Vapourware System Shock 3 by OtherSide Entertainment - taken over by Tencent!

[RoSoDude]

System Shock 1 is awesome, and I'd even argue its visuals, music, and (for the most part) level design hold up, but the core gameplay really doesn't. The shooting, controls, and actual mechanics are functional at best. There's nothing deeply wrong with the actual concepts, but the execution is pretty basic. I'm not trying to hold that against a game from 1994, but I don't think it really compares to SS2 or DX1, which modern games have only surpassed in polish and basically nothing else.

FAKE NEWS

You mean SS1 can't compare to SS2, the same SS2 that was almost gutted compared to its predecessor when it comes to mechanics and complexity?

Or, the SS2 that replaced clunky nonsense with well-designed meaningful depth?

Being able to turn on a rearview mirror and rollerblades doesn't make SS1's mechanics complex or interesting. The upgrades are immersive and fun, sure, but never require any thought or real choice. If you have a brain you'll slap on the best weapons, sprint at enemies with the laser rapier and energy shield and murder everything without a second thought. The weapons are straightforward once you know what the ammo types do, the combat is fairly dull, and the interface is an unwieldy product of its time. Dying comes at no cost, ammo is everywhere, and you don't actually have to manage anything after the first few levels. It's a great exploration game, and I somewhat prefer the setting of Citadel Station to the Von Braun, but you've got to be kidding if you think its mechanics are better. In SS2 I have to think about every upgrade and how I want to build my character, and the actual combat has much more tension and strategic depth, even if it is still somewhat bare bones. There's loads of combat playstyles, a hacking mechanic that rewards investment, equipment durability, and resources to manage alongside a compelling player fantasy. Other than the fact that the balance is off with some dump skills and unforunately "optimal" choices, it's clearly a masterwork in RPG system design.

I played these games one after the other, and was slightly convinced I would prefer SS1 because I found its atmosphere and Metroidvania-style gameplay loop so deeply engaging, but SS2 is on another level. I'll gamble on the fact that deep down, you think SS2 is worse just because more people like it. Everyone should play both so they can experience the flawed but genre-defining original and the refined gem that is its sequel.

 

[Infinitron]

balance is off with some dump skills and unforunately "optimal" choices

clearly a masterwork in RPG system design

Oookay

The upgrades are immersive and fun, sure, but never require any thought or real choice. If you have a brain you'll slap on the best weapons

So what you're basically saying here is that SS1 is "flawed" because it's not the same genre of game as SS2.

 

[Ash]

Action games and shooters are supposed to feature meaningful choice too. The plenty of choice offered in Shock 1 leaves a lot to be desired, as does many other aspects of the game. Yet certain people here think it is design perfection (fucking lol) and that Shock 2 is the inferior game (double fucking lol).

 

[MuscleSpark]

So what you're basically saying here is that SS1 is "flawed" because it's not the same genre of game as SS2.

Welcome to the RPG Codex, is this your first time here? All games that aren't RPGs are flawed by virtue of not being RPGs, obviously.

 

[ghostdog]

Spazmo: Odds are, something you like very much sucks. Why? Because this is RPG Codex.

 

[Dev_Anj]

If you have a brain you'll slap on the best weapons, sprint at enemies with the laser rapier and energy shield and murder everything without a second thought.

I don't think this is a good point to bring up while comparing the two, since a lot of this criticism applies very well to System Shock 2. Having problems with enemies? Just invest enough into Standard Weapons until you get the Assault Rifle and tons of ammo, and there, most encounters are made easy. There's literally little reason to pick any of the other weapon classes once you grasp that one fact, besides maybe specializing into Exotics for the crystal shard while investing into Standard Weapons for buffing the pistol.

You are, however right that System Shock 2 does ammo management better than System Shock 1, except for annelid ammo being too rare and being too much of a pain to get.

 

[RoSoDude]

Oookay

The RPG systems can be unbalanced even to a fault and still be totally engrossing. SS2's upgrade mechanics have a lot of tension -- there's a mix between what upgrades you feel you need, and what upgrades go along with your build. It's basic stuff, but it's just the right layer of abstraction where your personal skill and your choices both matter. A mediocre stat like Agility or Repair doesn't take away from this, even if it is unfortunate.

So what you're basically saying here is that SS1 is "flawed" because it's not the same genre of game as SS2.

No, it's flawed because its mechanics are bland, with complexity that doesn't serve any deep gameplay. The game doesn't have to offer you RPG systems (though I'd have liked that), but it does have to use its mechanics in a way that keeps the player engaged. Ammo and energy are so plentiful that players needn't ever think before pulling the trigger or using abilities. Since there's no cost to dying, all tension is removed from engagements once you cancel cyborg conversion on a level. My engagement was waning by about halfway through when I had 50 medipatches, an inventory full of batteries and first aid kits, and pockets overflowing with ammo and grenades. All of these design choices could be drastically improved without introducing any RPG systems. SS2 does this rather competently and adds deep RPG mechanics, which is what I mean when I say its mechanics are "better".

I don't think this is a good point to bring up while comparing the two, since a lot of this criticism applies very well to System Shock 2. Having problems with enemies? Just invest enough into Standard Weapons until you get the Assault Rifle and tons of ammo, and there, most encounters are made easy. There's literally little reason to pick any of the other weapon classes once you grasp that one fact, besides maybe specializing into Exotics for the crystal shard while investing into Standard Weapons for buffing the pistol.

You are, however right that System Shock 2 does ammo management better than System Shock 1, except for annelid ammo being too rare and being too much of a pain to get.

I'll agree that it's not a balanced experience. Separate ammo for the Assault Rifle probably could have amended this. I still find the comparison valid due to the ammo point and the fact the majority of SS1 weapons are even more forgettable -- I can't recall how many weapons I replaced for superior versions without having even fired the weapon I just threw away.

I also think think there's something to the fact that the systems encourage specialization, so you can challenge yourself to an Energy-only or PSI-only playthrough. It'd be nice if it were more balanced, though.

 

[Ash]

all tension is removed from engagements once you cancel cyborg conversion on a level.

Well, there's still consequences for death even once activated because enemies respawn at a fairly high rate (if I recall). So it's not Bioshock levels of bad, but still a very legitimate criticism.

Nonetheless, I agree with mostly everything you said. I do think Shock 1 is one of the weaker LG games despite its innovations, meanwhile I will fan-wank over Shock 2 any day. Shock 1 is perhaps one of the best examples of high complexity, low depth. Such as cyberspace. If anyone actually thought that was fun, deep and meaningful (to play) they're a contrarian hipster.
Still a great game though.

 

[RoSoDude]

all tension is removed from engagements once you cancel cyborg conversion on a level.

Well, there's still consequences for death even once activated because enemies respawn at a fairly high rate (if I recall). So it's not Bioshock levels of bad, but still a very legitimate criticism.

True -- this can be annoying on a few levels (like Maintenance with those invisible mutants). The part that breaks it is that most of the cyborg conversion chambers revive you to near full health and in the case of Engineering put you right next to the Healing Chamber and Energy Station. Much of the time I would allow myself to be killed to warp somewhere faster. If you were revived with lower health, as I believe is the case in Research, I'd have cared much more about staying alive in the face of respawning enemies.

 

[Karellen]

I suspect that it might be a difference in taste, but I feel that the way new weapons provide a clear power boost in System Shock is a big part of its appeal. The combat in System Shock is fairly trivial (I tend to think of it not as a shooter at all), and the game would benefit from being less liberal with ammunition, but even so, exploring in System Shock is such a pleasure in part because it makes the player noticeably stronger and, subsequently, lets you reach new places and deal with new types of foes. Certainly the system has little inherent depth, but what it does do well is support player-driven exploration, which is basically the one thing the game does exceedingly well. The game's appeal is largely in mapping and clearing out levels the way you do in dungon crawlers, and that wouldn't be nearly as fulfilling if it didn't yield persistent progress.

My main issue with System Shock 2 is that the game is entirely too constricting to begin with - in part, I suspect, to maintain a degree of balance in the usefulness of the non-combat skills - but beyond that, the RPG mechanics don't really enhance the joy of discovery in the game. The stat system means that a lot of the stuff you find you can't use, and at times it feels like paying income tax for the nice stuff you already found, but beyond that, even the stuff you can use just isn't that exciting, because the gun degradation and strict ammo limitations make a lot of the progress feel insubstantial - you just don't spend that much time playing with the fun toys you find, and in practice most of my memories of SS2 involve clobbering things with the wrench. The laser rapier in System Shock 1 might not've been balanced, but damn if finding it didn't feel like touching fingertips with the Almighty.

 

[Jaesun]

What is wrong with this being ported to other platforms?

 

[HansDampf]

How would you port SS or SS2 to consoles?

 

[Delbaeth]

Weren't Starbreeze the ones who did the Syndicate FPS?

Also, how many levels of DRM will have these System Shock games on PC, now?
Pretty sure, they will come out with Steam DRM and Denuvo, and then, "oh you wanted DRM-free on GOG?! You damned Pirates!"
And 6 months after release (so 5 months and 3 weeks after Denuvo cracked, and after the consoles' release's bombing), the DRM-free release will come with the classic "We have listened to our fans! We love you!"

Meh.

 

[Unkillable Cat]

What is wrong with this being ported to other platforms?

If it's designed for the PC and then ported to the consoles then I'm cool with this.

But we all know how this is going to go.

They'll come up with a design for the game, get to work, and then realize that consoles can't provide the processing power to handle their idea of the game.

So they cut out the elements that won't fit on console, scale back the scope of the game and get back to work.

Until they realize that the console still can't process their game.

Repeat ad nauseaum until there's nothing new or innovative about the game, and it's just another watered-down console title.

 

[Infinitron]

They'll come up with a design for the game, get to work, and then realize that consoles can't provide the processing power to handle their idea of the game.

Not really a thing anymore with modern console specs. 8 GBs of RAM and they're going to do frequent hardware refreshes too. The main concern about consoles nowadays isn't processing or space constraints, it's user interface and gameplay.

Here's what I said about console ports of games like this a while back:

I think if there's one genre whose core gameplay could be unharmed by being multiplatform, it's "survival horror"-oriented first person games, which typically are slow-paced and take place in confined spaces.

 

[Ash]

You could technically port both Shock games to the consoles relatively unscathed, it would just be seen as sub-optimal business proceedings due to inaccessibility (cursor control with a pad, small UI elements).

Can definitely be done, just nobody would do it because they want that optimized console cash.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

SS1 used an awful lot of keys. I see no way in hell to port that to console without major 'streamlining'. The issue begins and ends with the input for consoles being two sticks and some buttons managed principally by thumbs. The game would need to be playable and challenging for someone who is 'all thumbs'.

 

[Ash]

SS1 used an awful lot of keys. I see no way in hell to port that to console without major 'streamlining'

60% of said keys being something that is entirely irrelevant with the advent of the mouse or analog stick. So you could say "streamlined", yes, to far superior results. There doesn't have to be negative connotations there. Streamlined in the same way Shock 2 was streamlined (read: better).

The game would need to be playable and challenging for someone who is 'all thumbs'.

Guh. Won't even go there. Game isn't even challenging to begin with, just a pain the ass to get used to due to the awful controls.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Look at the key map. There was keys for a lot of things other than movement. My guess is you didn't play it past 'fuck this too many keys'.

Also, SS1 was not meant to be some approachable easy to pick up game. Some games are quite OK being complex and that should not be considered an impediment. Don't equate outdated controls with bad design, SS1 would be shitty on a controller. The results would be shit, not for superior. Esoteric controls, discovery of systems was cool, don't expect fucking millennials to understand that.

 

[Heretic]

Do they have other sources of funding? 12 mil doesn't sound like much.

 

[Karellen]

Look at the key map. There was keys for a lot of things other than movement. My guess is you didn't play it past 'fuck this too many keys'.

Also, SS1 was not meant to be some approachable easy to pick up game. Some games are quite OK being complex and that should not be considered an impediment. Don't equate outdated controls with bad design, SS1 would be shitty on a controller. The results would be shit, not for superior. Esoteric controls, discovery of systems was cool, don't expect fucking millennials to understand that.

Most of the unusual keys that SS1 has have to do with (by and large pointlessly) micromanaging your character's posture, though. Other than that it's just shortcuts to control your UI and cyberware, which are nice, but not really essential to the game; it's all stuff that you can do without, and the last time I played through the game I mostly controlled those with the mouse anyway. All in all, to say that the controls of SS1 are "outdated" is a masive understatement - the controls were pretty terrible even when the game came out, and tolerable solely because SS1 is a slow-paced game in which combat doesn't require quick reflexes. Forgive me if I don't think it's a sign of hidden genius that SS1 uses three buttons to control whether you're looking up or down and another six to control crouching and leaning.

As ever, the lack of a mouse is the real challenge when it comes to moving a game on console. Playing 1st person games without a mouse is normally a pretty terrible idea, but since SS1 predates mouselook, the game is fine with more sluggish controls, limited rotation speed and all that - it's precisely because SS1 was designed for such a counterintuitive and awkward control scheme in the first place that using a controller isn't really a step down. The UI would have to be different on a console, which is certainly a shame in a way, but the core of the game, which is exploration the station, could survive the transition without any serious trouble.

 

[Ash]

My guess is you didn't play it past 'fuck this too many keys'.

fuck this enable the mouselook mod more like.

Esoteric controls...was cool

Good controls are one of the most important things to nail for far too many reasons to mention. To put it in terms you'd understand, imagine driving a car with a fucking keyboard and not a steering wheel/handbrake etc. With less "keys" you actually have more control, because it is a immediate act to look at something and turn to it, and it becomes second nature in no time, for example.

The UI would have to be different on a console

Wouldn't strictly have to, there are plenty console games with cursor control over a PC-like interface (RTS comes to mind), but it would be deemed necessary for accessibility. I both agree and disagree with that, because you lose something special in the process and I don't think cursor control is that inaccessible on a pad, despite certainly being lesser than the mouse.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Can't apply modern sensibilities to the past. This should be obvious.

And yes complexity was cool. I still have my 700+ page Falcon manuals. Very complex controls and systems is half the reason to love that game.

 

[Ash]

I love complexity and lots of control. And indeed most of Shock's control complexity was a necessity due to the times, was not saying it wasn't. But today? No need for it. At all, so bringing in the "Shock used lots of keys" argument is nonsensical. And your love for such convolution is Stockholm syndrome-esque.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Someone old enough to play SS1 when it was released might have enjoyed it, absent the benefits of two decades of hindsight.

I distinctly remember moments where leaning around corners and other 'pointless' movement controls allows taking out security bots, cameras etc. without their spotting you.