About an hour in to System Shock 2, so far, not impressed

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

As a shooter, it was very inferior to bioshock. I doubt anyone got it because they wanted to play a shooter, but its worth noting.

The shooting was the worst part of Bioshock, what the fuck are you talking about?

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but bioshock's shooting was better than system shock 2's shooting. At least bioshock had headshots. It didn't matter where you hit the enemies in system shock 2.

Like I said, neither is a shooter, but since both contain shooting it's worth commenting on.

 

[Roguey]

Of course Bioshock is a shooter. Partway through development they realized they had to stop making some SS2-like jank and make something normies would find fun. https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/postmortem-2k-boston-2k-australia-s-bioshock

The team and the game changed remarkably over the course of development. A company was acquired. The team size doubled. The product focus changed from RPG hybrid to shooter.
...
In terms of design, we created a depth and density of game systems that fit into a game about character building and choice, but would not have been competitive as an FPS. Around the time that the game went into alpha, we took a hard look at that gameplay and realized that, although there were many choices, they weren't very compelling.

This was because we hadn't been thinking as much about making a shooter as we should have, and many of our key interactions (weapons tuning, plasmids, length of AI engagement) were designed and tuned for a slower and more cerebral experience. To put it another way, nerdy RPG-like stat changes just didn't seem meaningful in the vibrant and dangerous world of Rapture.

Once we recalibrated the game to be more like a shooter, we simplified many of the deeper systems tremendously so that the user would be able to understand them. We also put more polish time into the core interactions of the game, such as the weapons, plasmids, and user interfaces. We ended up with fewer choices overall, but each one of those choices was infinitely more functional, understandable, and fun than the previous ones.
...
The spec of BioShock changed so much over the course of development that we spent the majority of the time making the wrong game- an extremely deep game, and at times an interesting one, but it was not a groundbreaking game that would appeal to a wide audience.

We knew from the start that we'd have to make late changes to really bring the game to life-we had even built our original schedule to allow for six months of finalizing-but the amount of change that we ended up needing seriously exceeded our remaining schedule. Ultimately, we were very lucky to get an extension in the eleventh hour.

Part of the reason for the late course change came from not having our internal product message clear from the beginning. BioShock had initially been positioned as a hybrid RPG FPS. The decision to reposition the game as a focused FPS came later, after our initial production phase in summer of 2006. Had we been working with an FPS mentality earlier, we could have made better use of our time.

 

[Ash]

As a shooter, it was very inferior to bioshock. I doubt anyone got it because they wanted to play a shooter, but its worth noting.

The shooting was the worst part of Bioshock, what the fuck are you talking about?

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but bioshock's shooting was better than system shock 2's shooting. At least bioshock had headshots. It didn't matter where you hit the enemies in system shock 2.

Like I said, neither is a shooter, but since both contain shooting it's worth commenting on.

This is your requirement for what makes a better shooter or not?

Someone didn't spec intelligence, they fried their brain with too many plasmids. Bioshock is worthless drivel for pseudo-intellectuals and people that don't know better. Terrible Immersive Sim, terrible Shooter, terrible game all-round. If anyone likes it I instantly assume they're a fucking retard or have zero taste/experience.

Seriously, the idea that anyone would think Dead Space 3 is the best of the lot fucking baffles me. About the only, only thing it has going on the other two games is the snow aesthetic, which at least tried something different from the wrecked spaceship/space station design of the other two games. The 'optional objectives' basically just amounted to wandering around copy pasted abandoned ships to find absolutely trivial rewards, the gameplay is a complete step down from the other two with absolutely no thought put behind things like monster placement (90% of the game is just you being rushed by slasher necromorphs and those assholes with pickaxes), and the writers made the absofuckinglutely baffling decision to make a love triangle a primary plot point in the game.

No, it has co-op (cool if you're into that), better weapon customisation and even a pretty interesting non-linear space walk segment. Otherwise yes, 3 is inferior in most ways.

 

[DraQ]

Imagine storing morality in your brain wtf lmao

I guess you'd need to have one first.

 

[DraQ]

I never played SS1 but a FPS with no mouselook? Come on duders.

Mlook is superior and hindsight is 20/20, but SS1 and TN:SFC both used another mouse heavy control scheme which did have some merits. The ideal best of two worlds would be to have a handy toggle for slaving the view to the cursor.

Also, Roguey , SS1 grenade tossing is superior to any other game. Sure it will likely get you killed hilariously at first before you get used to it, but you can execute pretty much arbitrary throws (also around the corners) rather than pretending you have a really shitty grenade launcher taped to your dick as is the norm in most FPS games.

No saving/reloading. Instead, the game constantly autosaves, like Diablo 2. There are already resurrection chambers in the game, so it wouldn't even be a big change. In easy mode, the resurrection chambers are free, so it wouldn't become unwinnable through attrition for people who couldn't handle it. Yes, I'm aware the option exists already to play this way, but I doubt many people experienced the game that way.

Yeah, that would be pretty good for SS2.

 

[Morenatsu.]

As a shooter, it was very inferior to bioshock. I doubt anyone got it because they wanted to play a shooter, but its worth noting.

The shooting was the worst part of Bioshock, what the fuck are you talking about?

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but bioshock's shooting was better than system shock 2's shooting. At least bioshock had headshots. It didn't matter where you hit the enemies in system shock 2.

Like I said, neither is a shooter, but since both contain shooting it's worth commenting on.

This might make sense if we were talking Deus Ex, since its shooting is heavily dependent on stats, but SS2 is a game where you're constantly doing cartwheels to deal with the suddenly appearing enemies, and has shooting on par with any other game from the time. Headshots aren't even a feature in most classic shooters, and many of those ‘RPG elements’ were already quite present in normal shooters anyway. All of those games were better than Bioshock, which just feels like utter garbage to actually play no matter what you're doing.

 

[Arrowgrab]

Finally, I was disappointed to find out that the famous "Look at you hacker" double entendre isn't even in the the actual game

What do you mean when you say it's not in the game?

 

[Roguey]

What do you mean when you say it's not in the game?

Not in the game proper. It was only used an an audio test for the setup.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

As a shooter, it was very inferior to bioshock. I doubt anyone got it because they wanted to play a shooter, but its worth noting.

The shooting was the worst part of Bioshock, what the fuck are you talking about?

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but bioshock's shooting was better than system shock 2's shooting. At least bioshock had headshots. It didn't matter where you hit the enemies in system shock 2.

Like I said, neither is a shooter, but since both contain shooting it's worth commenting on.

This is your requirement for what makes a better shooter or not?

Someone didn't spec intelligence, they fried their brain with too many plasmids. Bioshock is worthless drivel for pseudo-intellectuals and people that don't know better. Terrible Immersive Sim, terrible Shooter, terrible game all-round. If anyone likes it I instantly assume they're a fucking retard or have zero taste/experience.

Seriously, the idea that anyone would think Dead Space 3 is the best of the lot fucking baffles me. About the only, only thing it has going on the other two games is the snow aesthetic, which at least tried something different from the wrecked spaceship/space station design of the other two games. The 'optional objectives' basically just amounted to wandering around copy pasted abandoned ships to find absolutely trivial rewards, the gameplay is a complete step down from the other two with absolutely no thought put behind things like monster placement (90% of the game is just you being rushed by slasher necromorphs and those assholes with pickaxes), and the writers made the absofuckinglutely baffling decision to make a love triangle a primary plot point in the game.

No, it has co-op (cool if you're into that), better weapon customisation and even a pretty interesting non-linear space walk segment. Otherwise yes, 3 is inferior in most ways.

Too bad you can't read.

We're comparing 2 games. Bioshock and SS2. One of them has better gunplay than the other, and if you think it's SS2 then you're retarded.

You're complaining about people saying bioshock is a better game, and including my comment because you're stupid and can't read. I very obviously said ss2 was the better game, but bioshock has better gunplay than SS2. And fucking duh, of course it does, just due to the improvements to shooters in the meantime. The devs would have had to be retarded to end up with worse gunplay than SS2. The work was already done for them.

Dues ex also had better shooting than system shock 2. Bioshock had better shooting than dues ex. Dues Ex was a better game than Bioshock. If you only liked shooters, but for some reason had to pick between Bioshock, SS2, and Dues Ex, you'd like Bioshock best.

 

[Morenatsu.]

Bioshock feels like shit to actually play. Such is the case for any and all console shooters. There's no improvements, only decline. No, I don't care about headshots. SS2 felt completely fine and intuitive and natural and comfortable, and Bioshock was immediately recognizable as the exact opposite.

 

[Kainan]

As a shooter, it was very inferior to bioshock. I doubt anyone got it because they wanted to play a shooter, but its worth noting.

The shooting was the worst part of Bioshock, what the fuck are you talking about?

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but bioshock's shooting was better than system shock 2's shooting. At least bioshock had headshots. It didn't matter where you hit the enemies in system shock 2.

Like I said, neither is a shooter, but since both contain shooting it's worth commenting on.

This is your requirement for what makes a better shooter or not?

Someone didn't spec intelligence, they fried their brain with too many plasmids. Bioshock is worthless drivel for pseudo-intellectuals and people that don't know better. Terrible Immersive Sim, terrible Shooter, terrible game all-round. If anyone likes it I instantly assume they're a fucking retard or have zero taste/experience.

Seriously, the idea that anyone would think Dead Space 3 is the best of the lot fucking baffles me. About the only, only thing it has going on the other two games is the snow aesthetic, which at least tried something different from the wrecked spaceship/space station design of the other two games. The 'optional objectives' basically just amounted to wandering around copy pasted abandoned ships to find absolutely trivial rewards, the gameplay is a complete step down from the other two with absolutely no thought put behind things like monster placement (90% of the game is just you being rushed by slasher necromorphs and those assholes with pickaxes), and the writers made the absofuckinglutely baffling decision to make a love triangle a primary plot point in the game.

No, it has co-op (cool if you're into that), better weapon customisation and even a pretty interesting non-linear space walk segment. Otherwise yes, 3 is inferior in most ways.

Too bad you can't read.

We're comparing 2 games. Bioshock and SS2. One of them has better gunplay than the other, and if you think it's SS2 then you're retarded.

You're complaining about people saying bioshock is a better game, and including my comment because you're stupid and can't read. I very obviously said ss2 was the better game, but bioshock has better gunplay than SS2. And fucking duh, of course it does, just due to the improvements to shooters in the meantime. The devs would have had to be retarded to end up with worse gunplay than SS2. The work was already done for them.

Dues ex also had better shooting than system shock 2. Bioshock had better shooting than dues ex. Dues Ex was a better game than Bioshock. If you only liked shooters, but for some reason had to pick between Bioshock, SS2, and Dues Ex, you'd like Bioshock best.

Some guns in Bioshock are pretty bad and worse then SS2 counterparts. The BS machine gun for example sucks very much and feels like a toy. SS2 also doesn't even try to be a shooter.

 

[Morenatsu.]

fuck this genre crap, there are only two categories: good enough and banalshitboring

 

[PEACH]

but bioshock has better gunplay than SS2. And fucking duh, of course it does, just due to the improvements to shooters in the meantime.

I'd love to hear about these mythical "improvements to shooters" between 1999 and 2007 and how they somehow apply to Bioshock of all games

The devs would have had to be retarded to end up with worse gunplay than SS2

If the shoe fits.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Some guns in Bioshock are pretty bad and worse then SS2 counterparts. The BS machine gun for example sucks very much and feels like a toy. SS2 also doesn't even try to be a shooter.

Yes, while bioshock did try somewhat to be a shooter. This is why bioshock ended up with better shooting. I'm glad we're finally getting on the same page. The assault rifle in SS2 didn't feel any better than any of the other guns in that game either. That's not to say bioshock was a good shooter, just better at that one specific thing than System Shock 2, a game that barely even tried to be a shooter.

I'd love to hear about these mythical "improvements to shooters" between 1999 and 2007 and how they somehow apply to Bioshock of all games

Well, SS2 gunplay was similar in feel to quake, let's say, without the super fast movement and all. We've got mouselook, but no limb/head hitboxes. Enemies don't really respond to being shot any differently than being clubbed or otherwise running out of hit points. The AI charged you in a straight line.

Quake 2 came out in 1997. Halo 3 came out in 2007.
Yes, I'd say FPS games (AKA Shooters) saw pretty significant changes and improvements in that time.

In Bioshock, you shoot a splicer in the head with your revolver (A challenging task in how fast they move) and they hit the floor. It takes more shots to the body. They approached in ways other than directly running at you. How might improvements over those 10 years have impacted bioshock? The devs existed in the world. They couldn't help but be influenced by the evolution of the genre. They were obviously trying to get shooter fans to play their game too. Do you think the bioshock devs never played goldeneye/quake/doom/halo? I bet you they were quite familiar with the existence of each of these ips and the games in them. I had a blast with goldeneye in 97 but it's painful trying to play it now, the genre has moved well past that.

I mean, what an incredibly stupid thing to say, to call improvements to literally any game genre, let alone the FPS genre, over 10 years "Mythical". Do you remember computers from 1999? They weren't as powerful as the xbox 360, let's just say that. Maybe think just a little tiny bit before you look like a jackass trying to dunk on something obviously true.


This is not a controversial stance. SS2 had objectively worse gunplay than bioshock. You're making a complete fool of yourself if you're claiming otherwise, this isn't the incline to die on.

I enjoyed the game of SS2 more than Bioshock, so put away your retard pitchforks, don't worry, I'm not trying to shit on the golden oldies.You guys claim to love classic RPGs. I strongly doubt this judging from your complete inability to read and comprehend what you read.

 

[Morenatsu.]

Quake is better than any and every Halo, and mentioning Goldeneye (which was always shit even in 1997) says you are a consolefag retard. Xbox 360 is complete and utter shit on all levels, and if you think controller auto-aim with dumb enemies, tiny levels, and regenerating health are ‘incline’... lol

Shooters aren't firearm simulators where you try to get headshots, they're dungeon crawlers with guns.

 

[Kainan]

Some guns in Bioshock are pretty bad and worse then SS2 counterparts. The BS machine gun for example sucks very much and feels like a toy. SS2 also doesn't even try to be a shooter.

Yes, while bioshock did try somewhat to be a shooter. This is why bioshock ended up with better shooting. I'm glad we're finally getting on the same page. The assault rifle in SS2 didn't feel any better than any of the other guns in that game either. That's not to say bioshock was a good shooter, just better at that one specific thing than System Shock 2, a game that barely even tried to be a shooter.

I'd love to hear about these mythical "improvements to shooters" between 1999 and 2007 and how they somehow apply to Bioshock of all games

Well, SS2 gunplay was similar in feel to quake, let's say, without the super fast movement and all. We've got mouselook, but no limb/head hitboxes. Enemies don't really respond to being shot any differently than being clubbed or otherwise running out of hit points. The AI charged you in a straight line.

Quake 2 came out in 1997. Halo 3 came out in 2007.
Yes, I'd say FPS games (AKA Shooters) saw pretty significant changes and improvements in that time.

In Bioshock, you shoot a splicer in the head with your revolver (A challenging task in how fast they move) and they hit the floor. It takes more shots to the body. They approached in ways other than directly running at you. How might improvements over those 10 years have impacted bioshock? The devs existed in the world. They couldn't help but be influenced by the evolution of the genre. They were obviously trying to get shooter fans to play their game too. Do you think the bioshock devs never played goldeneye/quake/doom/halo? I bet you they were quite familiar with the existence of each of these ips and the games in them. I had a blast with goldeneye in 97 but it's painful trying to play it now, the genre has moved well past that.

I mean, what an incredibly stupid thing to say, to call improvements to literally any game genre, let alone the FPS genre, over 10 years "Mythical". Do you remember computers from 1999? They weren't as powerful as the xbox 360, let's just say that. Maybe think just a little tiny bit before you look like a jackass trying to dunk on something obviously true.


This is not a controversial stance. SS2 had objectively worse gunplay than bioshock. You're making a complete fool of yourself if you're claiming otherwise, this isn't the incline to die on.

I enjoyed the game of SS2 more than Bioshock, so put away your retard pitchforks, don't worry, I'm not trying to shit on the golden oldies.You guys claim to love classic RPGs. I strongly doubt this judging from your complete inability to read and comprehend what you read.

Yes it's true that enemies moved and reacted better but that's just one part of a shooter. And what good is it if the guns feel so lame to shoot.
And let's not forget the fact that in any of these encounters you can't fucking die.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Quake is better than any and every Halo, and mentioning Goldeneye (which was always shit even in 1997) says you are a consolefag retard. Xbox 360 is complete and utter shit on all levels, and if you think controller auto-aim with dumb enemies, tiny levels, and regenerating health are ‘incline’... lol

Shooters aren't firearm simulators where you try to get headshots, they're dungeon crawlers with guns.

That's nice and all, but bioshock had better gunplay than system shock 2 and it's not even close. It's an objective fact. You would have to be a stupid person to think system shock 2's gunplay was better than bioshock's. SS2 has the better story, writing, atmosphere, music, platforming, and RPG mechanics.

And let's not forget the fact that in any of these encounters you can't fucking die.

LOL you never even played system shock 2 did you?

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Well, SS2 gunplay was similar in feel to quake

Made me laugh.

 

[Morenatsu.]

how can ss2 have better gunplay if it has inferior mouseplay

 

[Ash]

What is our definition of "gunplay"? We talking combat as a whole, or just the act of shooting guns? SS2 absolutely destroys Bioshock combat as a whole, because Bioshock is dumb, basic, repetitive and easy as shit. The act of simply just shooting/using guns (weapon design) however:

SS2's recoil is interpolated so fast that it feels like shit
Some enemy hitboxes are fucky
There's no detailed reload animations, but rather just lowering the weapon off the screen
Obviously there is quite a lot of difference in visceral detail achieved with evolution of graphics from 1999 - 2007: Bullet impact effects, weapon model poly count, animation methods etc.
No weapon swap animations in SS2 - current gun disappears, new weapon raises up.
Bioshock gets visual weapon upgrades to match the performance tune ups, SS2 no visual changes
Bioshock you can shoot certain select things in the environment (if I recall) which is a point in its favor.

By that definition Bioshock has slightly better "gunplay", though it is hardly important because the overarching combat and game is total shit. Also even then some weapon design-related things were removed in Bioshock such as alt fire modes or total count of weapons (Bioshock has less).

This is without going into encounter design and artificial intelligence (the things you shoot at), both games of which have their pros and cons when taken alone, but again it's all moot as Bioshock on the whole is trash, even as a FPS/Action game. I'd rather play goldeneye or daikatana.

 

[Morenatsu.]

Minimal gun animations and little recoil? Actually, that's a good thing.

 

[Ash]

Nope. The animations are there and are pretty slow if speed of gameplay is what you're getting at. They're just primitive lowering of the weapons off screen. Bioshock's animations are faster despite them being more detailed.
As for recoil, there's a lot in SS2, unless you invest in AGI then all of a sudden there is none. Given AGI is tied to movement speed, it's almost guaranteed that recoil will quickly be eliminated for most players since it's a valuable attribute to invest in. It's probably for the best as the recoil in SS2 is not very well implemented. Pretty sure there is no calculus involved, it just offsets your crosshair the full way in one frame.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Nope. The animations are there and are pretty slow if speed of gameplay is what you're getting at. They're just primitive lowering of the weapons off screen. Bioshock's animations are faster despite them being more detailed.
As for recoil, there's a lot in SS2, unless you invest in AGI then all of a sudden there is none. Given AGI is tied to movement speed, it's almost guaranteed that recoil will quickly be eliminated for most players since it's a valuable attribute to invest in. It's probably for the best as the recoil in SS2 is not very well implemented. Pretty sure there is no calculus involved, it just offsets your crosshair the full way in one frame.

Yeah, although i don't know if it was over just 1 frame, but yeah, your crosshair just moved for recoil, it wasn't like counterstrike, for example. But you never really needed to shoot that fast anyway, so it didn't really matter. With my old man reflexes it was a lot easier for me to hit enemies in SS2 than bioshock.

It worked for the game, and was good for its time. Bioshock clearly leaned more into the shooter realm, and every other area of gameplay was inferior in my opinion.

 

[Morenatsu.]

Of course I was only being half-serious, just because Ash saying ‘needs more recoil’ means he probably has something stupid in mind. SS2 is definitely relatively weak, but the solution wouldn't be to install Brutal Shock 2. By the way, the best shooting in any game ever is Half-Life's, closely followed by Doom's (with no mods and no vertical aiming). It's all about the clickfeelz, which is why BS, a PC-on-console hybrid, is terrible.

 

[Ash]

Holy hell you're retarded. Every time I think maybe I should give this guy a chance and nope. Never again.