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

[ciox]

You can tweak the enemy respawn rate just by touching a .cfg file so you should be playing this already.

 

[Mikeal]

Still thinking whether to play System Shock 2. Enemy respawn is something I really dislike, but folks say it's WAD and meant to reinforce the atmosphere...

Play it enemy, respawn isn't as annoying as everybody say.

 

[Perkel]

Still thinking whether to play System Shock 2. Enemy respawn is something I really dislike, but folks say it's WAD and meant to reinforce the atmosphere...

Enemy respawn in SS2 is a feature because it is whole station that shit the bed. Which means those respawning enemies are just dudes who wandered into your part of station.

AND it works really well. You can't "cheat" killing everyone so you need to focus on task at hand instead of killing next enemy.

 

[flyingjohn]

Still thinking whether to play System Shock 2. Enemy respawn is something I really dislike, but folks say it's WAD and meant to reinforce the atmosphere...

Play the game,it is great game with great game play(minus the last half) with great atmosphere.

Re spawning is necessary considering the low amount of enemies per deck.If there was no re spawn the game would be boring and resources wouldn't matter.
And if they choose to increase enemy count instead of re spawn it would devolve into a pure shoot out anyway which would be worse.


Plenty of ammunition in the game makes re spawning a quick affair.
Even on hard you will have more then enough ammo to deal with anything that comes in your way.And there is plenty of way to acquire new ammo(psi abilities,buying,etc).
The only situation where ammo starts becoming a problem is if you choose to conserve special ammo and waste normal ammo on droid and tough enemies.
It is not worth it and if you really hate wasting ammo use energy or psi instead.


And don't dabble in exotic until your second play through.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

Still thinking whether to play System Shock 2. Enemy respawn is something I really dislike, but folks say it's WAD and meant to reinforce the atmosphere...

the "casual" respawn is barely noticeable, most of the areas you already emptied will stay empty but be sure that that single time you'll let your guard down you'll turn a corner and hug something unexpected.
respawn is there just to unnerve you. you know it can happen, you'll fear the moment it will happen, and the longer it doesn't happen the more uneasy you'll feel.
that's why i love ss2 so much and why i won't play it again ^^'

 

[Taxnomore]

Wow, this thread is up ?

I have been playing System Shock 1 for a while now ; it's one of these classics I had never touched and never dared to because of the interface. It's truly awful in that regard...

... But I love this game. It's somehow incredibly immersive despite when you think about it not being too different from your average shooter of that era with a little verticality thrown in and of course data logs. Nonetheless, even though I do not think I will ever manage to complete it (I'm on Level 5), wow. It's a game that definitely has something.

I am not entirely certain how a remake can imrpove it ? I mean, updated visuals and interface are going to be nice, but is not something going to be lost ?

 

[Average Manatee]

SS2's respawn is only really annoying in one instance I can think of, which is the engineering deck's hub between shuttle bays. It's a massive choke point and you can be 100% certain that there are 2 or 3 enemies there every time you go deep down one of the branches and then come back out. Otherwise I've never really had a problem with it or noticed it acting in a gameplay-detrimental fashion. Most other levels are fairly open and you just sort of stumble into enemies now and again.

Plus, once you've "cleared" a level you can usually get to commonly-needed spots without issue since the active number of respawns is capped and if you stay out of the rest of the level the enemies will generally just hang out and not invade your short path to the nearby recharge station or chemical storage.

 

[RoSoDude]

I will never understand the complaints about respawns. They enforce tension, resource scarcity, and constant trepidation about what may be around the corner. It's more than just a point about atmosphere. Respawning enemies means that the Quantum Bio-Reconstruction machines are actually a positive inclusion as you have to face newly spawned enemies on your way back to where you died, so death entails a larger cost than just 10 nanites and makes every spent bullet and hypo prior to your demise a permanent loss. Respawning enemies means that you'll want to venture out to complete objectives as soon as possible rather than hiding in a Chemical Storeroom until your research finishes, encouraging you to plan routes between areas of interest and form strategies about your approach to new and old obstacles. Respawning enemies means you're eager to explore new parts of the ship to stock up on resources that have been chipped away, as roaming the corridors you've already visited is likely to result in a net drain on your resources. This is fundamental to the design and the game experience. As ZylonBane beautifully put it:

If you can breathe calmly while playing SS2, you're playing it wrong.

I mean, sure, if you're a wuss who can't handle full-strength SS2, I guess it's better than not playing it at all. But then don't go telling people you've played SS2, because you haven't. You've played a weaksauce, watered-down, decaf imitation. SS2 is supposed to wear you down. It is supposed to stress you out. You are supposed to be motivated to run, and hide, and cower in the dark, and learn the few areas that are completely safe. Quiet time in SS2 isn't handed to you, it's earned.

...I'd also extend the argument to anyone who savescums in SS2. *cough*or any other game*cough*

 

[Ash]

I will never understand the complaints about respawns.

Storyfaggots and/or people that suck at games would be my first guess. Both Shock games would suffer a major hit without the respawns. It's integral to the design and a clear net positive.
It's also unusual to see this often on a RPG forum, where respawning in some form or other is in a shit ton of RPGs...or maybe that's why we see it, because some RPGs set a bad example with respawns.

 

[ciox]

People have extremely varied reactions to the resource balance and opressive atmosphere of SS2, some keep their cool and find all the item caches and say the game is as bad as Bioshock at throwing items at you, some waste all their ammo and then complain about respawns, some have 300 bullets in reserve but still hoard items in elevators or chemical store rooms and agonize about each round fired, etc.

 

[Ash]

People have extremely varied reactions to the resource balance and opressive atmosphere of SS2, some keep their cool and find all the item caches and say the game is as bad as Bioshock at throwing items at you, some waste all their ammo and then complain about respawns, some have 300 bullets in reserve but still hoard items in elevators or chemical store rooms and agonize about each round fired, etc.

Yes, people be people, i.e statistically likely to be retarded.

The first type would be exaggerating through their teeth (and wut? I've never once seen anyone equate SS2 resource distrubution to Bioshock's. Did you make them up?).
The second type are people that suck at the game/using their brain and paying attention.
The final are people good at the game but they over-strategize and micromanage, resulting in less-fun gameplay for themselves, say they always use a wrench against hybrids and monkeys even late into the game to conserve ammo even though this is not necessary and makes them expend more health than they would using guns. Also is a repetitive use of the same simple tool, and they end up finishing the game having barely used their full horde of saved resources, rendering much of their efforts pointless.

 

[Naraya]

ADD STORY MODE TO SS2!

 

[Mikeal]

Yes, people be people, i.e statistically likely to be retarded.

The first type would be exaggerating through their teeth (and wut? I've never once seen anyone equate SS2 resource distrubution to Bioshock's. Did you make them up?).
The second type are people that suck at the game/using their brain and paying attention.
The final are people good at the game but they over-strategize and micromanage, resulting in less-fun gameplay for themselves, say they always use a wrench against hybrids and monkeys even late into the game to conserve ammo even though this is not necessary and makes them expend more health than they would using guns. Also is a repetitive use of the same simple tool, and they end up finishing the game having barely used their full horde of saved resources, rendering much of their efforts pointless.

What's wrong with using wrench? After some upgrades it's one of the most useful and powerful weapon in game able to 1 hit kill most of the enemies and killing Rumbler with 4.

 

[Ash]

Nothing per se. If you're specifically going a melee playstyle, with melee-centric upgrades and progression, go for it. But if you're using it constantly all throughout the game with the sole intent to conserve resources (namely ammo for shooting) because of hoarder mentality then this is not necessary and also counter-productive because you expend more health (and possible progress or nanites upon death) whacking everything close range as opposed to just shooting them from afar where they can't melee and you have time to dodge incoming projectiles, and acquiring any further targets only takes milliseconds as opposed to running up to the next enemy again and wailing away. The wrench is also the weakest melee weapon in most cases. It's fine to do a bit of ammo conservation with it, hell it's damn near mandatory early game, but there's a point where it becomes unnecessary and counter-productive to use it all the time against hybrids, monkeys, spiders, rumblers etc unless you've specifically invested in a melee build.

Deck 1 I use probably a 50-50 mix of ranged and wrench. Engineering 75% ranged, 25% wrench. Deck 3 onwards 90% ranged 10% melee (if that) for the rest of the game, and only because I often get the laser rapier which has higher base damage than the wrench and is good for Hybrids, cyborg assassins and Midwifes (though most of these still just get shot). Late game Monkeys I just always shoot them instead of wasting time fucking about with their tiny hitbox and dangerous explosive projectiles.

 

[Average Manatee]

There are people who need to pull out a ranged weapon for non-turret enemies before Ops deck?

But seriously, melee is ez if you lure baddies past a corner.

 

[Ash]

Hoarder faggot detected. Need to use guns? No, want. Want to play the game properly and as intended. Not playing like a faggot, abusing AI around corners and slapping them silly with the same janky melee weapon over and over in an act of boring repetition out of some misguided attempt to conserve resources that you don't need.
The game gives you access to ranged weapons (guns and Psi) from deck 1, and they're viable to use in progressively increasing frequency from deck 1. Playing up 'till deck 4 exclusively using the wrench where possible (e.g no turrets) sounds like the most boring shit of all time. Weapons have reloads, ammo management, ammo types, firing settings, weapon modification, weapon degradation/repair/maintenance, more upgrades relevant to them. Hitscan attacks. Projectile attacks. Variety of 12 guns all with different properties, rather than just pointlessly wrenching everything round a corner to converse ammo like a mindless drone. See the difference?

 

[Average Manatee]

Pure melee makes you a lot more conscious of your environment though. With guns if you are caught by surprise you can just spin around and shoot the enemy before they've finished their bark. With a wrench you need to see them first, and you need to maintain a sort of leapfrogging from corner to corner in order to stay safe.

Have you ever experienced the joy of the flesh maxing Psi on Impossible, then transmuting dozens of grenades and stacks of ammo into enough nanites to buy 100 psi hypos before Rec deck, then psi-boosting to 8 psi for the rest of the game and just machine-gunning everything down with your mind as fast as you can click? It is a power fantasy realization beyond measure.

But yeah, totally fine to use guns for the early game. I'm just messin'

 

[RoSoDude]

I use melee on the majority of lone enemies that I find patrolling corridors (except for some of those really long corridors in e.g. Hydroponics or Recreation) and firearms/psi for the larger groups of enemies in scripted combat encounters. This strikes a natural balance between reducing unnecessary ammo expenditure and avoiding the risk of taking damage. I feel like the game encourages this style of play pretty directly with both its resource scarcity and the high lethality of attacks (on Impossible). You're punished for relying entirely on weapons (they break), or entirely on psi (you'll run out of hypos), or entirely on melee (you'll die), or failing to diversify beyond your starting class' skills, but you still have loads of valid options available to you. This sort of player expression through constrained problem solving is the delicious nectar of SS2, IMO. Anyone complaining about the rarity of bullets isn't using their wrench (or their brain) enough, and anyone complaining that resources are too abundant is probably cheesing the AI

 

[Maggot]

Playing through SS2 right now and enjoying it a lot. Afterwards I'm planning on playing SS1 but I was curious if System Shock Enhanced adds anything over System Shock Portable? I would prefer not to give money to Portland hipsters whenever possible.

 

[passerby]

The final are people good at the game but they over-strategize and micromanage, resulting in less-fun gameplay for themselves [...]

Agree 100%, unfortunately I very often fall prey to my OCD, we are also the kind of people that spend 30h building perfect mod compilation for Fallout New Vegas and lose the will to play in the process

 

[RoSoDude]

Playing through SS2 right now and enjoying it a lot. Afterwards I'm planning on playing SS1 but I was curious if System Shock Enhanced adds anything over System Shock Portable? I would prefer not to give money to Portland hipsters whenever possible.

Prior to this year, the Enhanced Edition was basically just SS Portable with the mouselook mod.

However, now it's a full source port, with modern configuration options, rebindable keys, and mod support. I put up some impressions and suggestions about how best to use it here.

One thing that I only found out recently is that the EE features less recoil on the automatic weapons than SS Classic, even when using free mouse. I confirmed this myself.

 

[Perkel]

As someone who played ss2 and then ss1:

- ss2 feels like playing amazing game but you played games like that (though not as good)
- ss1 feels like you are playing completely new good game it has some issues here and there but overall game is special

After playing SS1 i don't understand why they downscaled whole ui/chip/enchancement system.
I would love for SS2 to go bonkers with eye replacement (like heat vision etc).

Second point about downscalling is SS2 more linear design (at least this is how i felt).
In SS1 it feels like you unlock each piece of station like in good metroidvania.

 

[Tweed]

I've always felt more immersed in the first game, making me feel isolated. Playing with everything turned on max is the only way to go, it gives a much better sense of being one unlucky person against a station full of mutants and cyborgs. Instead of gliding along shooting things as you go you have to utilize the leaning mechanics to avoid being blown away. Items like grenades and berserker patches aren't just extra weapons to be ignored, they're real lifesavers throughout the game, but especially near the beginning when you don't have weapons or ammunition that can deal with security droids. On the subject of weapons while being able to fast reload in the newest port is nice, it took away something from the gameplay by not forcing the player to have to manually reload their gun.

The little details make a big difference too, especially with the audio, like hearing the interference over Rebecca's messages or the gunfire and background sounds on some of the audio logs. One of my favorite parts actually comes near the end when you start getting messages from SHODAN's designers, going over the specifications of the bridge like a tech guy would. Of course there's also all the correspondence with SHODAN herself who never just sits around letting you do stuff to her station.

People rag on SS1's maps, but I think LG made great use of engine limitations. Corpses strewn about in rooms tell a story, especially in places like the flight deck where each flight bay has its own little music track. The 3rd floor is designed in such a way that you can to try to be done with whatever business you have there as fast as possible thanks to the lights being out and the invisible mutants. The assassins tucked away in the dark alcoves on the 7th floor can be a serious pain too. I wish there had been more opportunity to affect meat-space from cyberspace, but the whole cyberspace parts were fun except for some control issues.

 

[anvi]

The first one was better because it was the first, and was way ahead of any other game at the time. The second one loses a lot of points because it is no longer original and was no longer wildly advanced compared to the competition. Also the first game had grenades which I don't think the second game had. Or if it did, there were fewer. Or something. Same with ammo types. The first one just seemed to have a bit more depth because of anti personnel ripping up zombies but bouncing off robots, and armor piercing vice versa. And emp fun, and whatever else. SS2 streamlined things a bit and it bugged me.

Although if I remember right, the first game was a bit easier in terms of death which I don't like. I think you could barely lose because of respawning infinitely, and with a fair amount of energy and health too. SS2 either added the cost to respawns or balanced it better so that I felt like dying was something I really needed to be scared of. Also ammo and gear in general was a bit harder to come by so you had to be really careful and less gung ho which was exciting seeing as enemies could kill you easily.

I didn't like the 'builds' thing though because they just felt under developed and a bit pointless. Although I only tried playing as a full gun focused build and as a full hand ball thing build. The latter kinda sucked because there were only a few things it could do so I felt like the points would have been better spent in something else. Generally I think games should focus on one all encompassing and fun build, and only go with multiple builds if they are super rich and can have a big talent tree full of varied things that are all thoroughly play tested. Which SS2 was miles from.

Besides that I don't have much preference between the two. The second one is obviously better in terms of UI, graphics, and some other stuff. But the first one is easily playable nowadays with various mods and tweaks. I think I enjoy it more overall.

 

[JDR13]

The first one was better because it was the first, and was way ahead of any other game at the time. The second one loses a lot of points because it is no longer original and was no longer wildly advanced compared to the competition. Also the first game had grenades which I don't think the second game had. Or if it did, there were fewer. Or something. Same with ammo types. The first one just seemed to have a bit more depth because of anti personnel ripping up zombies but bouncing off robots, and armor piercing vice versa. And emp fun, and whatever else. SS2 streamlined things a bit and it bugged me.

Actually, it's System Shock 2 that has the anti-personal and amor-piercing ammos. SS 2 also has grenades but you need a grenade launcher to shoot them.

It was still slightly streamlined compared to SS 1 though.