.jpg (43x29, 1K)

You will when your next school semester starts.

Attached: 1561755181344.jpg (378x381, 16K)

>if you must kill plot characters or kids install a mod.
how hard is that op?

>redditfags white knighting virtual children
lmao this site has become so shit

He says as he posts a children's game. The adults are talking little ZOOM ZOOM, begone.

Then leave. We aren't going anywhere.

Why would killing adults be better than killing children? They're both equally wrong.

everyone that uses Yea Forums also uses reddit

No. Killing a child is worse because they aren't able to protect themselves as well as adults. Also, children are more innocent than adults.

nah i rather spam the site with tranny suicide rates to make you seethe :)

Yea Forums of all placea should know better
99% of the claims about what Cyberpunk 2077 would be like, are no source especualtions by normalfags that are about to buy their 4th copy of Witcher 3 for the Switch
I love the games because of the fanservice for book readers, but the games are not a fucking masterpiece
You are just mad because you've just realized you fell for the hype culture brought by the same people who believe Geralt's cast for the Netflix series is great, because they don't know book Geralt is a retarded dramaqueen, and think Geralt only carrying one sword in the posters is a mistake

Dilate, sweaty

It was kinda neat, kinda like how mass effect hid load times with elevators and decontamination

to be fair, the Witcher games are way better than the books.

This is how you created replayability you fucking idiots
New Vegas allowed important NPCs to be killed like in FO1&2 but made sure they had an immortal character that makes sense in the plot
Yes Man was that failsafe so you can kill at your heart's desire

God I hate children. I'd rather just not have them in anything.

Having trannys live rent free in your head is in itself gay user.

why are m rated game devs so spineless these days
you could kill children in deus ex and warcraft 3 and literally nobody bat an eye

Attached: 1538777896243.jpg (438x581, 44K)

>date ESRB was created
September 16, 1994
>date deus ex was released
June 17, 2000
>date Warcraft 3 was released
July 3, 2002

user, the reason why you don't see that anymore or "why devs dropped their balls" is because of the ESRB, if it didn't existed you would have all the gore and porn you can imagine

Even Obsidian left kids protected in New Vegas. They just made them really rare. That shit is just too much of a hassle nowadays.

Underrated and rational post
Heres a (you)

Childhood is wanting to be able to kill anyone in a CRPG. Adulthood is realizing if you want a sandbox RPG you should just get out a pen and paper.

fuck you

150% serious my nigga. Especially if they are female and also customizable.

>I suggest you immerse yourself in a large body of water with a high distance leap
Imagine someone saying this to you in real life.

who wants to attack children anyway

>OP

Attached: FB_IMG_1562568678304.jpg (720x680, 24K)

What is wrong with blocking yourself from game content in a game like this? You can make a new character to play the quests you missed if you want. Why do people feel like they have to do every single quest with one character in an RPG?

Why did you think that it'd be like New Vegas in anyway? Witcher 3 didn't even have killable civilians

the only reason you can't is because the game would have an adults only rating

Yeah not being able to murder children is not surprising at all. I wasn't expecting or wanting to be able to kill little kids in the first place, not being able to kill anyone related to the plot(until presumably it's their time to die as dictated by said plot)is somewhat more troubling though.

definitely going to pirate it to test it out. probably wont pay even if its good, but oh well

Lol, you are a faggot and likely suck cock

Is this bait or is Yea Forums this fucking casual now?

Except many other games have you kill kids aren't rated A you stupid fuck

You can still beat the game when that pops up you moron. Not only have you never played Morrowind but you have no idea what the story is or how it works. Killing plot important NPCs makes the game very hard to beat but it can still be beaten legitimately.

Don't bother. Yea Forums is filled with children. Either go to RPG Codex or 8ch Yea Forums if you want actual game discussion with people that actually play games. This Yea Forums is for shitposting.

>dude if we bring resetera people here /pol/ will finally go away and we will finally be able to talk about videogames!

And thats where we are right now.

>Can't be a pedo-rapist in game
>CDProjektred will bust mods that allow you to do this
Based, fuck pedos they all deserve an acid bath.

name 5

Daily reminder that the mods will ban you if you bring up the recent Resetera Pedophile discord ring. Make a thread about it and it will get deleted in seconds as well.

Attached: pedoera.png (979x480, 43K)

Fallout 1
Fallout 2
Prey
The sims
Rollercoaster tycoon

sorry maam

>NOT VIDEO GAMES
this is how fags will reply to this post

>Rollercoaster Tycoon
Fuck yes. You alright.

youtube.com/watch?v=gQTV43g-hAo
>He doesn't want to kill kids

>hey there
Guaranteed to be a stupid response

Ummmmmm that sounds pretty reasonable to me lol

Nigger

>pedos mad they can't jack off to dead kids in a video game AGAIN since fallout 3

Attached: 1531686620001.jpg (800x800, 117K)

Dear god the blades quest was bad. Nearly everything about it was so poorly handled.
>everyone is invulnerable
>have literally no say in what happens
>railroaded to the extreme
>only two actual members with poached companions
>mandate you kill one of the only good characters in the game and will hold shit hostage untill you do
I will never understand what the developers were thinking, its just laziness to the extreme and it hurts the entire game.

>Ultra liberal, everything-is-acceptable forum has a problem with pedophiles

What a surprise. These are the same people who think pedophilia is natural and that child porn is okay because it stops real children from being hurt. This is the problem with any sort of ideology that goes that extreme, they begin to out-extreme one another and go into a purity spiral that causes horrible problems. Just like the LGBT community. I fully support gay marriage and gay rights, but it went from that to transgendered rights (which, again, is okay with me)... but then it somehow ended up with HRT for 5 year olds and 10 year old drag-queens that dance on the street for money during pride parades. It is fucking disgusting. These people need to check themselves.

Attached: 1541537989619.gif (384x288, 1.89M)

JUST

I tried to march right in to kill Ulfric Stormcloak, but since he was essential to the plot, the most I could do is lead him to general Tullius and have them punch it out forever. If I'm not allowed to kill "the bad guy" untill the plot says I can it's shit.

People believe that here. There is a c*nny thread every hour on the hour.

Don't forget shit like whiterun where nearly the entire palace is immortal.

Sneed

idk killing kids is funny I guess but it's not a dealbreaker for me
it would make sense you can't kill at least some important story npcs, but I'll reserve judgment for whether the amount of invincible npcs and player choice is unreasonable when the game comes out
the bits of gameplay they've shown so far look really fun and I'm super excited to learn more about all the different ninja terminator shit you can do

>it would make sense you can't kill at least some important story npcs
Or you can just design the game well like good RPG do.

Hit the nail in the head so perfectly you felt personally attacked and had to reply, huh?

how exactly would this work without blocking progress though? I don't understand
what are some rpgs where you can kill all important story npcs?

Shit, I didn't know there was a build that fixes the shitty hitboxes.

Play an RPG from the early 2000nds and earlier. It's called good design.

Divinity
Morrowind
Pretty much any CRPG
Pretty much every RPG made before 2002

if you dont know the answer to this then you are obviously a minor so you need to get off this site.

Literally every game since 2005 or so tier

>REEEEEEEE MAYBE I DON’T WANT A PLOT
>FUCK YOU CDPR WHY DON’T YOU NEEDLESSLY PROGRAM DEAD ENDS INTO THE GAME

I'm fine with not being able to attack children. Plot-related characters though, eh. I mean the game probably will be fine but it's not going to be amazing in terms of role-playing.

So like The Witcher? It's not really a huge deal for the type of game they're making, we shouldn't be comparing this game to Skyrim where you can do anything at anytime.

Well made rpgs are more than strict linear stories with one or two slightly varying paths.
A good rpg knows its players want to make their own way and will do its best to accommodate any choice they might make.

>So like The Witcher? It's not really a huge deal for the type of game they're making,

You're right, it doesn't matter because they're not making an RPG

Could you kill children or important NPCs in any of the Witcher games? If not, why did you expect any different?

Attached: B419704E-20E5-4FEE-80CA-E6F70117FBC3.jpg (624x351, 46K)

Might as well say

>Couldn't roleplay as anybody but neutral good Geralt, what did you expect in a non-RPG like The Witcher series?

So you don't really want an rpg, just a story driven action game with character customization right?

I look forward to modding in killable kids

Kek saved

Attached: wow.jpg (562x437, 42K)

Except that's not true, the entire community was outraged. The fact that they were pedophiles is nothing to do with the sites politics

I'm 18

We'll have to see what it's like at release, but I'm certainly getting the point. I see how this could be an indicator of a lack of splitting story paths and player choice. They should be striving to accommodate all playstyles including maniac crackhead that kills everyone for the best replayability.

>going on murder sprees and killing thousands of people is fine
>but killing children is crossing the line

Attached: 1541282431639.png (371x353, 148K)

You can't walk into a bar and shoot everyone in Stalker and it's still known for its immersion more than any other game, this is the biggest non-issue people make a big deal about. What character do you expect to be roleplaying where you'd kill someone for any reason other than fucking around because you plan on reloading right afterward?

They're not, their games have more similarities with GTA than sandbox RPGs like Skyrim and New Vegas.

>I'm 18
the minimum age on this site needs to be raised to 30

>Fallout
>kill children for shits and giggles
>branded a child killer
>"Ah yes, a TRUE role-playing game offering actual CONSEQUENCES to your actions, unlike those watered down modern 'Arr Pee Gees' for pitiful casuals. Truly the pinnacle of immersion."
>*reloads save*

Sounds pretty lame gramps, that should be the maximum age.

you should've been killed as a child

he had invincibility on :)

Make no mistake: your parents daily regret not aborting you.

Stalker is not an RPG.

Yep you got it.
The reason everyone is so cynical is because as time goes on developers ate becoming increasingly detached from their core audience and more focused on the profitable "casual" market. Because of this they've started to see any form of complexity or player agency an obstacle to the cod/sports game audience and have streamlined their games to an increasingly extreme degree.

making your game too complex is bigotry. Jamie Soistein from Polygon doesn't have time to learn the mechanics of an RPG, this is LITERALLY the holocaust

Unironically: have sex.

dilate

Gain height.

gain X chromosome

sounds like an interesting branching story path

Seek employment.

seek therapy

save hex
also: cope

Acquire medication.
SEETHING

lmao

better dialogue tree than anything in cybercucked

whoever supports this kind of stupid shit in videogames because muh politically correct muh diversity and acceptance is fucking stupid, bringing your stupid ideologies of what is good or bad in a virtual world is something ok when there's no push or "rules" by media just because a group of faggots liberal tells you to do something so they don't hurt their felling doesn't mean you have to hear everything and everyone just make your game as you want you imbeciles.

Attached: 1480115227662.jpg (504x403, 113K)

I do think not being able to attack plot NPCs is lame. Don't know if it'll ruin the game, but it's definitely a negative to me.

Lose weight.

I mean, yeah. But it's far from a deal breaker for me. As usual, Yea Forums blows a tiny flaw out of proportion for the daily 5 minute hate.

I'm not a burger faggot so don't have a problem with my weight, go back to plebbit and spread you shitty mentality there.

Attached: 1379998776903.jpg (327x280, 20K)

You ruined it

The wordier the post, the closer it hit to home.

Stalker absolutely is an RPG.

he's not. look at the way he phrases his posts. bootlicking and shaming language everywhere, if you don't adhere to his standards of conduct you're "pathetic" or something else, to make you feel ashamed and change your behavior until it's acceptable by him. he's a faggot. he doesn't play or enjoy games, he just hates it when other people do. he's an effeminate bitch.

Same. But what's really important to me on top of story options is gameplay options. I've finally gotten around to playing Dishonored 2 and fucking looove it. There are so many angles of approach to the point where I'll need to do a couple rounds of the map before I have a good idea of the layout in my head. Still finding new shit on a second playthrough. I very much want to try Prey now, I heard the environments are even more intractable. I feel like the levels will be even more to wrap my head around but it'll be balanced out by the map and waypoints.

I never understood that opinion and I never will. It's not an RPG by oldschool definitions - you don't have a party, you don't have tactical combat, the only character progression is equipment progression which is barely above Doom's green armour -> blue armour. It's not an RPG by newer definition since you don't have any influence on the story until the end. You can join factions I guess and... ?

*Sips drink*

>it doesn't have to be at night
>it doesn't have to be in a large city
>it doesn't need to be 3rd person
>it doesn't need to have the different classes
>it doesn't need the player to be able to use flying cars
>It doesn't need accessible interiors for buildings
>It doesn't need to be free of liberal bullshit
>It doesn't need to have good customisation options
>it doesn't need to have real dialogue choices
>it doesn't need you to be able to join different factions
>it doesn't need to have killable NPCs
>it doesn't need to have Trauma Team as a gameplay element the player can use
>it doesn't need to have destructible environments
>it doesn't need to have good graphics
>it doesn't matter that CD Projekt Red is staffed by Americans now
>it doesn't need mod support
>it doesn't need to have good box art
>It doesnt need to not blow all its budget on b list actors
>it doesnt need to be an RPG
>it doesn't need you to be able to purchase new apartments
>it doesn't need you to be able to choose different childhood heroes
>it doesn't need you to be able to customise your cars or apartment
>it doesn't need Cyberpsychosis to be part of the game
WE ARE NOW HERE
>it doesn't need dynamic weather systems
>it doesn't need to have a branching story
>it doesn't need to have massive crowds of people
>it doesn't need to not be downgraded
>it doesn't need to have substance
>it doesn't need to not be GTA 2077

CYBERFLOP

Attached: Sipping CDPdRones Tears.jpg (326x412, 24K)

No, you just don’t want a story-driven RPG. You want a sandbox game. Are you similarly buttblasted when your DM punishes you or puts in ways to prevent you from murdering the most vital NPC to the campaign?

Great list
What's trauma team? Are they the armed private EMS company from the trailers?

Yas queen slay

>Additionally, it can't be played for humor
Get the fuck out, you obviously don't belong here.

And honestly joining factions in Stalker 1 is a mistake unless you really want to slug your way through the Army Warehouses or the fucking Bar every single time you need to get anywhere. Loners master race for life

Based and redpilled.

Attached: A0E05264-C162-4EF8-8A48-330723C58D6B.jpg (750x867, 415K)

Wait shit did they really remove the cyber insanity?

If the devs says having the OPTION to break the first person perspective breaks immersion, surely, artificial restrictions like not being able to attack children should break the immersion.

We just had this thread, isn't it tiring having to repeat the same bullshit outrage discussion over this? Oh right, FFXVkun started this thread.

The problem with murder hobos url is that they can ruin it for others as shown in your pic. This is a single player videogame

>violent games don't cause IRL violence
>except with children

faggot

>They're not, their games have more similarities with GTA than sandbox RPGs like Skyrim and New Vegas.
good, rockstar's leagues ahead of Bethesda and obsidian

This may seem strange to you but its entirely possible for a developer to work with and around a player's choices even if its not what they originally intended. I'm not asking for a sandbox I'm asking for an rpg that actually gives the player freedom to forge thier own path and not simply be a slave to a lazy writer.

>With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed
>good game design

I would greatly enjoy roleplaying playing as a schizophrenic drug addled fiend do you have a problem with this sir

To add onto that you seem to think that we all want to just be murder hobos for the sake of it but while that is a possibility there's more too it. Look at the civil war quest in skyrim. Lets say you're playing as a hardcore imperial and after making a name for yourself you decide you end up in winterhold and decide you're going to take out the traitorous kingslayer yoursef. Only the developers won't let you no matter how well equipped you are. Instead you have to to though a lengthy badly made quest each time.

You can't accommodate players who just kill important NPCs cause they think it's funny. If the designers want to keep idiots from soft-locking themselves for no reason, they'd have to add an infinite amount of "if"s in the story to keep it going. If the player kills X important NPC, then they can use Y important NPC to progress the story, but if the player kills Y important NPC, then they can use Z important NPC to progress the story, etc. If you make important NPCs killable, then the player just softlocks themselves and has to reload a save to progress. It might as well be the same as making them unkillable. These are video games, not D'n'D. You can't just play it by ear and use your imagination, a human being has to write the scenarios. And even, so you'd be an asshole D'n'D player if you just went around killing important NPCs. It's a huge fuck-you to the GM, you're shitting on their campaign and their hard work just for your shitty role-playing.

>Never actually played classic RPGs

Even if I did bother to play a crusty old RPG, I wouldn't go around murdering obviously important NPCs. It's pointless.

Compare it to Morrowind. You're started off with no background or history with a vague lategame objective and told to make your place in the world until you're more able to work toward it. The roleplaying comes from how you insert yourself in the world, listen to peoples stories, create your own, sit by the campfire, hunt anomalies, etc. You don't need stats and party characters to be an rpg, you need a world to insert yourself into in your own way.

Its funny you should mention and. I'm playing in an OOTA campaign right now and our party ended up unknowingly sideing with the cultists of the deep father in the first encounter we had with them. Dispite this having MAJOR consequences and causing us to miss out on a bunch of content our dm did his job and worked along with our fuck up. That's what an rpg should be

>steal a car
>driving fast down the road to avoid cops
>accidentally drive off the road and kill a couple people
>30 hours later realize one of the people I ran over and killed was a essential NPC and I can’t continue
>now forced to start a completely new game

Hahah yeah okay I love that idea!

Attached: 19CD33A2-CBF3-40C3-8E86-CBDA94DF728E.gif (209x276, 64K)

>it's pointless
No it's not. It's called role playing you stupid underage faggot. The point of an RPG is that you can do what you want. If I want to murder someone I should be allowed to.

>Can't continue
Underage retards. Good RPGs made it where you could still continue. "Essential NPCs" are a retarded concept.

>300+ replies
>no search result for fake

Is this fake?

Do you know how stupid and time consuming it would be to have a what if you killed the quest giver for every fucking quest. Then you need what ifs for those what ifs and it never ends.

It’s not happening.

>Act like a shithead
>Hurr durr whai can i not progress reee

>oldschool definition
>influence on the story is the newer definition
Look, I've never played STALKER so I'm not here to argue about that, but you have this completely ass backwards.
the term rpg comes from tabletop games where you primarily immerse yourself in playing the role of a character in that game world and interact with the world as the GM arbitrates the events and interactions for you.

Playing the role of the character has always been the primary, the other definition only exists because JRPGs took all the mechanics from the latter but were too lazy to give you any agency over what happens.

you retards need to play actual pnp tabletop rpgs if you want to "do whatever i want with no limits whatsoever"
you're the type that laughs at jrpg players for not having choices, not even realizing that you have absolutely the same issue just to a slightly lesser extent in your """""role playing""""" games

What's the point though? Are you really enjoying yourself when you roleplay a racist in Morrowind, then immediately fail the main quest because you murdered the first imperial you saw? If you went around murdering NPCs in a tabletop RPG, no one would want to play with you.

You don't really seem to understand. No ones asking for infinite possibilities. This isn't going to just be some flat plane filled with characters standing around. There's going to to be a whole world built around them. With creativity, imagination, and common sense developers can shape the world in order to organically guide the player through it. Lets say there's an important character, maybe their really tough, or have a ton of allies, or maybe you don't meet them face to face untill later on. And even if they do die anticipate it and add a back up. Maybe they left notes or journals, maybe they were only a single piece of a larger group and get replaced, maybe they are able to save themselves via cybernetics after you leave them for dead. Anything's better than just "lol they're invincible" it just requires more work and creativity.

>>>it doesn't have to be at night
you retards are seriously so fucking retarded that it's hard not to laugh. like yeah dude, everyone knows a big part of cyberpunk is uhhh, they don't have daytime in that setting. there's just no sun.
even bigger fucking lmao at "it doesn't need to be free of liberal bullshit" when the entire root of cyberpunk is about rebels rising up against dystopias, megacorporations, etc. i know you're just a retard copypasting shit, and i don't give a damn about the game either way, but you really deserve to be publicly mocked.

Good thing to know New Vegas doesn't exist.

Morrowind has character building and quests with choices.
>You're started off with no background or history
That's not true in case of Stalker, your start as a survivor of some freaky accident with a truck full of dead people or whatever, which came from the center of the Zone, I think? It's highly unusual.
>The roleplaying comes from how you insert yourself in the world, listen to peoples stories, create your own, sit by the campfire, hunt anomalies, etc.
This means every game is an RPG ~if you want it to be~, which is cute but also devalues the term quite a bit.

DnD started as a fantasy version of a wargame, sort of. A lot of early modules focus primarily on dungeon crawling. Anyway, we're talking about video game RPGs, obviously, not PnP. This is not /tg/.

>by killing that npc you anger his faction but gain favor with their competition who now fulfill the same purpose of the original npc you killed but with different options going forward.

git gud.

>IT'S NOT FUCKING FAIR BROS I LOVE GETTING SOFT LOCKED WITHOUT REALIZING IT UNTIL 50 HOURS LATER
>IT'S IMMERSIVE TO NOT BE ABLE TO FINISH THE GAME I JUST WANT THE OPTION TO BE ABLE TO RUIN EVERYTHING AND NOT BE ABLE TO PROGRESS
>IT'S NOT FUCKING FAIR I WANT TO MURDER CHILDREN STEAL THEIR CLOTHES AND LOOK AT THEIR UNDERWEAR
why are WRPG players all sociopaths?

Attached: 1393674463906.jpg (339x298, 52K)

PnP is what these retards want, though, they just don't know it. It's what they imagine old, "real" CRPGs/WRPGs were like, with infinite possibilities limited only by your imagination. Of course, they haven't actually played any of those old mythical games that let you do LITERALLY anything, they but they sure love talking about them.

>there is literally no way to avoid soft locking besides making npcs essential
>it is physically impossible for developers to be creative

Hey there Todd

>Good thing to know New Vegas doesn't exist.
He's not wrong about the repercussions though. Most of the time when you kill a quest critical NPC in NV the game does not handle it gracefully. The quest is just now softlocked. Obsidian clearly got tired of writing NPC death event handlers and quest fail states.

but no one called tactical wargames "role playing games"
yes the early modules focused more on dungeon crawling and at it's heart the game still does, doesn't mean roleplaying is any less important to the games
and pnp is the source of the vidya RPG genre and where the name comes from. It would be like saying Street Fighter doesn't have anything to do with Karate because Ryu shoots fireballs and martial arts are not video games.

>liberalism is about rising up
Not anymore
Also, all the seminal cyberpunk works is not about rebels or rising up but about people just trying to navigate the world that they are in.
And while there sometimes are rebels, they are usually either obviously never going to accomplish anything, or are secretly or overtly owned by some corporation - OR, they are not the actual point of the story. Or all three.

cringe

But the choice is still there for those who want it. And when it came to the big players they got creative and added in work around.

>All of the main quest being completely irrelevant when one dwarf can beat the game for you is a good thing!

>he literally cannot live with the repercussions of his actions
>the game must cater to me and my choices no matter what, i must be able to win no matter how many retarded choices i make
>if i intentionally make a game unwinnable through my own actions, it is up to the dev to wipe my ass, not me

>Softlocking

Every game that has featured this kind of shit tells you flat out when you passed the point of no return. Fuck off, retard.

Sure, you can handle it. But you are increasing your workload by significant amounts. Let's say you have a recurring character the player can kill. You don't have to handle the death just once, you have to handle it for every time the character was to appear. And if you have a lot of recurring characters then you have a lot to handle. And what if those character interact with each other? Now you have to handle permutations of characters being alive and dead. It quickly because a fucking nightmare if you want a coherent story. That's probably why NV doesn't reuse characters much and basically anyone who is REALLY important just isn't in the game unless it's a specific point when the player is supposed to be allowed to kill them.

I played New Vegas, which allowed me to kill any character where it made sense. It also had a plot which encouraged you to kill those people occasionally. A kind of plot where killing some of them would work in the interest of other NPCs. That was the game where lead designer wanted that from the start, though.

It's also pretty unusual to have your debts paid off and to be hand-selected by the emperor to unite Morrowind, what's your point? They structure it to let you define how you want to play your character and experience the zone. I agree that it's easy to dilute what an RPG is, but I think there's a difference when the core gameplay comes from inserting yourself into that world and experiencing it in your own way. That's a part of most games, but it's the focus of an RPG. SotDRP was an iconic WC3 roleplaying map that had none of the traditional features of CRPGs, but it was still a roleplaying game.

nice try baby, bedtime

Attached: werdna.jpg (854x480, 57K)

>just ignore him like you would in a real scenario.
one time a kid called me gay and i threw a book at him and told him to fuck off

reddit and sóypilled

To be fair, it's kind of a plot point that most of the main quest of Morrowind is pointless business work that you are only doing just because the prophecy says to. Morrowind has this big meta-narrative shit going on that a lot of people love about it. I don't.

>But the choice is still there for those who want it.
Think of how much better New Vegas could have been if the devs had spent less time appeasing the miniscule proportion of players who like to go on murderous rampages in RPGs and more time on developing the Legion.
In a perfect game, sure, you can kill every NPC, and everything can still work and make sense. But that's one of the last things I would add to the perfect game, right after the earwax maintenance mechanic. It just doesn't add much.

Oh interesting, so you followed a quest that the devs specifically gave you that revolved around killing certain important characters? As in, you killed important characters because the devs told you to? Oh so the devs told you to do something they planned for you to do, and then you did it, and things didn't mess up? You really didn't think this gotcha post through very well, did you?

This message is a lie for every character except the spider dwarf.
As long as he is alive you can still technically beat the game. It's just secret and costs half your max HP.

>find a way to make a character impossible to kill in an organic way that won't feel out of place
Or
>lol you just can't kill this guy even though he's standing right in front of you completely defenseless.

killing people should have consequences
Yes, if you kill someone you should be prepared for the inevitability that they might have been useful to you later and now they are dead and can't help you.
If I believe killing someone should be worth derailing several quests because I hate that cunt, I should be able to kill them. If I'm not caught I should get away with it, not have him crouching on the ground at 1 HP calling for the guards.
Do you know how many NPCs are essential in skyrim that don't need to be?

I CAN BREAK THESE CUFFS

>core gameplay comes from inserting yourself into that world and experiencing it
That would depend on the player. I never sat with other stalkers in Stalker... Does that mean I was playing it "wrong"? Was it not an RPG for me, then? It absolutely does dilute the term. Thart would also make a lot of adventure games "RPGs". Stuff like Myst, for example.

You didn't play New Vegas?

Don't worry, you won't be able to attack women either after twitter complains

Cuck

>Do you know how many NPCs are essential in skyrim that don't need to be?
Most of the NPCs in Skyrim are essential only until their quest is complete. The reason for this is because Skyrim is a proper living world, there's more in the game than just the player that can kill an NPC. They just didn't want to deprive players of quests due to no fault on the part of the player and so they make most NPCs essential until the quest done. Then they can die independently or the player can kill them. For the ones that are always essential it's usually because they serve a critical role the game can't have empty, e.g. every city has two people earmarked for the Jarl role and they are both always essential.

Its really not that complicated. In NV Vegas for example if you kill every one involved in a quest then you fail that quest. Its logical and it makes sense and that's a choice the player made. Only an idiot would complain about that. Now lets say you have a recurrent character who is meant to show up multiple times but you kill then in the first encounter because you don't trust them. If they were just a side character then end it there. Maybe add some voice lines and other small things referencing them later on but the player is otherwise cut off from that content. New Vegas handled it pretty well in my opinion.

RPGs used to do it in the early 2000nds and guess what, RPGS were the best before 2007.
Lol, you are a faggot.

It depends on how many npcs are unkillable. If it's more than a or 4 it's a bad sign for player's choice

Just do Morrowind’s “good job idiot, now reload a save” if you kill someone important.

People that just want to massacre everyone should go play something else.

Which one do you think will sell more and therefore keep the company alive so they can keep making games and keep employees?

>having the game say quest failed adding a replacement npc or two and a few lines of dialogue is the reason the legion isn't fleshed out

Wut?

>In NV Vegas for example if you kill every one involved in a quest then you fail that quest
Not all the time. Most of the time they don't handle the NPC death and the quest becomes softlocked. If it's in your quest log it's staying there forever, neither completable or failable.
>Now lets say you have a recurrent character who is meant to show up multiple times but you kill then in the first encounter because you don't trust them. If they were just a side character then end it there. Maybe add some voice lines and other small things referencing them later on but the player is otherwise cut off from that content.
But what if their role was important? You can't just end it. You need a replacement. But what if the player kills the replacement too? You need a replacement for the replacement. It just goes on and on and on. You are increasing your workload by a significant amount. There's just practical limitations involved here.

There's reason, for example, NV doesn't let you go the Legion before the game is in a state it can handle the player killing Caeser.

Go back to Deus Ex or FO1/2 if you’re looking for child murder. I’m not opposed to it but it’s not going to break my immersion in a cyber utopia

both. easy/casual mode has essential npcs. hardcore mode has killables.

casuals should play on casual and stop trying to prove how tough they are by picking hard mode, then bitching because it's too hard.

Fallout 3 would be an improvement because at least Fallout 3's politics were blatantly satirical rather than being woke.

There comes a point where designing a game where a character is expected to die the second the player can shoot him is a detriment to the game’s story.

CDPR is very story first, why does anyone expect them to value player agency more?

>killing defenseless quest givers is hardcore
The absolute state.

But 99% of the time in skyrim its pointless and overbearing. Skyrim is do focused on making you do the quests it stops being a living world.
In New Vegas there's a quest called three card bounty where you are asked to kill three major raiders in the area. You can encounter and kill them at any time before the quest and when you go to "start" the quest you can immediately complete it.
Compare this to Skyrim where in many cases major items and npcs won't even spawn untill their respective quest is started. (Minor fetch quest items non withstanding)

Personally I use video games to train and prepare me for rampages IRL.

You can also fool the quest giver by siding with the bounties. Good shit.

But I'm a real child murderer.

I agree it would be nice to have the options but it's just not realistic. The work load by comparison is a lot less to cater to the larger audience so it doesn't make sense from a business stand point to put in over twice the effort designing fail safes, new story lines, etc when less than a third of overall people playing will even know that shit is there. Obviously normies will pick up on it and it will be a talking point from them but they won't use it or even play with it at all. My point is I just can't see justifying the hours and money to cater to such a smaller audience when your sales won't really change either way.

>Defenseless
They aren't underage nigger

>it's just not realistic
NEW VEGAS DOES THAT

And NV compartmentalizes its NPCs in order to achieve that. For people that have a long running role and really matter you can't kill them until the game says you can.

I would prefer quests being able to fail and not softlock the game. It's nice when the game can accommodate you killing important characters or seriously fucking up a decision and still presents you with a way to proceed even if it's not the ideal path

Power is being able to kill someone, then choosing not to.

>And NV compartmentalizes its NPCs
The way it does that mostly makes sense and it's a better way to do that. More, dare I say, immersive way.

>Not all the time. Most of the time they don't handle the NPC death and the quest becomes softlocked. If it's in your quest log it's staying there forever
I honestly can't think of a time this happens outside of bugs or quests that are part of larger quests
>But what if their role was important? You can't just end it. You need a replacement. But what if the player kills the replacement too? You need a replacement for the replacement. It just goes on and on and on. You are increasing your workload by a significant amount. There's just practical limitations involved here.
You're seeing this as too black and white, there are other ways to continue a quest/interaction beyond endless npcs and even then there are more creative means to make a character unkillabke. Look a yes man, it makes sense he won't permanently die because he can transfer his code.

>There's reason, for example, NV doesn't let you go the Legion before the game is in a state it can handle the player killing Caeser.
This is a perfect example of how to make a character unkillable without making them unkillable. They did the same thing with the ncr but just failed to give the two factions equal opportunities to stand out.

That's a dumb comparison. You can literally do the same thing with several quests in Skyrim. Most players will likely have the tablet or whatever from Bleak Falls Barrow before getting that quest from Farengar.
The only time you typically can't is with radiant quests, a system New Vegas lacks entirely.

You're a fucking faggot, but this is a great insult.

This, for gods sake this

Seeing as you could lkill important NPCs in all the Witcher games with ramifications later on, why do you think this won't be done in this game?

New Vegas' system works fine for New Vegas, but not every story is told the way New Vegas' is. Do you really think it'll be fun if all games start being written in a manner that plot important characters only appear in-person once over the course of the game?

>this thread
Man, CDPR drones really will defend anything, huh?

Attached: 1542109874504.jpg (499x497, 82K)

People mad that plot critical NPCs cant be gunned down whenever you see them are babies. The devs would need to create either nameless respawning NPCs or machines to replace the services they provided, which is a lot of work and takes away the whole relationship and trustbuilding aspect of cyberpunk. It's not the wilderness, you need people.

>not killing children in an RPG about a dystopian society
Okay, that's probably a violation of a lot of admittedly stupid laws they need to follow
>Not allowed to kill "essential" NPC's
God I hate this. It means you're inherently limiting the plot of a game centered around being and role playing sandbox where you ought to be able to investigate different aspects of a particular world build. Like, making a an idea for a character and just running with how that rp would act is most of the unf t anyways.
>Your rp character would shoot this npc on sight? Too bad because he's too important to the plot lol

I'm honestly pretty disappointed

Attached: 1559590028790.jpg (648x648, 46K)

That's the crux of the problem, really. What IS more important for an RPG story - for the developers to TELL the story they really want to, player agency be damned, or for them to compromise their desire in favor of increasing player agency? Josh Sawyer, the lead on New Vegas, maintains that "if you want to tell a story, write a book". Clearly CDPR writers disagree.

I really don't mind.

>The devs cant just let you create a dead end character who can kill anyone vital to him
Why? It's a fucking role playing game

>defending the witcher 3
helllloooo reddit

>he thinks not being able to kill children messes with his immersionIf you want to be immersed I suggest you immerse yourself in a large body of water with a high distance leap you fuckin schmuck

Attached: 0b4vvpq4f6d01.jpg (960x492, 56K)

Or, they just let your actions have consequences. Guess that idea is too much for witcherbabs

Attached: 1558530643855.png (720x715, 472K)

>Modkit
>Downgraded
How can you "downgrade" a modkit you autistic fucking mongoloid

friendly reminder that the witcher games arent actual RPGS theyre action fantasy games (for a real RPG play kingdom come)
why does reddit love CDPR so much its kinda creepy

>Morrowind, New Vegas
What other RPGs in he last 20 years allow you to just casually kill plot-essential NPCs?

>This entire stupid fucking post
Name one game that you think is a "Roleplaying game" that allows you to do what you want.
Go on, I'll wait.

Nobody would be happy with Cyberpunk running on fallout engine.

because coding doesn't run on imagination power
it's not a pen and paper game
play video games with their limited capacities or don't

I never played Deadfire but I suspect maybe it did?

That's not an engine problem...

>all the circlejerk redditors SEETHING that someone dare insult witcher or projekt red in this thread
love to see it

>Kill an npc
>story-wise you can no longer advance their questline and are now hunted by mercs until you die or quit the game.
>"These consequences suck. The devs are hacks. The game should always be winnable no matter what."

Who are you quoting?

You really think they kept that engine this whole time because of gameplay? No that engine is incredibly easy to design shit like that around compared to a real engine that plays real games.

I know you guys love New Vegas and all but consider this, the whole yes man thing only really works with the specific type of story New Vegas establishes. We don’t even know what kind of npcs are considered super essential or if they will always be unkillable at all times or not

In skyrim this only really appiles to item specific quests with little to no story or content behind them that the player might miss by completing it out of order. In NV it applies to nearly every single quest.

>It's too difficult to code the ability to kill all the traders in game and have your worthless role play die miserably in an infinite loop

... No? This exact shit used to happen in a lot of older rpg's

I agree with Sawyer fundamentally, that there's no point in choosing video game for your medium if you don't make use of its advantages, but I think there's an obvious line at which you stop allowing agency. In a role-playing game, that's when the player is no longer playing a role. If the player chooses to take actions that no one living in the world of the game would reasonably take (murder a whole village, murder children, assassinate heavily guarded political leaders), they're no longer playing a feasible role in-universe, and should not be rewarded.
That's not to say I think certain NPCs being immortal is necessarily the solution. To maintain immersion, the player should just be immediately swarmed by endless guards/townspeople and killed, with no chance of survival.

They kept it because they have tools for it and because people will buy their games anyway. It's more a question of scripting and writing, really.

>no one living in the world of the game would reasonably take
>assassinate heavily guarded political leaders
Because that never happens?

That's called "advertising", Mr moderator.

Arcamum came out in 2001

Ultimately it comes down to the choice the devs made. Letting all NPCs die whenever the player chooses requires a lot of extra writing and also limits the storyline to be completable in that circumstance. New Vegas got away with it because Yes Man could reincarnate over and over, and the plot's concept is eliminating different factions until one or zero remained to take over New Vegas.

It happens (extremely rarely now due to just how heavy the guard is), but the assassin almost never survives.
Like, I said, you can do it, sure, but you should be instantly killed.

>>no one living in the world of the game would reasonably take
>>assassinate heavily guarded political leaders
>Because that never happens in real life?

Exactly. There will always be limits, its how developers deal with those limits that matters.

no they didn't
a single dead end character is different from literally every npc being a killable dead end character to adapt to the story
there'd be no story you could realistically write
you might as well just make "generic quest givers: the game" in that case but very few people would even want to play something that bland and even less would want to make it

>plot's concept is eliminating different factions until one or zero remained to take over New Vegas
The plot of Cyberpunk is very similar, though? You have the thing everybody wants (platinum/immortality chip). Different factions want it. That's it.

The fight should be tough, but undoable? It's an RPG, after all. Not real life.

>Yes man is the only plot that lets you kill other essential NPC's
No, each faction works in opposition to the other. It's as complicated as that. Just connect essential NPC's to each other so that killing them is an essential part of the plot.

Cyberpunk and New Vegas absolutely has a different plot. The chip is just the thing that throws you into it, shit like yes man only really works with a setting that accommodates it. If there was some single fucktard you couldn’t kill in cyberpunk and it’s literally just that guy you wouldn’t want it either

You must be fucking British.
>The game will tell me when it's appropriate to kill enemies. If there's someone I oppose, I can trust my faction to tell me what to do about them instead of making any decisions myself

Yes man is the only thing you can do if you literally kill everyone. He’s the failsafe because you can’t kill him, if you’re just gonna pick a faction then obviously nobody opposing your faction would be essential(and even if they were, they’d die in a quest most likely anyways)

>STRG+F

Morrowind: 15 results
Fallout : 24
Bethesda : 8

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm its like some fans of a company still cannot cope with the last 2 blunders the company produced

Attached: 21352352135.jpg (344x345, 32K)

>It's an RPG, after all. Not real life.
RPGs are meant to emulate real life, at least to a certain extent. That's how role-playing works, you take on the role of something we can relate to from a human standpoint.

>no they didn't
Yes they did. It was only really arpg's that do otherwise but no one really plays arpg's for the plot , as they are usually more focused on *action* as the name implies.

When it comes to a game like Cyberpunk 2077 you'd expect a more traditional rog as per the basis of the video games namesake, but instead we're getting an arpg. That doesn't mean the game itself is going to be shit, but I was really hoping for something more focused on a complex plot and giving the player more role playing options. Maybe not quite as much as something a roguelike would offer but still...

That's 3, maybe 4, so far. Anything else?

Or some dumb shit goes down without your input at all and they get killed. And now you have to start a new game. Then at different parts on the game until you rage-boycott the game or finally finish like an autist.

Hmmmmmmmmm it's like one particular company has been responsible for the most influential WRPGS of the past two decades

Failsafes suck, honestly. In a complex roleplaying game you create dead end characters a lot actually.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm too bad the last 2 games sucked ass and the last game (Fallout 76) is one of the lowest rated AAA games in existance

Mostly because advertisers like to shil it here for some reason.

It's not that simple not even close.

A good game would account for it and play out the story accordingly.
I guess Cyberpunk isn’t a good game.

And that somehow retroactively removes their influence on the industry?

You are indeed correct but I have no idea what point you're trying to make by stating such facts.

Kenshi, also I think Underrail.

I guess out of the millions there are only two good games ever ever

>schmuck
jew detected.
which is surprising since your diet consists, in part, of toddlers foreskins.

Attached: becca shrug.png (760x579, 459K)

The point is about the critical npcs part retard, killable children gets you banned in several countries

Since when did Kenshi even have a plot?

>Their influence on the industry

>M..Mah favorite company was famous! and important!!!!!
Imagine clinging to the past. Also thank god it was influentel decades ago another because the gameplay in every Bethesda game was so fucking shit i stzill cannot cope how people have nostalgic memories about Morrowind.
Going back is only possible with a huge mount of nostalgia.

But i guess you can be "proud" that some game you limed had an impact 17 years ago but is completly irrelevant today

There’s actually a backup way to beat morrowind you just need the 3 items and a way over the ghost gate

Dilate.

>mfw the prophecy of the save spamming is real

Attached: sona.gif (400x400, 123K)

>i stzill cannot cope
Yeah, I can see that

The only thing i see are Bethesdadrones again trying to force another blunder because they cannot cope with the fact that their beloved series is literally dead in the dust.

Its kinda telling that every single CP 2077 thread is full of people defending Bethesda or Obisidian.

Attached: DtH8jvqWkAM3pDB.jpg (536x441, 38K)

>underages are defenseless
The most talked about criminal gang in Sweden right now consist of 8-12-year-olds.
No, that is not a joke.

This is your example of consequence? This is your example of how being able to tard out and murder plot-critical NPCs is good design?

It's an a nonstandard game over that tells you to reload your last save. Fucking wow. I can't believe developers don't put this amazing mechanic in all their games.

Luckily I have a solution for you. If you get the childish urge to kill a plot-critical character in CP77, aim a gun at their head and yell, "POW!" Then run to the electrical socket and yank the power cord out to shutdown your computer or console. "That'll teach me!" you can say, grinning to yourself in the dark.

Does anyone really care about this game now that it has tranny ads in it?....Really?

Attached: nRTOoD.png (1106x1012, 660K)

But.....they're not? The only reason they're even mentioned is for examples of how certain mechanics were implemented in the past. No ones even talking about thier newer games unless pointing out what not to do in an rpg.

Okay, so we've got about 5 so far. Seems to me that killing a plot important NPCs aren't a common thing in most RPGs, so why are people having ahissy fit because you can't in CP2077? Could you kill any essential NPC whenever you want in Fallout 1/2, Gothic, KOTOR, Elex, Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate, Divinty, VTMB or Planescape?

I can't believe its come to the point of people here defending shitty game design like unkillable NPCs of ANY sort. Skyrim was notorious for this shit. It SUCKED not being able to eliminate Maven Blackbryer. It was bullshit, she basically dabs on your character along with the others. You can become a god, but nothing more than a nuisance to children and quest NPCs. Its shit. The fuck happened to this place?

Attached: IMG_20190627_201231.jpg (931x1666, 172K)

I hope you make a game so I can laugh at how bad it turns out

>build a perfectly good robo dong
>attach a smelly human to it
Disgusting

>so why are people having a hissy fit you can't in CP2077
Because it's made by CDPR. There's a long detailed history starting with /dag/fags getting BTFO by The Witcher 2 that spurred this autistic hate for CDPR where they just make shit up. Remember a few weeks ago when it was apparently shit because the faggots created the game in their head based off that 2015 reveal teaser and are mad that the game won't be like that?

Attached: Witcher Shitposting.png (1872x275, 69K)

Dude look at the thread here. Do you see how autistic the people are who want Cyberpunkl 2077 to fail?
Pic related
Look at this.
Also people stuck in the past because some shitty RPG made 2 decades ago when they played it as kids or teens and now have it in high regard.
So they tend to ignore the jaring bad aspects in for example Morrowind ( for example graphics, gameplay, synchronized lines) but focus on minor aspects like killingevery NPC

Attached: SeekHelp 2.0.png (2856x2718, 665K)

>if you keep eating poisonous food it builds up your tolerance to it
Really?

Attached: 1280476373478.png (250x250, 106K)

The point isn't that you can't kill someone whenever you want its that they might go the lazy route and just make certain characters invincible.

The real question is why are people making out like Skyrim's "You can't kill anyone we don't want you to" is unusual and unacceptable game design. It's how most RPGs are. Nobody ever whines, for example, that you can't just kill La Croix in Bloodlines whenever you feel like it or that the only reason you can't is because the game prevents you from doing so with artificial gameplay restrictions. This shit is standard for RPGs. Nobody is "notorious" for it.

>why yes I do believe being able to kill virtual children is an important aspect of an immersive game

Attached: 36EA631E7AD44FEAA442C0BE5DF2E133.png (500x500, 248K)

I don't care about the children but not having unkillable NPCs that are necessary for the plot has been a problem that plagued RPGs for a long time now. I guess we'll just have to keep waiting for an RPG that solves it.

If CdProject delivers the same ammount of different paths you can take and different outcomes + sidequests that always somehow intervene i would rather take the invincible approach.
I dont want ruin my experience and replaying a 100+ hours game because i killed some dude/girl 20 hours in the game just to be locked oit of y quest where i found out he/she was the next messiah and would have rewarded me with the best artifical dickenhancement on the planet.

Different styles of games. In skyrim, you do almost whatever you want and you become a living god with absolutely no one above you (except kids). In VtMB, there are always those stronger than you.

They are just smaller versions of humans, why should they be invulnerable?
>oh but there will be gore porn of dead kids on youtube
Except there isn't of all the games where you can kill kids

>making your game unbeatable is a consequence
Uh, yeah?

>reaching this hard
I hope it really is just one dude shitposting and pretending anything he does matters in the slightest and that this game won't sell millions and be a critical darling regardless

If it's legitimately multiple people who post this shit and genuinely believe that it's anything but baiting for (You)s then I'd suggest a relaxing nap in your garage with the door closed while revving your parent's car because there's obviously no saving you

Attached: 1507694705696.png (450x219, 221K)

Then how does you being a god in Skyrim but can’t kill some bitch relate to not being able to kill characters we’re not even sure of the identity or strength of as of this exact moment?

Because people don't understand that game design differs from RPG to RPG and also people don't understand what 2077 is about

>I guess we'll just have to keep waiting for an RPG that solves it.
Supposedly that's what Ken Levine's next game is going to be about. Details are vague but apparently it's an open world sci-fi RPG where the player can do anything there's game mechanics for to anyone and the game world and story will always react accordingly.

>I have never, not once, ever played a video game

>Yea Forums is now filled with underage kids whose entire conception of role-playing games is formed around playing skyrim in their formative years
just delete the fucking board already

Attached: 1525077321456.png (1200x566, 966K)

but having unkillable NPCs*
I need to get some sleep soon
That sounds awesome. Hope it ends up actually being completed without entering dev hell.

>In VtMB, there are always those stronger than you.
Except La Croix isn't. You kill him in game. Along with a lot of other people that are supposed to be stronger than you but aren't. It's just you aren't allowed to do it until the game says you are because the game locks off player options in the areas they are hanging around in.

If it has nothing to do with skyrim then why ask about skyrim? Silly.

The conversation started with bitching about Skyrim

I will tell you how this is going to play out:
>Have a fixed budget of 30 million dollars
>First of all we need an engine
>To make the game look immersive we need good graphics, motion capture etc
>Voiced lines are necessary to immerse the player
>At the end there is not much money left

Or

>Make the game ugly
>make the protagonist silent and many Npcs dont have unqie lines
>But hey we have options to kill every person

>Morrowind is a nonstandard game now
I didn't feel old until this exact moment. You shits have too many games that think for you.
Now here, let me spoon feed you, you illiterate little fuck.

>Yea Forums was always filled with people who hold shitty games like Morrowind in high regard because they played it in their youth and cannot accept that most aspects of the game are literally bad but nostalgia doesnt let the people realize it

if you make immersive first person game it better be immersive. having protected story characters breaks immersion. like in fallout 4 the first friendly faction group sucks and you can minigun them all day and night and they'll just drop on their knees for a moment and still be your best friend. compare that to new vegas, you can slaughter the first town you start in. you have the freedom to do as you please, to immerse yourself in the world around you.

If you could kill children it would get an AO rating (at least in America) and they wouldn't be able to release it on anything but the PC.

New Vegas still has plot-protected characters, just not in the starting zone.

Well, with modern games, it would auto-save right after so you'd be fucked. No manual saves!

reddit jew detected

>shit like yes man only really works with a setting
Ah yes, a robotic consciousness which jumps from one host body to another could not possibly make sense in a cyberpunk setting...

In 99% of RPGs on the market you play as an exceptional individual, not a level 0 commoner.

Yeah actually, if you use the
>Body double
Excuse what fucking stops anyone with actual importance and money in the story from doing the same?

my point is that having plot protected characters is not a bad thing if it's done well. if you make insufferable character a major plot character you have basically ruined your game.

First post, best post.

Attached: 1551935537260.png (1000x1000, 668K)

Name 5 games released in the last 2 decades that let you kill children without the addition of mods

>compare that to new vegas, you can slaughter the first town you start in. you have the freedom to do as you please, to immerse yourself in the world around you.
Sure. As long as you don't mind you break a lot of shit in the process because often quests don't handle "abnormal" player actions and get softlocked and you don't find the bugs that result from that to be immersion breaking.

New vegas has also shitty gameplay, bad graphics and bad animations. Not to forget bad voice acting .
But thank god we have killable Npcs LOL

>you don't blindly worship my shitty censored games from an IMPORTANT corporation I like so much? KILL YOURSELF INFIDEL
yikes

What countries?

>you can do ANYTHING
>lol no, it's a theme park, be nice to the comedians ok.
>cyberpunk
>childrens can't be abused they are sacred and pure and immune to the corruption
How many red flags do you need holy shit.

I matters tremendously.

>cyberpunk setting
>ok you must be loyal good and help everything, you really wanted that leather belt, think of the feelings of that robot, man.
It's sad how political brainwash made you obedient tot he point you can't be a person even in role playing games. You hear orders, you obey. Like a machine.

Why can't you hurt kids in modern videogames?

So there's even less consequences then.

I'm glad this shit thread is dying. You're all unironic retards. Every single one of you.

bioshock is what cyberpunk should had followed tonally. anarchic nonsociety where anything goes and you can even kill children albeit off screen. too bad it's the current year.

Because that will get you an AO rating from the ESRB and an AO rating means the game isn't allowed on consoles which is were the majority of the gaming market is.

fallout 3 has also shittier gameplay, bad graphics, bad animations and absolute braindead plot and characters.

then developers could allow you to harm kids in the pc release with almost no repercusion, who the fuck cares about ESRB ratings? parents buy call of duty to their prepubescent kids all the time

>Excuse what fucking stops anyone with actual importance and money in the story from doing the same?
Nothing? But it won't be written like that. I mean, it would be cool. Killing important people would require hacking into their information security vault and killing the backup consciousness for real, or hiring a hacker to do so. We both know it won't be written like that, though. You just won't have an option to attack them until the plot allows.

>who the fuck cares about ESRB ratings?

>wtf why does this company want to make sure they can sell their game??1?

>this entire thread
>the fact that this is worth any argument at all
Zoomers deserve late-stage abortion.

Attached: 1517988055110.jpg (104x178, 5K)

kill yourself, todd

Again different. One is you can't kill a guy because attacking is disabled when you are in that room/building, or because it's in a cutscene with dialog, or similar. The other is you can attack but the guy just doesn't take damage.