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

[Terenty]

What simulation is there in SS2? Are there any other interactions besides killing enemies and enemies killing you?

 

[RoSoDude]

What is this vapid reductionism? By that line of thinking, what "simulation" is in Deus Ex besides sneaking and killing? Social dynamics sure as hell aren't simulated in DX -- it's all scripted C&C.

System Shock 2 has plenty of simulation, you just have to think on a more granular level. It has the simulated physics and light + sound stealth systems native to the Dark Engine, in addition to what was built from the ground up for the game. Simulation of enemies wandering around the ship and repopulating previous areas, simulation of security systems looking for you and sending reinforcements, simulation of weapon durability, simulation of exotic alien research, simulation of the interactions between various forms of weaponry and organic/robotic creatures, simulation of intelligent creature behavior, simulation of toxic and radioactive hazards, hell even simulation of the cognitive effects of imbibing alcohol... what on earth are you asking for?

Simulation is about recreating the critical and relevant aspects of some real-life (or at least recognizable) phenomenon so they remain familiar and tangible in an otherwise abstract setting. Hence why games like Deus Ex, Thief, and System Shock are seen as particularly immersive, because the interaction between player inputs and the world state is grounded by real-world expectations, even when the player's end goal is just to eliminate a series of threats. Do I need to be able to pay off a mortgage on my house or drive a forklift around in System Shock for it to count as "simulating" anything but killing? Come on now.

 

[Safav Hamon]

All I'm saying is that Deus Ex, Thief, and Ultima: Underworld are in another league compared to System Shock 2.

The bar isn't high for System Shock 3 to have better gameplay and level design, especially since Warren Spector already made SS2 his bitch with DX1.

 

[Master]

What? SS2 had great levels man, just like DX. Only difference being they arent as open but that just fits the setting. Though one better thing is that being more closed they arent as easy to cheese trough like in DX.

 

[taxalot]

I am pretty amazed OS is still getting away with the way they promote System Shock 3. Have we seen interviews or things like that where they are being questioned about how they plan to achieve this considering the absolute total failure that was Ascendant ?

I hear they are different teams, alright, but they are still running off the same bank accounts. This cannot be good.

 

[MasterLobar]

Not so different after all.

Level designer of Underworld Ascendant started helping the development of SS3: https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-pappas-49771a3/

The two teams are even sharing codebases. Well, do they? Judge for yourselves.

The SS3 team is entirely based in Austin, but we share feedback on occasion.

EDIT Nov 26 2018: Earlier, this comment stated that we share codebases. This is actually false. I meant to say that we both use Unity and CAN share assets between the two projects, but we do have not done so.

https://forums.otherside-e.com/t/ss3-dev-team/9684/3

And the community manager gets super-pissed when the question if they are also "sharing" (i.e. misappropriating) budget between the two projects comes up, so it's pretty obvious they are doing that as well one way or the other.

But the community manager is like "We would never screw our investors in such a way." Oh, of course, you wouldn't after totally lying about the kickstarter.

We've clarified in the past that Underworld Ascendant's KS money was not used for System Shock 3. Since this is the third time I've seen this kind of thread pop up, I'm going to make this the final time I address it.

[...]

I want to stop people from accusing the UA team of launching a KS and then funding it to Shock3. If anything, it would have been amazing to have some of the Shock3 budget lent to UA; but that violates publisher-dev contracts, and we respected that and worked with what we had.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/692840/discussions/0/1848072002772540554/#c1769259642860738259

I don't buy that "two totally different teams" for a second. It's all one rotten soup.

 

[Safav Hamon]

What? SS2 had great levels man, just like DX. Only difference being they arent as open but that just fits the setting. Though one better thing is that being more closed they arent as easy to cheese trough like in DX.

For the most part System Shock 2 plays like a linear corridor shooter. The levels aren't big or varied enough to support any creative playstyles like Deus Ex.

 

[Infinitron]

I would like to get back to creating original IP. I like creating worlds and original characters so I suspect you'll see some of that as well, but we'll see what happens. First thing is System Shock 3. Let's get that out of the door.

How much of that does he think he's going to be able to achieve even in the best case? The man's old. He's gonna be creating new IPs at age 65+?

 

[ZeniBot]

Hot Take: Warren Spector says the levels will be bigger than SS2, there will be more options than SS2, and there will be C&C unlike SS2. So unless he's talking shit, it will be a better immersive sim than SS2.

You're right, he's talking shit.

This sounds like some Todd Howard level bullshit. 10x the detail.
Most people would be happy with System Shock 2 again. No need to potentially ruin it with filler bullshit and an unrealistic crunch deadline which leads to a rushed product and overall worse reception.
Did this fucker not learn anything from Invisible War? sorry but I can't help but feel a sense of dejavu.

 

[LESS T_T]

I would like to get back to creating original IP. I like creating worlds and original characters so I suspect you'll see some of that as well, but we'll see what happens. First thing is System Shock 3. Let's get that out of the door.

How much of that does he think he's going to be able to achieve even in the best case? The man's old. He's gonna be creating new IPs at age 65+?

I think he said in one of the interviews or talks few years ago, that he thinks he will make "a few" more games before retirement.

edit: yeah: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-08-10-devs-must-define-success-for-themselves-spector

Will I retire? We'll see. I'd be lying if I said I hadn't thought about that, but I think I have a few more games in me.

 

[Terenty]

System Shock 2 has plenty of simulation, you just have to think on a more granular level. It has the simulated physics and light + sound stealth systems native to the Dark Engine, in addition to what was built from the ground up for the game. Simulation of enemies wandering around the ship and repopulating previous areas, simulation of security systems looking for you and sending reinforcements, simulation of weapon durability, simulation of exotic alien research, simulation of the interactions between various forms of weaponry and organic/robotic creatures, simulation of intelligent creature behavior, simulation of toxic and radioactive hazards, hell even simulation of the cognitive effects of imbibing alcohol... what on earth are you asking for?

Then how come Rdr 2 isnt considered an imsim? Theres lots of simulation there and its immersive as fuck. Far cry 2,3,4,5 ? Every game then suddenly becomes an imsim, because every game has simulation in some form and immersiveness is a subjective notion. No?

 

[Wunderbar]

Then how come Rdr 2 isnt considered an imsim? Theres lots of simulation there and its immersive as fuck.

RDR punishes you when you walk too far from a partner, when you're trying to use stealth in a action-only mission, even when you're trying to walk around the house from the different side. Very immersive.

 

[Master]

What? SS2 had great levels man, just like DX. Only difference being they arent as open but that just fits the setting. Though one better thing is that being more closed they arent as easy to cheese trough like in DX.

For the most part System Shock 2 plays like a linear corridor shooter. The levels aren't big or varied enough to support any creative playstyles like Deus Ex.

They are varied considering its a spaceship, one whole area, not a globetrotting affair like DX.
And you can get creative if you want especially with Psy, if by creative you dont mean just cheesing the game like you can in DX.

 

[RoSoDude]

Then how come Rdr 2 isnt considered an imsim? Theres lots of simulation there and its immersive as fuck. Far cry 2,3,4,5 ? Every game then suddenly becomes an imsim, because every game has simulation in some form and immersiveness is a subjective notion. No?

Would you believe it, having simulation and being "immersive" (which is subjective as you say) does not mean a game is an Immersive Sim, because genre names are stupid and musn't be taken literally. A Role-Playing game is a game in which you play a role, hence Super Mario Bros is an RPG. Quake is a Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Thief is a ROGUElike. 

 

[Terenty]

Then how come Rdr 2 isnt considered an imsim? Theres lots of simulation there and its immersive as fuck. Far cry 2,3,4,5 ? Every game then suddenly becomes an imsim, because every game has simulation in some form and immersiveness is a subjective notion. No?

Would you believe it, having simulation and being "immersive" (which is subjective as you say) does not mean a game is an Immersive Sim, because genre names are stupid and musn't be taken literally. A Role-Playing game is a game in which you play a role, hence Super Mario Bros is an RPG. Quake is a Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Thief is a ROGUElike. 

Ok, but what set of characteristics make certain games immersive sims and others not?

 

[RoSoDude]

Would you believe it, having simulation and being "immersive" (which is subjective as you say) does not mean a game is an Immersive Sim, because genre names are stupid and musn't be taken literally. A Role-Playing game is a game in which you play a role, hence Super Mario Bros is an RPG. Quake is a Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Thief is a ROGUElike. 

Ok, but what set of characteristics make certain games immersive sims and others not?

Like any dreadful genre debate, this is hotly contested. Some people think it shouldn't be a category at all, some people think it describes a design philosophy rather than a genre, and some wish to widen the definition to the point of calling Apex Legends an Immersive Sim. I've actually seen someone argue that before.

For my part, "Immersive Sim" denotes the following characteristics:
1. Real-time gameplay from the (usually first-person) perspective of a single player character
2. Influence from role-playing games, particularly in promoting "player authorship"
3. Systems-driven gameplay with a focus on simulation

As I understand it, "Immersive" comes mostly from #1 since you're directly behind the eyes of your player character in real time, and "Sim" mostly comes from #3, as the rules (systems) that define gameplay are largely derived from simulating your interactions with the game world. The biggest thing that the genre name misses is #2, which is a subtler element to pin down since it's both a comment of history (i.e. the ethos of Ultima Underworld was to make an immersive dungeon crawler RPG that replaced dicerolls with computer simulation wherever possible) and also of structure (the player should have open-ended goals that allow them to apply the various tools at their disposal in a logical manner). There are also peripheral features common to many Immersive Sims such as first person shooting, RPG elements, stealth systems, resource economies, narrative C&C, etc. that are only so because they're a natural fit for this type of game (or because Arkane's bread and butter is just copying LGS's main franchises) and not because they're fundamental.

Under stricter definitions, only the LGS + Ion Storm + Arkane games would count (UU 1/2, SS 1/2, Thief 1/2/3, Deus Ex, Arx Fatalis, Dishonored 1/2, Prey 2017). Under looser definitions, many of the Hitman games, MGSV, and Zelda: Breath of the Wild probably count (I haven't played any of these, but they pass #1 if you drop the FPP requirement, and seem to pass #2 and #3 as well). I would be extremely reluctant to count something like RDR2 because, while I haven't played it, its main missions seem to do everything in their power to keep the player railroaded into the sequence of actions the developers want them to take, rather than offering the player a set of tools and allowing them to decide how to combine them to realize their goals (fails #2). No idea about Far Cry, but I have my doubts (open-world sandbox does not necessarily grant #2). Never ever count Bioshock.

For more discussion on the subject, I recommend The Playing Field's videos on System Shock 2 and Thief 2. He uses the same definition as I do.


For the record, I only use the term "Immersive Sim" because it's what nearly everyone else uses -- I agree that the term is becoming more and more meaningless, and would happily jump ship to something better. It's probably too late for that though.

 

[Terenty]

Would you believe it, having simulation and being "immersive" (which is subjective as you say) does not mean a game is an Immersive Sim, because genre names are stupid and musn't be taken literally. A Role-Playing game is a game in which you play a role, hence Super Mario Bros is an RPG. Quake is a Multiplayer Online Battle Arena. Thief is a ROGUElike. 

Ok, but what set of characteristics make certain games immersive sims and others not?

Like any dreadful genre debate, this is hotly contested. Some people think it shouldn't be a category at all, some people think it describes a design philosophy rather than a genre, and some wish to widen the definition to the point of calling Apex Legends an Immersive Sim. I've actually seen someone argue that before.

For my part, "Immersive Sim" denotes the following characteristics:
1. Real-time gameplay from the (usually first-person) perspective of a single player character
2. Influence from role-playing games, particularly in promoting "player authorship"
3. Systems-driven gameplay with a focus on simulation

As I understand it, "Immersive" comes mostly from #1 since you're directly behind the eyes of your player character in real time, and "Sim" mostly comes from #3, as the rules (systems) that define gameplay are largely derived from simulating your interactions with the game world. The biggest thing that the genre name misses is #2, which is a subtler element to pin down since it's both a comment of history (i.e. the ethos of Ultima Underworld was to make an immersive dungeon crawler RPG that replaced dicerolls with computer simulation wherever possible) and also of structure (the player should have open-ended goals that allow them to apply the various tools at their disposal in a logical manner). There are also peripheral features common to many Immersive Sims such as first person shooting, RPG elements, stealth systems, resource economies, narrative C&C, etc. that are only so because they're a natural fit for this type of game (or because Arkane's bread and butter is just copying LGS's main franchises) and not because they're fundamental.

Under stricter definitions, only the LGS + Ion Storm + Arkane games would count (UU 1/2, SS 1/2, Thief 1/2/3, Deus Ex, Arx Fatalis, Dishonored 1/2, Prey 2017). Under looser definitions, many of the Hitman games, MGSV, and Zelda: Breath of the Wild probably count (I haven't played any of these, but they pass #1 if you drop the FPP requirement, and seem to pass #2 and #3 as well). I would be extremely reluctant to count something like RDR2 because, while I haven't played it, its main missions seem to do everything in their power to keep the player railroaded into the sequence of actions the developers want them to take, rather than offering the player a set of tools and allowing them to decide how to combine them to realize their goals (fails #2). No idea about Far Cry, but I have my doubts (open-world sandbox does not necessarily grant #2). Never ever count Bioshock.

For more discussion on the subject, I recommend The Playing Field's videos on System Shock 2 and Thief 2. He uses the same definition as I do.


For the record, I only use the term "Immersive Sim" because it's what nearly everyone else uses -- I agree that the term is becoming more and more meaningless, and would happily jump ship to something better. It's probably too late for that though.

Thanks for the links. But why not Bioshock? It totally falls under all three categories you mentioned

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

No it doesn’t.
It very obviously fails at 2 and 3 both.

 

[udm]

For the most part System Shock 2 plays like a linear corridor shooter. The levels aren't big or varied enough to support any creative playstyles like Deus Ex.

urmom plays like a linear corridor shooter

 

[Paul_cz]

For my part, "Immersive Sim" denotes the following characteristics:
1. Real-time gameplay from the (usually first-person) perspective of a single player character
2. Influence from role-playing games, particularly in promoting "player authorship"
3. Systems-driven gameplay with a focus on simulation

Interesting. Kingdom Come Deliverance is a mix between immersive sim and RPG then I guess?

 

[forumvisitor#451]

I would also count Operation Flashpoint / ARMA games as immersive sims

 

[LESS T_T]

From Starbreeze's Q1 report: https://mb.cision.com/Main/14632/2804965/1038389.pdf

Sales and direct costs
First quarter 2019

Net sales for the first quarter of 2019 amounted to SEK 47.8 million (110.1), of which PAYDAY accounted for SEK 26.7 million (25.1). Starbreeze had no revenues for Dead by Daylight during the quarter. Revenues from Dead by Daylight during the comparison period amounted to SEK 62.0 million. Starbreeze Indian studio Dhruva contributed external income of SEK 9.1 million (7.0). OVERKILL’s The Walking Dead (OTWD) generated sales of SEK 2.1 million (0.0). The publishing rights to System Shock 3 were sold during the quarter and generated initial revenue of SEK 3.7 million

Direct costs amounted to SEK 170.6 million (77.0) and comprised costs related to game production and development. Direct costs include depreciation, amortization and impairments of SEK 41.8 million (40.2). Impairments during the period total SEK 26.5 million on property, plant and equipment. See Note 8. The impairments refer to non-current assets in the VR parks in Dubai and in Stockholm at Sveavägen 14. Direct costs SEK 68.1 million corresponding to the cost of the sold asset System Shock 3. As the Group previously communicated, Starbreeze is expected to, under the terms of the agreement, be compensated for the Group’s costs. However, under IFRS, the Group is permitted to disaggregate only a portion of the entire contract amount but must recognize the entire cost of the sold asset.


Costs and profit or loss
First quarter 2019

[...]
EBITDA amounted to SEK -106.7 million (48.8). The decrease in earnings is due primarily to lower net sales, higher administrative costs related to the reconstruction and the negative accounting effect of the sale of System Shock 3.

Starbreeze sold the publishing rights to System Shock 3 during the first quarter of 2019. Under the terms of the agreement, Starbreeze will recover its investment over time. In accordance with IFRS, the Group will initially recognize a loss, as IFRS 15 does not permit recognition of future royalties in revenue even if these are directly connected to the sale of the publishing rights; instead, the carrying amount of the sold asset must be immediately expensed. As a result, revenue of SEK 3.7 million and a cost of SEK 68.1 million have been recognized in the quarter. In future periods, revenues related to this transaction will be recognized without associated costs.

 

[MasterLobar]

That's more bad news for OS. The refund is not royalty-based, as Nyast assumed.

IMO the refund contract is probably structured around royalties on their future revenue, for a total maximum of $7M.

OS had to start paying back immediately after the cancellation took effect, and probably now owes a fixed amount per month.

The disclosure says OS paid back SEK 3.7 million in the first quarter (1 Jan - 31st Mar). That's about $385,000 (the exchange rate is varying around 10:1).

Assuming their obligation to pay back started the day the deal was cancelled (cancellation was announced on February 11th). The actual cancellation notice was probably sent a few days earlier, so they had to repay ~ $385,000 for about 2 months.

So it seems reasonable to assume that OS has to refund Starbreeze over time at a rate of $200,000 per month.

This also proves those wrong who opined that OS had deep pockets or different sources of capital and somehow paid back everything already (e.g., Flug in the OS forum):

Not a surprise in the current circumstances. However, it suggests Otherside have had the capital to do this. Interesting.

https://forums.otherside-e.com/t/starbreeze-cancel-system-shock-3-publishing-deal/9855/2

They did not. They have no publisher. They have no revenues. They have no reserves. They have no assets they could sell. The only thing that keeps them live is the $3.5 million OS management/owners and two venture capital investors provided in August 2018.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1756400/000156761918004482/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml

But that's not going to last very long. I'd give the company 3 more months max. This is going to be over by the end of July, if not sooner.

 

[MasterLobar]

Had some time to give the Q1 interim report a closer look:

https://www.starbreeze.com/sbz-media/2019/05/Starbreeze-Interim-Report-Q1-2019.pdf

One thing is really interesting. On p.4, it says:

Starbreeze expects to be fully compensated for the costs the company has incurred in connection with development of the game.

And again on p.9:

Starbreeze will recover its investment over time.

So Starbreeze reaffirms that they think OS is going to fully repay their SS3 investment (SEK 68.1 million or about $7 million).

But Starbreeze must be aware of Otherside's financial troubles. If they write in their report that they expect to be fully compensated, but know that's not true, they could be subject to legal liability. It would also have been difficult to get approval of the report from their auditor.

That's really weird to be honest.


Otherwise, what happened on the balance sheet is the following:

The publishing rights to System Shock 3 were sold during the quarter and generated initial revenue of SEK 3.7 million.

[...]

In accordance with IFRS, the Group will initially recognize a loss, as IFRS 15 does not permit recognition of future royalties in revenue even if these are directly connected to the sale of the publishing rights; instead, the carrying amount of the sold asset must be immediately expensed. As a result, revenue of SEK 3.7 million and a cost of SEK 68.1 million have been recognized in the quarter. In future periods, revenues related to this transaction will be recognized without associated costs.

When they funded SS3 during the last 2 years, they capitalized their expenses (SEK 68.1 million or ~ $ 7 million) on their balance sheet as an asset (publishing rights). They are selling it entirely now, and that wipes out the complete asset at once, for which they incurred a loss of said SEK 68.1 million).

But they are not allowed to capitalize their expectation of getting reimbursed by OS over time, because these future revenues aren't certain at all (see point above!). So they can only recognize those repayments as revenue that OS actually makes to them.

That obviously was SEK 3.7 million (~$385,000) in the first quarter, so OS is very likely paying back ~$200,000 a month.

 

[toro]

Stop posting: the idea of a jobless Warren Spector begging for blowjobs on the streets is arousing me.