Lynx67 on 10/9/2005 at 23:49
I can't get SS2 to work no matter what I do. I have tried everything to no avail. Updated all drivers and everything else and it still tells me (System Shock 2 has a known compatibility issue with this version of Windows. For an update that is compatible with this version of Windows, contact Electronic Arts.) EA does not even list SS2 anymore. Anybody got any ideas? Thanks
TheNightTerror on 11/9/2005 at 02:36
Tried the compatibility modes? :confused:
Drat on 11/9/2005 at 02:41
Read that thread a little harder. Oh, and where did you get the game?
cosmicnut on 17/1/2007 at 10:05
Personally I would love to have a VB & Ric, properly designed with all decks and rooms present. What it takes is a different approach to gameplay.
placement of quest items would have to be better and more logical. Saying "He's somewhere on deck 2" would be useless if deck 2 had hundreads of rooms. Giving the player more of a clue to their exact location and a better map system would be needed. It would also make talents like spatially aware more usefull. gaining that skill would allow you to highlight the exact position of the quest task on the map. A kind of autorouting waypoint system so you could tell where you are going at a glance would be usefull (Kind of like Saints Row).
Having a large ship would also improve replayability. "I didn't go through that door last time!" could be a regular motto.
However it will never be as the work involved would be immense, as well as the game engine requirements. The main problem with a lot of SS2 is the rushed nature of the finished product. Early VB levels are brilliant but the quality starts to degrade on the later levels, they become more anacronistic and by the time you reach the Ric... Well that entire sequence make no logical sense (especially the floating torpedo bit!), even upside down...
The BOTM sequence is better only because it doesn't have to follow the logic of a spaceship.
I can understand the tram. On a huge ship you would have to travel a fair way. Most people would rather sit down and ride rather than walk or stand still. It seems week as the version we have is tiny due to the limits of the level sizes. You could use telports for this job but a small power outage (possible, if you remeber the VB experimental nature) and you would be dead. On a tram system, you may have to wait a while for a rescue car or take a short walk, but you would still be alive!
Kolya on 17/1/2007 at 10:18
Except that as soon as you touch the tracks you are dead.
Given the short distance conveyor belts would have sufficed, unfortunately those can't be done in SS2 I heard. Well, at least no conveyor graphics.
cosmicnut on 17/1/2007 at 12:30
My point was that, yes, the distances in the game were tiny. This is due to the limitations of the engine. If we had a full size VB, the distance might have been miles!
TF on 17/1/2007 at 13:36
You could've had a much longer tram tunnel there even with engine limitations, long enough to get bored riding through it, which is where it starts to become obvious why they didn't do it.
Bjossi on 17/1/2007 at 14:30
I always felt that the VB was way smaller when progressing in-game than seeing it from the outside. Instead of worrying about engine limitations, they could have just added more sectors for each deck.
I guess they would have done that if there wasn't too little time eh?
Ultraviolet on 17/1/2007 at 18:44
Everybody's like "OMFG THEIR WOOD BE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF ROOMS!" What the fuck are you talking about? It'd be plenty larger, sure, but:
What do we know about the size of the crew?
Lower personnel would be sharing bunk rooms -- we've seen the bunk rooms in-game already. Scientists and high ranking officers would probably have compound office/quarters. That takes care of a lot of bloat. Those quarters on deck 5 were most likely "hotel" quarters -- the area has the look, for sure. They're probably somewhere that people who have saved up their money living in the shitty bunk rooms can go once in a while.
