icemann on 5/7/2016 at 01:04
Now that there is a demo out for the System Shock reboot, thought I'd startup a thread here on the topic.
Post your opinions. I'll post mine once we have a few replies.
Volitions Advocate on 5/7/2016 at 03:40
I have a real love/hate relationship with the music. I really do like the horror emphasis though, I always thought that the horror was there in SS1, but since graphics tech wasn't able to really make it vivid, the game had to make you think about it rather than see it. While that shows masterful interactive storytelling, I don't see how making it a bit more obvious is a step in the wrong direction, like some seem to think.
back to the music: I think the orchestral score idea seems to be there for the sake of doing it. Up until a month ago I would have said I had no idea how you bring an old soundtrack like SS1 into the modern world, then I played Doom.
I don't think they should worry about a carbon copy of the original music, but better. Mick Gordon did a great job of translating it.
What I DO like, however. is the level design aesthetic. I love that they seem to want to keep it nearly identical. Some have said they don't, but I'm all for it. $900K is not a huge budget, so if they are able to go directly to the original for the level design and just put their veneer on it, I doubt it will be boring.
I enjoyed the small snippets of quick info that popped on screen when you tried to interact with something that you couldn't. Keeping some of that information from the original is a nice touch.
I always hate excessive bloom, and lens flares, and all that crap, but here I really like it. Who knows how the hacker sees the world?
Starker on 5/7/2016 at 12:09
I have only had time to do one playthrough of the demo, but overall I like it. It's surprisingly faithful to the original in some ways and the rest I can live with. There were a few things that irked me, like the pickup animations lasting too long on special items, the way ladders locked you in, and interacting with buttons being too fiddly, but there weren't any dealbreakers.
I'm even okay with it being a reboot, although I would have had preferred that they didn't name it System Shock.
Nameless Voice on 5/7/2016 at 13:34
I actually liked the demo a lot, apart from those few niggles other people have mentioned.
The combat and AI are pretty awful, but I assume those will be improved in the final game.
What worries me is the updates and vision statements from Night Dive as to where they want to take the game - that is what has scared me away from backing it.
Going by just the demo, I'd be far more hopeful.
heywood on 5/7/2016 at 14:55
Mixed feelings here. If this game was going to be a faithful remake in a modern engine, I'd be more enthusiastic. It would also justify retaining true-to-the-original combat/AI and level design. But I'm not sure what to think of it as a reboot.
terrannova on 5/7/2016 at 14:56
I didn't like the way you control the puzzle panel, manually moving your head around and touching buttons, seems primitive and out of place for a game like this. In the original game the panel fits seamlessly into the neural interface--where it belongs.
Starker on 5/7/2016 at 18:45
All the criticisms aside, though, I think it's pretty remarkable that there is a demo at all and that the plans for the reboot are discussed in such detail beforehand. While I may not ultimately agree with all the changes, I at least appreciate the honesty and openness to feedback.
Nameless Voice on 5/7/2016 at 19:14
What bothered me more about the puzzle panel was that you just solved it by pressing every single button. There was no actual puzzle, the elements didn't toggle... you just pressed everything one.
Twist on 5/7/2016 at 19:23
Do the grid and wire puzzles really belong in the neural interface? I always understood them to be more mechanical than digital, like something the hacker would manipulate with a screwdriver and needle-nose pliers. Didn't the survivors setup some of these puzzles as a means of limiting access to areas without Shodan's influence?
I assumed LG used the HUD to display the controls for these puzzles because of a lack of detail and granularity in the era's 3D rendering technology, not because you were actually using a neural implant to operate them. The neural implant gave you advanced access to cyberspace and provided functional ports to accept a variety of cyber-implants like the navigation unit. But it didn't give you the magical ability to turn a screw without a screwdriver.
Regarding my overall view of the demo: I guess I'd echo Starker's view.
While the demo isn't perfect -- and I'm sure different people have different opinions on how the specific features of a 22-year-old game should manifest in a modern version -- I think it's surprisingly good for a pre-alpha demo. I'm impressed it exists at all at this early stage and that it's as polished as it is.
But I, too, am concerned about some aspects of their vision. I think they need to discuss in greater detail how and why this remake would benefit from adding RPG elements.
As I understood it, the lack of RPG stats in the original was deliberate. Doug Church wanted every aspect of the game to exist as something tangible within the game world. He wanted an immersive experience free of abstraction layers like character stats. I don't want to misrepresent their perspectives, but as I understood it, there were a few Looking Glass employees who weren't crazy about the direction System Shock 2 went. Thief -- with its minimal HUD and lack of character stats or even an inventory screen -- was really more the direction the company wanted to go with immersive sims.
If that's accurate, then it seems a shame to go against the intentions of the original designers.
Trance on 5/7/2016 at 19:32
The pre-alpha does not fill me with confidence about Night Dive's ability to redo the first game. I think there's a lot of things about the first game that could stand to be reworked to make for a more fun (and even a more quality) game, but I've seen very little in the way of redesigns in this pre-alpha that I liked. I'm hoping that this was just a rush job to promote the Kickstarter campaign, and that the pre-alpha doesn't contain even a few of the design decisions that we'll end up with.
I definitely don't like that they appear to be altering the storytelling. That is the strongest and most memorable element of the game for me, and extreme care and thought should be exercised when messing with the way the original game did it. The three examples we saw in the pre-alpha (Rebecca and SHODAN's emails, and the door code hint) all seem to imply that we're going to get pared-down exposition and far less lore-based immersion than we had in SS1, more akin to how SS2 did things but even further in that direction. The information fed to the player will be doled out in a more obvious, videogamey manner, and there will be less information present for the purpose of building a believable location formerly inhabited by believable people.
Shock 1 might've done a lot of things wrong, but almost none of those things have to do with the way it told its story. Night Dive has to re-examine their priorities and draw new conclusions about their design choices if they want my money.
