Nameless Voice on 23/10/2017 at 19:56
I'm pretty sure there's a formula based on the visibility level and the acuity of the AI's vision to determine how close they need to be in order to see you at a given light level.
Renault on 23/10/2017 at 19:58
Quote Posted by Buccura
Metal Gear Solid V is still a much more advanced stealth game than Thief 1/2.
I'm not saying it isn't true, but why do you believe Metal Gear has more advanced stealth than Thief? I'd need some examples to be convinced. Same goes for Thief's visibility levels - what makes you think that they might be just for show? It's helpful to provide some evidence if you're going to make statements like these.
And as far as the complexity of Thief gameplay, I don't think anyone is saying you have to be a super genius to be good, but there are more factors to consider than if you're playing a game like Dishonored. For Dishonored, it's probably as simple as "if you're less than 50 feet away from an AI, they'll see you." Thief factors so much more in - intensity of light sources, their proximity to you, what surface you're on, how fast you're moving, whether you have weapons drawn, whether you're standing/crouching, etc. It's not that the game has complex controls, but it does have complex systems.
Tony_Tarantula on 23/10/2017 at 22:55
Quote Posted by henke
It's true that realistic sound propagation and light-based visibility are rare these days, but the actual gameplay in the Thief games really isn't
that complex. "Hide in safe spot>observe enemy movements>form plan and execute it" is the same gameplay loop as pretty much any modern stealth game. It doesn't take a genius to play it, so let's not suck our own dicks
too much for having mastered it.
Of course not, but it DOES take a level of patience that doesn't fit well with today's goldfish attention span.
Much the same could be said for other genres. Bioware is a great example with how the definition of an RPG slowly got dumbed down from Baldur's Gate, to KoToR, to Mass Effect, to Mass Effect's sequels. Not that all of those are bad but they collectively represent a massive devolution of gameplay. Same for most "shooting" FPS games as mechanics like regenerating health have removed a lot of the strategic (vs. tactical) elements of those games.
It's kinda beating a dead horse at this point, but the simplification of these mechanics is visible. It's kinda justifiable since a lot of people don't have a ton of time to spend learning complex systems but also personally frustrating to me that games like Thief or Deus Ex, games that are easy to learn but have complex underlying systems that lead to gameplay depth, are rare along with book-like RPGs.
Starker on 24/10/2017 at 06:10
Bioware is not synonymous with RPG. That is just one company. There were many other RPGs after Baldur's Gate like Arcanum, VTMB, Gothic, Wizardry 8, etc.
What happened was that big cRPGs stopped being made when companies focused on consoles and the big RPGs that did come out had to be streamlined for consoles. This is how you get "dumbed down" RPGs like Dragon Age and Mass Effect.
Also, there are lots of old school RPGs around these days, now that the PC market is relevant -- The Witcher, Dark Souls, Tyranny, Wasteland, Divinity: Original Sin, Shadowrun, etc.
Thirith on 24/10/2017 at 06:12
Shhh... Don't let facts get in the way of a good "Things were better when I was young" narrative.
Judith on 24/10/2017 at 08:53
In terms of systems design, I don't remember a modern stealth game that has e.g. more complex AI alertness system than original Thief series. Most games go for the green/yellow/red alert framework. That said, I loved how MGS V reacted to/countered your actions, and I wouldn't expect any of that from a small studio like LGS was at the time.
As for the future, I expect the stealth genere to become indie-only niche. If the AAA sector doesn't collapse on its own corporate greed, it will soon look like the mobile market: gambling, lootboxes, and microtransactions everywhere. There's not much place for single-player games there, not to mention the stealth genre.
Starker on 24/10/2017 at 09:37
Yeah, Kojima Productions was bigger than LGS and had a much bigger budget. LGS only ever had north of a hundred employees.
Now that there are no big studios left to pursue stealth focused titles, I guess the only hope is Arkane at Bethesda's mercy. Or maybe Splinter Cell will return to its stealth roots?
Malf on 24/10/2017 at 11:31
Quote Posted by Brethren
I'm not saying it isn't true, but why do you believe Metal Gear has more advanced stealth than Thief? I'd need some examples to be convinced. Same goes for Thief's visibility levels - what makes you think that they might be just for show? It's helpful to provide some evidence if you're going to make statements like these.
I wouldn't say
more advanced necessarily, but there's a lot more going on with MGSV's stealth than you'd think. I'd certainly say it's a lot more intricate and involved than other stealth systems (excluding Thief).
For example, one thing a lot of players don't notice, because the game doesn't make a big song and dance about it, is that there's different optimal camo outfits for each scenario.
The implication is that because it costs the most, the sneaking suit is the best. But in practice, this is simply not the case in most scenarios. Sure, when on a night-time operation or assaulting an enemy FOB, it's one of the best choices for a sneaky approach. But for daylight operations in the savannah? You'll stick out like a sore thumb, and the AI will notice you at a much greater range.
In those scenarios, you're better off picking a lower cost, but more appropriate camo. That means they've made an AI system that has an algorithm for assessing player visibility on different types of terrain at different times of day based on what the player is wearing. Even with tricks to simulate this system, it's still an incredible thing to have in a stealth game.
I mean, the
easiest way would be to have map brushes that give a certain area a base optimal camo type. For argument's sake, let's say that results in 10 different base areas and 10 related optimal camo types. Then there's lighting conditions; again, for argument's sake, let's say there's two: day and night. Then the camos themselves would have an index number that relates to the terrain they're most effective in, then the one they're least effective in. There'd then be ratings on a decreasing scale for all different terrain types in between those two extremes, plus alternate ratings for day and night.
And of course, the true genius is making it so the player can look at how the camo looks on Snake and then gauge whether it's the best for the scenario they're attempting.
Even that easy, tricksy way I describe above sounds like a lot of programming work. But however it is they've approached this problem, the main point stands:
your choice of camo affects your visibility.
That's incredible.
And that's just the one example that leaps out at me. There's other nifty little things, like if you're driving with an unconscious enemy in the passenger seat, enemies will pay less attention to you.
The main weakness of MGSV is that it's eventually too easy to buy gear that will make most missions trivial, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the systems underlying it are some of the best I've seen in a game.
I just wish they'd made Subsistence versions of all the missions, 'cos that's where the real challenge lies, and that's where you really learn the systems inside and out and appreciate just how robust they are.
henke on 24/10/2017 at 11:54
Don't forget to mention that you can hide in a porta potty and play a tape of a guy having noisy diarrhea to keep enemy guards from coming to investigate. Does Garrett have that move up his sleeve, EH?
Malf on 24/10/2017 at 12:12
Yeah, I think I'm gonna have to play it again at some point. I never really played around with the tapes, but I definitely saw the potential. It's like how the water pistol is actually useful, as you can hold guys up by gunpoint (cos they don't realise it's not a real gun), or use it to break electronics stealthily and permanently.
