Cyberpunk 2077 - Unkillable Children, Story NPCs

I just wondered how many games actually do show kids running around, killable or not. Not many. Guess that's the easy way to avoid issues, and also reduces the cost for development of the required animations for children.

And actually… the Witcher 3 had quests that involved the death of children as a potential consequence of the players actions. That's not the same thing, I'm sure. Then again, they never advertised CP2077 as a sandbox/simulation game either, so I'm at a loss why there'd ever be such expectations.

Originally Posted by sakichop
All this complaining about people complaining about not existing killable children in a game kills immersion is so ridiculous that I wonder if you do not have anything else to do, or if maybe you should face some hardships in life to make you stop complaining about stupid crap.

Isn't that how forums work?

I mean this is certainly OT but whats the point of a forum if all people do is "like" or thumbs up? If everyone just agrees or, if in disagreement, keeps it to themselves, wouldn't this place be like … really dead and boring?

While the discussion got more heated than it should have (and really … that seems to be the way online) it was still interesting with a lot of view points expressed that do show how people view different things.

I found it all pretty interesting myself and in the end even changed my mind to some degree on the issue, seeing more of the pros/cons of such a setting and why some folks do like it. I may not agree on how important it is (clearly it isn't an issue to me if you can or can't) but I better understand why some might like it.

So seems to me the topic and folks commenting served the purpose of the forum - to discuss something of interest and get people involved in posting. I only posted as often as I did as it was a chance to get involved with a discussion and make some actual posts instead of just being a lurker that takes without giving.

Of course you can have threads where people discuss strategy, tactics, best builds, stories, etc. and I enjoy that as well. But sometimes a good, even if somewhat heated, discussion can be good and enlightening.

I agree. Though every now and then the discussion was getting a bit overheated, I too think it was quite an interesting thread, and I loved to read the various arguments pro and con.

I agree with what you wrote @wolfgrimdark , but I'm confused why you quoted Sakichop instead of Ruysan, Sakichop's post was just a sarcastic mockery of Ruysan's post & it was Ruysan who was projecting anti-conversation in this instance.

Originally Posted by wolfgrimdark
Isn't that how forums work?

I mean this is certainly OT but whats the point of a forum if all people do is "like" or thumbs up? If everyone just agrees or, if in disagreement, keeps it to themselves, wouldn't this place be like … really dead and boring?

While the discussion got more heated than it should have (and really … that seems to be the way online) it was still interesting with a lot of view points expressed that do show how people view different things.

I found it all pretty interesting myself and in the end even changed my mind to some degree on the issue, seeing more of the pros/cons of such a setting and why some folks do like it. I may not agree on how important it is (clearly it isn't an issue to me if you can or can't) but I better understand why some might like it.

So seems to me the topic and folks commenting served the purpose of the forum - to discuss something of interest and get people involved in posting. I only posted as often as I did as it was a chance to get involved with a discussion and make some actual posts instead of just being a lurker that takes without giving.

Of course you can have threads where people discuss strategy, tactics, best builds, stories, etc. and I enjoy that as well. But sometimes a good, even if somewhat heated, discussion can be good and enlightening.

Agree 100%, but I think you misinterpreted my post.

See lackbloggers post above.

I'd say it could have applied to either post.

Ah apologies if I misinterpreted. It was more a general observation that was in my mind and triggered by the last comment. I would have been better off just posting without a quote but the sentiment I made still stands

I saw a kid in some rpg i played not too long ago - he was running around town - but for the life of me which rpg was it - poe? ds? some game - i don't know if he was killable or not because i didn't try but he ran up and had a message. A very important message. I'm not sure which game it was - maybe ds-2 ?

Originally Posted by Cacheperl
I just wondered how many games actually do show kids running around, killable or not. Not many. Guess that's the easy way to avoid issues, and also reduces the cost for development of the required animations for children.

And actually… the Witcher 3 had quests that involved the death of children as a potential consequence of the players actions. That's not the same thing, I'm sure. Then again, they never advertised CP2077 as a sandbox/simulation game either, so I'm at a loss why there'd ever be such expectations.

If we stopped nitpicking everything, we might as well close down the forum and for that matter whole of social media and even the internet as whole