Was the Dishonored series good? Did System Shock 2 have good level design?

[JarlFrank]

Except nobody is defending quest markers. It's just a simple fact that they are extremely hard to do well in 3D environments.

Given the scope and budget of this thing and apparent massive cuts they already had to do, I'd rather have a shitty navigation system that works, than theoretically great navigation system that actually sucks.

Speaking of navigation by environment done right, The Long Dark does it brilliantly. Not only there's no quest markers, they don't even give you a compass so you have to rely on position of the sun to remain mindful of your movement. The maps are pretty small, though. You can't have everything.

You are de facto defending them by saying that there is no other way to do quests in a 3D environment, which is blatantly bullshit. I can turn off quest markers for 95% of Skyrim and get by just fine, so if it can be done in that piece of shit game, it can be done in any game. There is even a mod that rewrites the quest objectives so that the troublesome quests that cannot be done without a marker, can be done without them (unfortunately the mod maker didn't keep it up to date so it's a dead mod, but that's by the by). What do you know, this so-called 'extremely hard to do' thing can be done just by rewriting the quest objectives. Really makes you think.

Isn't it interesting that 95% of what lazy developers (and apologists for them) say cannot be done or is extremely hard to do well can suddenly be done by a modder in their spare time.

"We're working on ultrawide support, we don't have any ulltrawide monitors in the studio!" Modder does it for them.
"We can't allow you to change FOV because it'll mess up the UI" Modder does it for them.
"We can't fix this power armor bug" Modder does it for them, then they reintroduce the bug in a later game using the same engine.

Quest markers are a byproduct of lazy, awful level and quest design. End of discussion. No ifs, no buts, no 3D environment this or that. If you cannot fit your quest into the game without quest markers, go back to the drawing board and redesign your levels, the quest itself, and probably major parts of the game, because you have failed to make a good game.

Fun thing about that, Dishonored 1 and 2 are great examples of games that have quest markers in them, but you can switch them off and you won't even notice they were ever there.

In Dishonored 1, I only needed to activate the marker twice, and that was in my own home base because one of my allies wanted to talk to me but I wasn't told where he was waiting for me.
During the actual missions though... you can switch them off and perfectly play, and you won't even notice that quest markers were ever an option. The levels are just well-designed with a natural progression and your goals are usually easy enough to find. It's usually "assassinate X" or "try the non-lethal way of eliminating X", and the means of doing it are obvious enough through exploration of the environment and layout of the places.

Dishonored 2 is even better at it, the level design in that one is just god-tier.

Considering how 3-dimensional the level design is in that game, playing it with markers on would actually be more confusing than helpful in some levels.

It's a perfect example of a game designed to be explored naturally, and it works well without those shitty dumbfuck markers. If your level design is good, markers are absolutely not needed.

 

[Wesp5]

Fun thing about that, Dishonored 1 and 2 are great examples of games that have quest markers in them, but you can switch them off and you won't even notice they were ever there.

Another recent game would be Metro: Exodus. Granted, it's no RPG, but it has huge maps with quest locations and you can navigate quite fine with the ingame realistic clipboard map...

 

[Kem0sabe]

Dishonored 2 was shit tho, even worse than prey.

 

[Yosharian]

Except nobody is defending quest markers. It's just a simple fact that they are extremely hard to do well in 3D environments.

Given the scope and budget of this thing and apparent massive cuts they already had to do, I'd rather have a shitty navigation system that works, than theoretically great navigation system that actually sucks.

Speaking of navigation by environment done right, The Long Dark does it brilliantly. Not only there's no quest markers, they don't even give you a compass so you have to rely on position of the sun to remain mindful of your movement. The maps are pretty small, though. You can't have everything.

You are de facto defending them by saying that there is no other way to do quests in a 3D environment, which is blatantly bullshit. I can turn off quest markers for 95% of Skyrim and get by just fine, so if it can be done in that piece of shit game, it can be done in any game. There is even a mod that rewrites the quest objectives so that the troublesome quests that cannot be done without a marker, can be done without them (unfortunately the mod maker didn't keep it up to date so it's a dead mod, but that's by the by). What do you know, this so-called 'extremely hard to do' thing can be done just by rewriting the quest objectives. Really makes you think.

Isn't it interesting that 95% of what lazy developers (and apologists for them) say cannot be done or is extremely hard to do well can suddenly be done by a modder in their spare time.

"We're working on ultrawide support, we don't have any ulltrawide monitors in the studio!" Modder does it for them.
"We can't allow you to change FOV because it'll mess up the UI" Modder does it for them.
"We can't fix this power armor bug" Modder does it for them, then they reintroduce the bug in a later game using the same engine.

Quest markers are a byproduct of lazy, awful level and quest design. End of discussion. No ifs, no buts, no 3D environment this or that. If you cannot fit your quest into the game without quest markers, go back to the drawing board and redesign your levels, the quest itself, and probably major parts of the game, because you have failed to make a good game.

Fun thing about that, Dishonored 1 and 2 are great examples of games that have quest markers in them, but you can switch them off and you won't even notice they were ever there.

In Dishonored 1, I only needed to activate the marker twice, and that was in my own home base because one of my allies wanted to talk to me but I wasn't told where he was waiting for me.
During the actual missions though... you can switch them off and perfectly play, and you won't even notice that quest markers were ever an option. The levels are just well-designed with a natural progression and your goals are usually easy enough to find. It's usually "assassinate X" or "try the non-lethal way of eliminating X", and the means of doing it are obvious enough through exploration of the environment and layout of the places.

Dishonored 2 is even better at it, the level design in that one is just god-tier.

Considering how 3-dimensional the level design is in that game, playing it with markers on would actually be more confusing than helpful in some levels.

It's a perfect example of a game designed to be explored naturally, and it works well without those shitty dumbfuck markers. If your level design is good, markers are absolutely not needed.

Yeah unfortunately Dishonored 2 is boring as fuck. I completely lost interest in it about 5 hours in

Note that I was playing it with EVERYTHING turned off, and the hardest difficulty, and no powers. And... just boring as fuck.

 

[Quillon]

Dishonored 2 was shit tho, even worse than prey.

How did they manage that?

Tho its strange either people find Arcane games boring as fuck or else treat them as 10/10s.

 

[Zer0wing]

Tho its strange either people find Arcane games boring as fuck or else treat them as 10/10s.

That's because they (the former group) want instant gratification either literally or instantly filling up codexers inner feature checkbox list and Arkane games are prone to not open to the player in the first hour of gameplay, if ever. Same thing with System Shock 2 or Thief 2 but no one remembers.

 

[Yosharian]

Tho its strange either people find Arcane games boring as fuck or else treat them as 10/10s.

That's because they (the former group) want instant gratification either literally or instantly filling up codexers inner feature checkbox list and Arkane games are prone to not open to the player in the first hour of gameplay, if ever. Same thing with System Shock 2 or Thief 2 but no one remembers.

Except I said 5 hours, and it's closer to 6. I got bored because the story is shit (just like the first game) and the gameplay is piss-easy.

Not because I ragequit after one hour.

Prey is fantastic by comparison, despite also having some flaws.

 

[Nano]

Tho its strange either people find Arcane games boring as fuck or else treat them as 10/10s.

That's because they (the former group) want instant gratification either literally or instantly filling up codexers inner feature checkbox list and Arkane games are prone to not open to the player in the first hour of gameplay, if ever. Same thing with System Shock 2 or Thief 2 but no one remembers.

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

 

[glass blackbird]

The second level of Thief 2 (after the tutorial mission) is the fucking warehouse, one of the best in the series

 

[Zer0wing]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

 

[Yosharian]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

Ok but those arguments were wrong, and Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, those games are masterpieces, whereas Dishonored 2 is not.

It's irrelevant what some people said 'at the time'. Dishonored 2 is 3 years old. It is not a great game.

Btw Dishonored 1 was pretty bad too

 

[Nano]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

What are you even talking about? It's a fact that people were lauding SS2 and Thief 2 when they were released. People were moaning about how they deserved to sell more when LGS closed just a few months later.

 

[The Great ThunThun*]

Dishonored 2 was shit tho, even worse than prey.

How did they manage that?

Tho its strange either people find Arcane games boring as fuck or else treat them as 10/10s.

Uh. I found Dark Messiah and CoC to be masterpieces and Dishonored to be meh. Dishonored 1/2 is a watered down thief game. Don't need that with the dark mod around.

 

[Maggot]

I played pretty much the entirety of Prey except for one specific space segment with quest markers off. The devs actually put effort into designing the station so you can read signs or use a map to navigate inside and outside. Anyone that justifies quest marker cancer in a game because it's a 3D environment needs to ease up on the paint chips.

 

[HoboForEternity]

Yeah. Alot of well designed 3d games sont need quest marker. Prey, ELEX are modern examples of them.

 

[JarlFrank]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

Ok but those arguments were wrong, and Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, those games are masterpieces, whereas Dishonored 2 is not.

It's irrelevant what some people said 'at the time'. Dishonored 2 is 3 years old. It is not a great game.

Btw Dishonored 1 was pretty bad too

Dishonored 2's level design is top notch throughout though. And if you go for a proper unseen + no kills run, it's even challenging.

 

[Wesp5]

Ok but those arguments were wrong, and Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, those games are masterpieces, whereas Dishonored 2 is not.

This all comes down to personal taste. In my opinion Thief and Thief 2 were great, but SS2 was a boring bash fest with endless respawning enemies, breaking weapons and a level layout that was so obvious intended as a game maze and nothing like anyone would expect in space ships! And I read that they even copied the twist from SS1 which I never played though...

 

[fantadomat]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

Ok but those arguments were wrong, and Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, those games are masterpieces, whereas Dishonored 2 is not.

It's irrelevant what some people said 'at the time'. Dishonored 2 is 3 years old. It is not a great game.

Btw Dishonored 1 was pretty bad too

Dishonored 2's level design is top notch throughout though. And if you go for a proper unseen + no kills run, it's even challenging.

I wouldn't go as far as challenging,unless you mean no knock outs. Still it is pretty good game,but the first one was better. From this one you could get really nasty eye strain and headaches.

 

[Maggot]

If you think SS2 was mazelike, you're more retarded than I thought.

 

[fantadomat]

Yeah,SS2 was pretty clear and logical,the only maze like level i remember was the engine part of the station. The rest was easy to navigate.

 

[Yosharian]

Don't make that comparison. Arkane's games are mediocre as fuck compared to Looking Glass's.

They weren't as loved and praised when released as they do now and the arguments were similar - too easy, bad writing, all while putted against the first installments of respective series.

Ok but those arguments were wrong, and Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, those games are masterpieces, whereas Dishonored 2 is not.

It's irrelevant what some people said 'at the time'. Dishonored 2 is 3 years old. It is not a great game.

Btw Dishonored 1 was pretty bad too

Dishonored 2's level design is top notch throughout though. And if you go for a proper unseen + no kills run, it's even challenging.

Yeah, I'll give you those points.

 

[Nano]

This all comes down to personal taste. In my opinion Thief and Thief 2 were great, but SS2 was a boring bash fest with endless respawning enemies, breaking weapons and a level layout that was so obvious intended as a game maze and nothing like anyone would expect in space ships! And I read that they even copied the twist from SS1 which I never played though...

Ah, now I understand Zer0wing's agenda.

 

[Zer0wing]

Ah, now I understand Zer0wing's agenda.

Get out of here, stalker. Also yes, SS2 indeed, in fact, underwhelming compared to the first game and all meaningful criticism is legit.

 

[Maggot]

Ah, now I understand Zer0wing's agenda.

Get out of here, stalker. Also yes, SS2 indeed, in fact, underwhelming compared to the first game and all meaningful criticism is legit.

Ironically those "criticisms" you agree with apply more to SS1 anyways aside from weapon degradation.

 

[Zer0wing]

Ironically those "criticisms" you agree with apply more to SS1 anyways aside from weapon degradation.

It really does not. At the very least SS1 has comprehensive mini map. Level design brilliance does not last 'til the end of SS2.