New gameplay trailer for SS1 remake - medical level

[673f84b1f2b9aKolya]

Half-Life 2 did this to great effect with the zombie vocalizations.

I missed that one. Yeah, HL2's zombies evoked sympathy and the revulsion of sickness. I never killed one of them. I put them down.

[673f84b1f2f1bicemann]

Cut corners on the graphics if you must, but don't do it on the voice actors. It's that important.

I'd argue that Origin using it's own staff to do most of the voice acting for the original game, gives it its own charm. Switching to fully trained actors would lose some of that. You'd get more of Bioshock's style with how they did them. Nothing at all wrong with it mind, its just different. I see it like how with the early C&C games you got mostly random people in the FMVs (besides Joe Kucan aka Kain), and then once you got to C&C 3 and Red Alert 3 they went with 100% professional actors, and the charm was lost.

[673f84b1f3220RocketMan]

I also don't mind the staff voice acting.  Just... come on man, WAKE UP, you're in front of a mic talking about friends becoming cyborgs and you sound like a filing cabinet that suffered a recent blow to the head.

[673f84b1f33a0icemann]

Lol yeah. You get a variance.

I thought whoever voiced Diego was excellent. Majority were good. A few were half half.

[673f84b1f3615bim]

I've skimmed through this thread since I've already discussed the game on another forum. But I'm with the guy on about retro-actively including some peripheral links between the two game. An audio log here, a prop in the environment there, maybe some text on a screen somewhere referencing/foreshadowing some of the background stuff established in the SS2 manual. Nothing too intrusive, pretty much easter-eggs that further tie he plots of the two games together. None of this would compromise this remake's faithfulness to the original.

On the music, personally I like it - a calm chilled out tune evoking the original medical theme serving as your (re-)introduction to the chaos that has beset the station. It's effective precisely because it's dissonant.
That said, I would hope they do have a faithful remake of the original track in their faithful remake of the original game as you get a bit deeper into the level.

The gameplay however seem very eeeh so far. Really basic AI patterns, SS2 (Especially Secmod or Pop's difficulty) has it beat in terms of making enemies a real threat. There seems to be some kinda disconnect between the player and the environment that's hard to describe. If there's one area where this remake should take liberties with replicating the original, it's this; "Walk towards player and attack until dead" was fine in 1994 with a difficult control scheme adding to the challenge. But it's not 1994 no more.

As for the art, while it's a good emulation of the original style and substance, there are a few things off with it. As someone else mentioned, the floor tiles are a goddamn safety hazard lol. But more pervasive is the bloom, shininess and glossiness of everything - the Unity demo had the same issue.


Overall though, I'd have preferred for this game to be "rebooted" rather than straight-up re-made; Though I know that's not what kickstarter backers put their money towards so it's entirely fair to disagree with that.

[673f84b1f377ebim]

On the voice-acting, I'm really on the fence with it. I'm not sure if entertainment media has twisted my perception of how people would emote and vocalise in such a situation and the voice acting is actually accurate to it, because they're burnt out, fed up and just waiting for the moment a cyborg comes to do them in - or whether that would be such a pervasive mindset. I think some variety in that regard would help a little bit, but that could end up being dissonant in a bad way equally.
What the original voice acting in both games does have going for it is that almost all the characters sound like real, every-day people - because their VAs are. SS2 did have quite a bit more range though.

[673f84b1f3becZylonBane]

Overall though, I'd have preferred for this game to be "rebooted" rather than straight-up re-made

You know they already tried that, right? I'll let you guess how well your wish turned out.

[673f84b2000f8bim]

You know they already tried that, right? I'll let you guess how well your wish turned out.

Though I know that's not what kickstarter backers put their money towards so it's entirely fair to disagree with that.

Yeah, I do. I'm very much aware of the fact it wouldn't have been what people invested their kickstarter money into, so I'm in agreement that the backlash for their trying to take it another direction after the fact was entirely deserved and that it's right for them to make it as faithful as possible. Wanting a reboot as opposed to a re-make =! wanting this remake to have continued to develop something in contravention of what people gave them money to make.

In other words, I'd have preferred that they'd planned and touted the re-make along the lines of what they started exploring from the very beginning, so as to not be pulling the rug out from under those who wanted a full-on 1:1 re-make. It sounded like a more attractive game to me when System Shock 1 its self already exists and is entirely playable on modern systems with EE. I rarely see the point in re-making any (esp. single-player) game if it's not going to be iterated on, beyond bringing it up to modern graphical standards. When that's the case, it can only ever be worse than the original by some degree or another, at which point the product has little purpose to anyone except those who value graphics above all else.

[673f84b2002e9icemann]

I'd recommend having a read of the comments on the KS from when it started to get an indication of how that would panned out, had they gone for a reboot rather than remake from the get go.

In short, they wouldn't have got their target cash amount. Not by a long shot. You have to think about who the target audience is, and what they want, rather than just doing what you want. Now you could say "Well isn't the entire point of KS to do projects your way?", to which I'd reply sure definitely. But they wouldn't have got their funding target.

[673f84b20060aAlech]

Humanizing your enemies enhances the immersion of your game tremendously.

Meanwhile in canceled reboot
https://ksr-video.imgix.net/assets/018/847/760/a9285e986f0f6202a783c2395edc274a_h264_high.mp4

[673f84b2009d5bim]

I'd recommend having a read of the comments on the KS from when it started to get an indication of how that would panned out, had they gone for a reboot rather than remake from the get go.

In short, they wouldn't have got their target cash amount. Not by a long shot. You have to think about who the target audience is, and what they want, rather than just doing what you want. Now you could say "Well isn't the entire point of KS to do projects your way?", to which I'd reply sure definitely. But they wouldn't have got their funding target.

I was under the impression that it started out as a 1:1, then they started exploring some iterations which diverged from what it was meant to be. If it's instead as you describe, then that's even more of a shame in my opinion. Instead of something with some novelty to it, now we're getting a 1:1 remake because people are afraid of change. Again, I pose the question; What's attractive about that - beyond exposing a few more new people to the series, and muh shiny gfx - when SS its self is already a thing?

Look at RE2Make - It still has the same spirit, plot and overall architecture of the original, but its gameplay is completely different in many ways, still the same in others. It brought new and improved systems and mechanics (and voice-acting, cutscenes and direction of both) that make it a better game than the original, while still preserving everything that made it a fun experience in the first place. The best part about it is, if someone were to disagree, RE2 still exists to be enjoyed in its "pure" form.
If Capcom had instead approached it in the same way as this remake, the only thing for them to possibly get right or wrong is replicating the gameplay and atmosphere of original precisely with a new coat of paint.

[673f84b200c53voodoo47]

it was never meant to be 1:1, if by 1:1 you mean "convert the maps to a newer engine, uprez the textures and make the AIs 3D", it was always meant to be "SS1, if it was made today". at one point, they basically lost direction, and the game started to look more and more generic, "less Shocky", fortunately, they recognized this quite quickly and made the correct decision - discarded the build despite the inevitable delay.

RE2 is a good example actually, and SS1 Remake is aiming for something similar, I'd imagine - still Citadel, but modern, some improved and added mechanics, more horror and less wackiness.

[673f84b200d67Kolya]

If they only updated the graphics, controls and enemy AI that would be fine with me. So far the AI looks as stupid as ever though.

EDIT: And the audio logs. Almost forgot!

[673f84b2010fabim]

it was never meant to be 1:1, if by 1:1 you mean "convert the maps to a newer engine, uprez the textures and make the AIs 3D", it was always meant to be "SS1, if it was made today".

And yet as far as we've seen this is all they're aiming for now. If SS1 were made today - would the architecture be so blocky the station could be remade in Space Engineers? Would the level design be so labyrinthine that a new player has trouble telling one corridor or room from the next? Would the enemy designs be so goofy-looking?
I don't think so - it'd end up looking and playing more like SS2 or Prey if not something completely different. I just don't see why anyone would want exactly the same gameplay, levels, story and overall design out of a new game as one that exists already, instead of taking that original and elevating it by adding/updating to the best of modern gameplay and design concepts.

[673f84b201456ZylonBane]

I just don't see why anyone would want exactly the same gameplay, levels, story and overall design out of a new game as one that exists already

Really? You can't think of a single reason why someone would want to play SS1 but with the ultimate graphics upgrade mod and modern control and UI conventions? You're drawing an absolute blank on why anybody would want that?

[673f84b201709bim]

Really? You can't think of a single reason why someone would want to play SS1 but with the ultimate graphics upgrade mod and modern control and UI conventions? You're drawing an absolute blank on why anybody would want that?

As opposed to that effort also going towards iterating further on its gameplay and design, yes.

[673f84b2019aaMarvin]

True that. Graphical overhauls in modding aer wonderful, but if you have a team of skilled professionals and a couple of million dollars to burn, why would you not iterate on an idea but simply replicate it again instead? Obviously because it's hard, and they've already failed once. But still...

[673f84b201aafZylonBane]

Exactly that. Bim here's talking like this is some sort of theoretical, but Night Dive already crashed a burned trying to reinvent SS1. Next-gen design requires next-gen budgets. What they're doing now is what they can afford.

[673f84b201c5bRocketMan]

I do hope that Otherside has been following ND's development history and seeing how and why things went wrong and how they got the the point of making what they're making today.  It's still early and I'm O.T. a bit but I just hope that examples such as these teach them something because the 30 second vid they put out doesn't show many lessons learned.

[673f84b201e1eSynaesthesia]

Graphics and gameplay are not mutually exclusive. We develop both aspects but neither is being sacrificed for the sake of the other.

[673f84b2020c4bim]

Next-gen design requires next-gen budgets. What they're doing now is what they can afford.

While that is a fair point, there's still plenty of room to improve elements of the original design without denting the budget or really compromising its "faithfulness".

[673f84b2021c2icemann]

Or you could go play Prey if thats what your after.

[673f84b2023e1JDoran]

Prey (2017) is a very good example of how to update or introduce SS1/SS2 style gameplay and features and make it work really well, so that it all seems like part of the game's world and totally natural on the part of the player.

Unfortunately, the game is also a very good example of how to make a game that feels like it's missing the last third of the actual game, and how to make the first hour or so of a great game really rather boring, how to make the NPCs feel flat and very unconvincing, and to make you wish it had sold a lot better than it apparently did, as then we might well be given a sequel, and if the sequel kept the good and fixed the bad then that new game could have been amazingly good.

But the public voted by not buying Prey 2017, and as a result a sequel isn't looking too likely. Just throw the majority of gamers a reskin of last year's FIFA, or the latest Call of Duty and they're happy. Which is why we slightly more demanding gamers play such old games as System Shock, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Deus Ex, Thief 1 and 2, etc. Because those games promised us a glorious future where games innovated and would build upon the standard of SS, Deus Ex, Perfect Dark, etc. But instead of forming the foundations for better games to build on, those games are still largely the gold standard, in a sea of mediocre releases.

[673f84b202578icemann]

Isn't Prey 2 in development?  Could have sworn there was something about that a while ago. Though that could have been for the Mooncrash DLC.

I'm currently replaying Prey for the 1st time (after 1st playing through it on the games release), and completely loving it. It's the most SS2-like game out there. As for Mooncrash, gave that a play this week. It's good, but there's time limits attached when I wasn't a fan of. Beyond, it's quite good as it's a rogue-lite. Played it for a day, then wanted something more substantial so decided to replay the main game.