Will this game have Open World RPG Elements?

[Crazy Alchemy]

By which I don't mean Skyrim and shame on anyone who thought that. I mean like Shadows of Amn, Planescape Torment, maybe Fallout 2 and Arcanum of Steamworks and Magick Obscura to take it to an extreme. I hate being arbitrarily locked out of areas I wanted to explore, and so far no Shadowrun game has provided the living breathing interactive world we expected from Kickstarter.

One thing that's turned me off to the new generation of Shadowrun games is how linear they are, how little player interactions in conversations with NPCs seem to matter, and how little freedom the player actually has to explore maps and return to previous areas.

The New Generation of Shadowrun that I read about and watched gameplay of was a series of missions that the player was essentially forced through with very little to explore and almost entirely combat oriented gameplay, devoid of interesting hub areas and interactive content.

Everything I was able to gather indicated that Dragonfall was a major improvement but still fell short of the expectations many of the kickstarter backers held for the original. My question is, how has Hong Kong changed things? Is it more open world than before? Are there more meaningful conversations with NPC's? Are there more meaningful dialogue choices with actual reactivity now? Are there interesting hub areas to explore and does the player have any actual freedom to explore them?

[Crazy Alchemy]

"Democratic" "Republic" hahaha.

[gr0ri0us_r34d3r]

DONTO MAYKU ME NUKU YOO

[Darkeus]

Publicado originalmente por gr0ri0us_r34d3r:

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

I'm a troll, ignore me.

I also made this:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/310950/discussions/0/594820656473124379/

Got blown up and is now back to troll once again. Just report me and move on. It's literally all I do, is troll and bait, look in my post history. Plus I use feminism to try and prove points where it is irrelevant.

Lmao!

[Sentinel 08295]

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

By which I don't mean Skyrim and shame on anyone who thought that. I mean like Shadows of Amn, Planescape Torment, maybe Fallout 2 and Arcanum of Steamworks and Magick Obscura to take it to an extreme. I hate being arbitrarily locked out of areas I wanted to explore, and so far no Shadowrun game has provided the living breathing interactive world we expected from Kickstarter.

One thing that's turned me off to the new generation of Shadowrun games is how linear they are, how little player interactions in conversations with NPCs seem to matter, and how little freedom the player actually has to explore maps and return to previous areas.

The New Generation of Shadowrun that I read about and watched gameplay of was a series of missions that the player was essentially forced through with very little to explore and almost entirely combat oriented gameplay, devoid of interesting hub areas and interactive content.

Everything I was able to gather indicated that Dragonfall was a major improvement but still fell short of the expectations many of the kickstarter backers held for the original. My question is, how has Hong Kong changed things? Is it more open world than before? Are there more meaningful conversations with NPC's? Are there more meaningful dialogue choices with actual reactivity now? Are there interesting hub areas to explore and does the player have any actual freedom to explore them?

No. Otherwise you'd see the "open world" tag on the store page.

[Darkeus]

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

Publicado originalmente por Darkeus:

To be fair, Arcanum may be open world, and you can go where you want.

But the game really wants you to stay on task. Going off the rails will mostly get you killed. I know, I have the game installed as we speak.

As do I, and it lets you go where you want and do what you want. You say that open world is more of an illusion simply because you have to be prepared for the challenges you face, but it's not an illusion, you can survive in any number of ways, the beaten path is Shrouded Hills then Tarant and from there it's entirely up to you, plot points aside.

More importantly, once you visited a location you could return there pretty much any time you wanted. It didn't arbitrarily tell you that now you can no longer visit one side of Tarant, that for absolutely no reason and no justification of any kind a place you had been was closed off to you. The only places closed off were closed off for story reasons.

The new generation of Shadowrun games fail at that.

The plot points are what run the game. In the end, you gotta go to the next one.

And visiting a location. Other than that illusion of freedom, what point is there of going back to locations unless there was other content that you could not do yet? Like I said, I am playing the counter--argument. You don't give a reason why that is actually important in the scheme of the game except for personal taste.

And yes. I am saying that unless you min/max, exploit, cheat, or do it right and level up, the level and power of enemies is always a soft gate to where you can go. Most people just stay on the path and explore as it takes you. Again, going back to places is only good if there is something to actually do there. Which there usually isn't.

[Crazy Alchemy]

Publicado originalmente por Darkeus:

The plot points are what run the game

Plot points run any decent RPG regardless of whether or not it's open world. Even Fallout 2 was loosely guided by a series of plot points.

Publicado originalmente por Darkeus:

And visiting a location. Other than that illusion of freedom

It's not an illusion if you're allowed to travel, it's actual freedom.

Publicado originalmente por Darkeus:

what point is there of going back

Because you want to, and in a better game, because there are reasons to.

Publicado originalmente por Darkeus:

I am saying that unless you min/max, exploit, cheat, or do it right and level up, the level and power of enemies is always a soft gate to where you can go.

In Arcanum you can adapt survive and thrive in any number of ways, and there are a lot of different viable directions you can travel. What you're saying isn't true I've played the game start to finish repeatedly I've played it very differently a number of times and it's never been as restrictive as you are implying.

[Dorok]

In Arcanum combats are a total boredom, most of large wild area are total bordeom fillers, exploration quality is very weak in general which is a boredom for such large world.

Arcanum have many qualities but it's VERY far to be a model of open world CRPG to follow.

[Dorok]

All of that is ridiculous, OP fake he can enjoy non open world CRPG but once he starts argue, it's like he is restricted to only enjoy a very specific type of CRPG.

Ok his choice, but come here argue about open world CRPG is fallacious trolling.

[Zamio]

Publicado originalmente por Echoic:

Publicado originalmente por Zamio:

Anyone can make an open world game. Making an actual good one is much harder. You now have a million problems that didn't exist when your game was linear. What if the player does x before y? What if they've met and killed a pre-existing character we want to use for an important quest? How do we spread out all the content to not leave the player bored? What should we add in so the whole world is varied? What if the player doesn't do x right after y?

So many additional problems and it might still fail horrifically. Why does everyone think that open worlds are the easiest thing ever?

They say asking rhetorical questions is great for pursuasion / effect but it's not really clear what you're trying to pursuade us of...

hehe okay, I can do rhetorical questions too, I'm just bored enough...

Is there a point to this post? Is there any point engaging with you in a dialogue about it? Are you even more bored than I am? Did anyone actually say that it's the easiest thing ever? Who's everyone? Would the easiest thing ever be posting lots of questions?

There, deal with that! btw, not actually expecting an answer. :P

That's not a rhetoric question you dolt, I was giving possible dillema's the dev's will have to face. Try reading once in a while, eh?

Ah, that's probably too difficult for you to get.

[Crazy Alchemy]

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

In Arcanum combats are a total boredom

Luckily combat isn't the focus of the game, however I find it no less boring than combat in Fallout 2, and I contest that the combat in Shadowrun isn't much better.

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

most of large wild area

Luckily there aren't many, most are small, and most of them are completely optional. Of the wilderness areas I recall, there was a maze with a vexxing inaccessible treasure chest, a passage between the mountains, the base of the elf city, and the Bou Dur encampment. I'm sure I'm missing a few, but locations that stand out to me are the many city and hub environments populated with NPC's riddles and quests, and the various dungeons most of which were optional, held interesting lore for those who bothered to explore, and contained adequate loot to be enticing.

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

exploration quality is very weak

Perhaps you simply failed to notice or appreciate all of the interesting locations, characters, and quests that litter the game. You don't seem to provide a reason why it was boring, other than that you found the wilderness areas dull.

[Crazy Alchemy]

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

All of that is ridiculous

It's apparant that you are simply adopting a contrarian attitude without regard for accuracy.

[Zamio]

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

Publicado originalmente por Vred:

Your point is that you want total freedom

How about the freedom to go back to the market after a mission or to visit a tavern and talk to some NPC's for miscillanious stuff and side quests?

You know, the type of stuff that has existed for more than a generation in better RPGs?

You mean the hub world Dragonfall had? That's called a hub.

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

Woo that's your problem? The KS?

KS stands for Kickstarter. Shadowrun Returns was one of the Kickstarter Success stories and recieved a lot of backing.

One of the features backers were led to expect was a reactive world to explore populated with characters and interactive content.

But in reality it doesn't allow much exploration, there aren't many characters, interactions with them are extremely limited, and there isn't much interactive content.

Citation needed.

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

The new generation of Shadowrun games fail at that.

TIL you can fail at doing something you never set out to do.

[Crazy Alchemy]

Publicado originalmente por Zamio:

You mean the hub world

Insufficient.

Publicado originalmente por Zamio:

Citation needed.

See dev videos and blogs during Kickstarter.

[Dorok]

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

...
Luckily combat isn't the focus of the game, however I find it no less boring than combat in Fallout 2, and I contest that the combat in Shadowrun isn't much better.
...

Lol it's so ridiculous that I stop lost my time.

[Crazy Alchemy]

Publicado originalmente por Dorok:

Publicado originalmente por Red Cyka:

...
Luckily combat isn't the focus of the game, however I find it no less boring than combat in Fallout 2, and I contest that the combat in Shadowrun isn't much better.
...

Lol it's so ridiculous that I stop lost my time.

I'm sorry not only was your sentence structure incoherent but you failed to provide a reason why you think what I said is ridiculous. You appear to be making an appeal to ridicule without providing any basis for ridicule.