https://www.google.com/search?q=vampyr&client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us&prmd=vni&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl-Kru8fPMAhUJLSYKHZM4CeMQsQQIIQ&biw=360&bih=615


So Vampyr is a action/survival RPG, developed by Dontnod, coming next year where you play as Jonathan Reid, a doctor turned Vampire in early 20th century England. Along with the moral struggle of needing to kill to live (if you do not feed you WILL die) you must decide who you will kill and suffer the consequences.


The people you kill will effect your environment. Kill a doctor and the streets may contain more sick. Kill the police and crime may become more rampant.

https://youtu.be/qUN_deqYEqc

Notably, it's made by Dontnod, the Life Is Strange developers. Looking forward to it.

Sounds like a game I'd really enjoy. Thanks for posting.

I know. Just reading articles and watching that video on it I'm getting a strong Vampire Chronicles vibe.

Really looking forward to it. Love the morality of having to choose who to feed on, as well as seeing the consequences of your actions effect the game world. I'll most likely feed on the sick and dying if that is a choice. At least their suffering would come to a swifter end.

Now I'm really interested.

My only question is, does feeding on the wrong people that cause a negative impact on the surrounding area, have a direct impact on you? Because without that, it's not impactful at all. I'd just go around feeding on as many people as I felt like every night till the whole town/city was dead. I mean, you're a vampire. You don't necessarily need humans except to feed on them, and considering how many humans were around even in 20th century England, I don't imagine you'd run out for a very, very long time.

If they do have it so that what negatively affects the city also negatively affects you, it sounds fun, otherwise, meh, a self-imposed morality based game sounds boring. It's a game, I don't care a whit about morality in a video game because I can easily distinguish my actions in a game from my actions in real life.

Hell yeah! I'll be keeping an eye on this fo sho!

From what I've heard you play a doctor, who has recently become a vampire. So I'm sure there will be moral impact on your character, depending on who you decide to feed on. First do no harm.... but in order to continue to go on living you need to do harm.

So I wonder what happens if you prey on prosttutes and homeless folks?

Here's an article that details what the game will be like a bit.

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/new-vampyr-screenshots-gloom-and-doom-dismal-edwardian-london-536473

Interesting indeed. Though I reckon it′ll be on Steam so my money will probably stay in my pocket

But what if they dont nourish as much and dont sustain your hunger as long and dont reward as much experience? You'd be feeding much more often which may be risky by means of getting caught. Also they mention in the video other vampires that also effect the world you live in. What if you start feeding on the poor and sick in droves and start pulling attention to the Vampyr? And then other vampires start hunting you for it?

Like I said above there are other vampires who live in the same city as you. I think it would be awesome if your actions could get them to start coming after you if you start drawing too much attention. Also what about vampire hunters? Who's to say there arnt humans on the look out for your kind who deal in killing them?

I'm surprised that you have to kill your victim. Even in the classic stories, being fed upon by a vampire isn't necessarily a death sentence. Also, I wonder if you can sire other vampires.

Vampirism in the game may work the same as Let The Right One In - one bite and they become a vampire unless they're killed. This would make sense in two ways - reduce the guilt at creating another monster to prey on people and, more selfishly, avoid creating predators that are competitors.

I'm a little disappointed at the London setting, it seems a bit hackneyed. Prague or Vienna or similar would have been unfamiliar and more interesting.

Paris might have been fun too.

I'm sure there are reasons that will explain it. I think a "little drink" would be possible but will probably be more risky at first until skills are gained. There isn't really much info out on how the feeding system works so it's all speculation at this point. What we do know is that feeding nourishes hunger, keeps you alive, probably regens health and is necessary to gain new abilities.

Yes, except that Dontnod have already set one game in (a futuristic) Paris with Remember Me. Somewhere new would be nice.

That, and I think many might agree that it already has a strong Vampire Chronicles vibe and Paris, France is one of the major stages for that series.

I agree, Paris would be a better setting than London - though maybe Dontnod want to avoid too many direct comparisons with established fictional worlds like the Vampire Chronicles, to be a bit more unique. I just think it would have been cool to have a vampire story set somewhere completely new like Prague which given its age and architecture would contribute bags of atmosphere. It's only a minor grumble though, if LIS is anything to go by then this will be extraordinary.

Oh ok gotcha. I've never heard of that game so I didn't know.

Would killing one doctor really increase the number of sick people?

That was one scenario I read that was claimed in one of the articles. How accurate that is though is like with any game pre release. But since this is based during a time the Spanish flu ran rampant in England, it would be interesting to see.

Blood is blood, no person would be more nourishing than another. I'd make up the experience loss by killing more vampires. All of the death already caused by the flu would cover up any of the sick people who are already dying. Let other vampires come, I'd relish in seeing them torn asunder. Keep in mind the developers also said there won't be just Vampyrs but other supernatural creatures... most likely werewolves.

I don't think so. They could go the rout that the quality of the blood is determined by the person's health. A healthy person who is financialy well off and can afford good food would have better nutrition and health and there for would have better quality blood than a homeless man starving on the street dying of flu. I think from a ballance perspective it would make since too.