System Shock 1 vs 2 - Which is better and why?

[SumDrunkGuy]

It is fine even without the mod. I would say that using it is harmful to the experience as it makes the player too efficient in combat and it just changes the way the game feels.

I played both games for the first time relatively recently and found the first one to be better all in all, in spite of the poor combat.

RIGHT!? You're talking to the same heathens who probably use the faggy mouse "fix* mod for Dark Souls 1. Not being able to control your character properly is part of the intended experience. It's what makes the game special. Those stupid stupid idiots.

 

[anvi]

SS2 had pretty amazing controls, you could lean forward and stuff! Never saw another game that could do that.

Weren't you the one shitting all over Thief? You could literally do that there.

Yep Thief is innovative and did some stuff really well, I just find it boring and dumb. SS1 was a masterpiece, and way ahead of other games at the time.

It is fine even without the mod. I would say that using it is harmful to the experience as it makes the player too efficient in combat and it just changes the way the game feels.

I played both games for the first time relatively recently and found the first one to be better all in all, in spite of the poor combat.

RIGHT!? You're talking to the same heathens who probably use the faggy mouse "fix* mod for Dark Souls 1. Not being able to control your character properly is part of the intended experience. It's what makes the game special. Those stupid stupid idiots.

You can still play without the mouse mod... But it just makes it into a tank game.

 

[anvi]

Also only a pansy would pick SS2 over 1.

 

[Semiurge]

SS2 had pretty amazing controls, you could lean forward and stuff! Never saw another game that could do that.

That was inherited from Thief.

SS1's depth of movement was great, though the implementation requiring 100 different keys for it was retarded.

EE of SS1 has lean keys too, and the whole control scheme is now very close to that of SS2. Cyberspace movement is easy if you use a keyboard numpad for movement, familiarity with Descent 1 & 2 won't hurt either.

 

[Correct_Carlo]

SS1. I am on record as saying that SS2 is massively overrated, and I stand by that.

fuck you

The first few levels of SS2 when you are sneaking around, barely surviving, are great. However, after the game's twist, there's zero reason to keep playing. It turns into an awful corridor shooter with bullet sponge enemies, limited ammo, and constant retracing your steps over the game's maps to accomplish what more or less amounts to just a 1990s style FPS "find the red key for the red door, find the blue key for the blue door, and etc." objective list.

The Dark Engine is a wonderful, atmospheric, stealth engine, as Thief 1 and Thief 2 demonstrated. However, it's a shitty, FPS, combat engine, as SS2 and parts of Thief 1 demonstrated. Combat is floaty and lame with bullet spongey enemies who don't react to bullets or being hit. Thief 1 had brief enough combat sequences to still be a classic game. However, SS2 turns to shit once the game's focus shifts from stealth to combat.

And hitboxes in SS2 are completely fucked. I recall aiming my wrench at an enemy's head and swinging repeatedly, watching the wrench just pass through its head, doing zero damage, until I repositioned myself slightly, only to have the wrench suddenly connect, with no visual indicator as to why. It's a solid 2.5 out of 5 star game, which isn't totally awful, but it's nowhere near deserving of the hype it gets.

SS1 is better in almost every way, especially when it comes to making the most of the limitations of the tech of its time. In fact, SS1 is a truly revolutionary game that does things which no game up to that point had done. SS2 is not even close to being the best game of 1999, or even 1998 or 1997, had it somehow been released earlier. It's completely and utterly mediocre.

 

[Eirinjas]

SS1. I am on record as saying that SS2 is massively overrated, and I stand by that.

fuck you

The first few levels of SS2 when you are sneaking around, barely surviving, are great. However, after the game's twist, there's zero reason to keep playing. It turns into an awful corridor shooter with bullet sponge enemies, limited ammo, and constant retracing your steps over the game's maps to accomplish what more or less amounts to just a 1990s style FPS "find the red key for the red door, find the blue key for the blue door, and etc." objective list.

The Dark Engine is a wonderful, atmospheric, stealth engine, as Thief 1 and Thief 2 demonstrated. However, it's a shitty, FPS, combat engine, as SS2 and parts of Thief 1 demonstrated. Combat is floaty and lame with bullet spongey enemies who don't react to bullets or being hit. Thief 1 had brief enough combat sequences to still be a classic game. However, SS2 turns to shit once the game's focus shifts from stealth to combat.

And hitboxes in SS2 are completely fucked. I recall aiming my wrench at an enemy's head and swinging repeatedly, watching the wrench just pass through its head, doing zero damage, until I repositioned myself slightly, only to have the wrench suddenly connect, with no visual indicator as to why. It's a solid 2.5 out of 5 star game, which isn't totally awful, but it's nowhere near deserving of the hype it gets.

SS1 is better in almost every way, especially when it comes to making the most of the limitations of the tech of its time.

I disagree with your general assessment. SS1 & 2 are not FPS games, but simulations, and as such can't be qualitatively compared to FPS games when it comes to combat. The only problems with SS2 are the low-poly models and the rushed ending. The story, voice acting, design, and gameplay are all well above par for a video game and deserving of every accolade.

 

[Correct_Carlo]

I disagree with your general assessment. SS1 & 2 are not FPS games, but simulations, and as such can't be qualitatively compared to FPS games when it comes to combat. The only problems with SS2 are the low-poly models and the rushed ending. The story, voice acting, design, and gameplay are all well above par for a video game and deserving of every accolade.

A simulation of what? Swinging a wrench at a monkey's head and watching it pass through the monkey's head with zero damage? Because if that's what the game is simulating, it does an ace job. At everything else, it's shit.

 

[Eirinjas]

I disagree with your general assessment. SS1 & 2 are not FPS games, but simulations, and as such can't be qualitatively compared to FPS games when it comes to combat. The only problems with SS2 are the low-poly models and the rushed ending. The story, voice acting, design, and gameplay are all well above par for a video game and deserving of every accolade.

A simulation of what? Swinging a wrench at a monkey's head and watching it pass through the monkey's head with zero damage? Because if that's what the game is simulating, it does an ace job. At everything else, it's shit.

I'm sorry you had a hard time beating your monkey.

 

[JDR13]

Also only a pansy would pick SS2 over 1.

Like Ash?

 

[JDR13]

SS2 had pretty amazing controls, you could lean forward and stuff! Never saw another game that could do that.

SS1 was cool in that way too. You could lean while standing or crouching and also go prone. It's amazing how the genre has regressed since then when it comes to control over your character.