SSR: System Shock Kickstarter

[67410a4c75b94ZylonBane]

Considering that the graphics and the interface almost universally come up as barriers to entry whenever anyone asks if System Shock is still worth a play, I'd say that demolishes any argument that this is a pointless remake. Even Warren Spector thinks remaking it is a good idea.

[67410a4c75d05Kolya]

But maybe people are just naming the graphics and interface because that's less embarrassing than saying: The game was too difficult to understand.

[67410a4c7602fRocketMan]

yeah... there's a difference between "bad design" and just "takes a while to latch onto".

[67410a4c7619dZylonBane]

Are we seriously having an argument over whether SS1's infamously awful interface is actually bad? Even the original developers think it sucked.

[67410a4c76391icemann]

As in the UI?

I know it breaks several UI design conventions about having too many things on the screen at once. I did a presentation on it's UI for one of my uni classes back in 2010 lol.

I never really minded it myself, since I always looked on the hacker in SS1 as more of a walking cyborg with a conscience (aka like Robocop but with much more human bits left). I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

Attached my powerpoint presentation of it to this post. I am not saying for a second that it was a good presentation or anything. More just putting it up for curiosities sake. Kinda amusing looking at it now, 10 years later.

[67410a4c765ceRocketMan]

The fact that the interface is "infamously bad" and that the developers agree with popular opinion, doesn't make it so from an objective point of view.  The second point is particularly invalid because before the game existed, they had to think up the best way to control their new game and this is what we got.  It seemed perfectly good to them then but now that they have to answer for that in interviews and such they're siding with the people who pay their salaries and saying, "yeah, what were we thinking?!".

It goes without saying that a lot of people don't like the interface.  It also goes without saying that a lot of people don't like paying taxes.  However an ad populum argument is just that - that many people disagree or don't like something.  Whether it is actually bad is another matter.  It may yet be argued that the interface IS bad but I personally am not at all convinced of that.  It felt very natural for me the innumerable times I played it.

Icemann:  Good presentation.  I've always wanted to break down the argument to the finer points.  Valid points throughout, although despite the use of some poor icons for the implants and stuff it's just one of those things where we make a mental association and move on.  Like with the boost implant.  Hard to tell that it's a boot with repulsor fields coming out but doesn't matter.  Our brains remember the orange blob makes us fly and that's enough most of the time.

[67410a4c767d1Briareos H]

I'm too lazy to go through my post history but I'm sure I've defended the interface in the past. I like it. I know I'm a minority and I certainly don't mind any attempts at overhauling it in a remake. I just don't believe that this is much of a barrier to entry when we have the EE available. And graphics shouldn't be either, people like Doom, the only difference is in art direction.

Anyway I apologize for the controversial statement. The remake is pointless for me but I appreciate any enthusiasm towards System Shock 1! As for what I would have liked to have, i.e. a VR reboot keeping the same art direction, tone and general story but greatly extending the gameplay and contents, it will never happen.

[67410a4c7693cicemann]

Until the remake SS1 was largely forgotten by many, and that is a crime. I say forgotten by many, as I would almost never see it get mentioned anywhere.

[67410a4c77645ZylonBane]

The fact that the interface is "infamously bad" and that the developers agree with popular opinion, doesn't make it so from an objective point of view.

There is no such thing as an "objectively" good interface. It's literally subjective. If most people like it, it's good. If most people don't, it's bad.

I'm too lazy to go through my post history but I'm sure I've defended the interface in the past. I like it.

The SS1 interface uses EIGHTEEN keys for movement control. If you like that, that's called Stockholm Syndrome. I've played mech simulators with less complicated controls.

[67410a4c7792cRocketMan]

There is no such thing as an "objectively" good interface. It's literally subjective. If most people like it, it's good. If most people don't, it's bad.

Good point.   I change my opinion.

[67410a4c77d3aKolya]

That is not true from a usability perspective. Studies show that perception of beauty strongly interferes with the perception of objective usability. (Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233864572_The_Inference_of_Perceived_Usability_From_Beauty)
The identity of Apple products as being "easier to understand" is at least partly built on that. They're pretty, so people like to spend time with them and consequently understand them better, all other things being equal.

But maybe people are just naming the graphics and interface because that's less embarrassing than saying: The game was too difficult to understand.

What I really was aiming at here though wasn't that SS1's interface was better than people say, but that its gameplay was worse than people remember.

If you want to see what this gameplay looks like today with updated graphics, you can watch this gameplay video of P.A.M.E.L.A., where the player wakes up from a cryotube and then spends an hour stumbling around in the dark with a flimsy flashlight, trying to figure out what to do, where to go, how to open containers, which objects are actually interactable and how, etc.

This sort of gameplay, of letting the player figure things out by themselves, which is remembered so fondly by many, is painfully boring today, because no one is amazed anymore by the simple fact of being aboard a space station/underwater-city/spaceship where things went wrong. Because we've been there a thousand times.

[67410a4c78185RocketMan]

Studies show that perception of beauty strongly interferes with the perception of objective usability. (Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233864572_The_Inference_of_Perceived_Usability_From_Beauty)

I agree.  I think ZB was making arguing from philosophical grounds, saying that there's no objectivity regarding how good the interface is.  In everyday experience I sometimes refer to things as being objectively this or that but if we're being really picky, truth and fact are always subjective since human senses are inherently unreliable and it cannot be established that everybody's perceptions are the same.  Furthermore, the validity of something is only as good as a person's argument for it.  That's why a good lawyer can get a guilty man off or an innocent man convicted.

When it comes to the SS1 interface, I like it and think it wasn't awkward or poor at all.  It became a second skin for me.  I could make an argument to that effect as well if I took the time.  However if a bunch of other people hated it and can make their own arguments explaining what troubled them so much about it, I lose and the UI is deemed "bad". 

As far as I'm aware, the only real truths are logical and mathematical.

[67410a4c78535ZylonBane]

As far as I'm aware, the only real truths are logical and mathematical.

If I tell you, "I found the SS1 interface to be an awkward, overcomplicated pain in the ass", that is a real truth that is derived from subjective experience, not logic and math.

And are you seriously going to stand there and swear to us that an interface that requires 18 keys and/or clicking on various panels to control your character is GOOD design? If you think this was a good design, do you wonder why no successful games use a control scheme anything like it?

[67410a4c7872dvoodoo47]

nothing beats personal experience - tried to play SS1 before the mouselook mod existed, and had to give up, it was simply not workable. bit of a learning curve with the mouselook mod, but not a big deal, and SS1 finally became playable.

so yeah, the SS1 vanilla control scheme sucks as far as I'm concerned. it's like Quake on the current gen chinese handhelds - it's cute seeing it run, but as soon as you try to actually play it using all the console buttons, you'll realize it just isn't happening. I imagine I'd be having an easier time playing it on a pc, with a mouse, using just my teeth.

[67410a4c78ae3RocketMan]

If I tell you, "I found the SS1 interface to be an awkward, overcomplicated pain in the ass", that is a real truth that is derived from subjective experience, not logic and math.

If it's derived from subjective experience, then it is not a truth.  This is the sort of subject matter dealt with in epistemology courses.  The only real truths are stuff like "If A = B and B = C then A = C" or "sinx + cosx = 1"

I have to qualify my statement that I like the interface by saying the mouselook mod makes it much much better.  However the abundance of keys never bothered me because I did most everything using the mouse.  I think that complex systems are inherently awkward but when you handle them as elegantly as possible, you have to take the complexity into consideration and say it's good because the goal post is no longer in the same place.  If the interface is bad, then what does good look like (for 94) ?  Successful games don't impress me because lots of morons play successful games.  I can close my eyes, spin around and will likely end up pointing at some bullshit game.  Triple A bullshit to be sure... but bullshit nonetheless.  I just don't consider game success to be a factor when analyzing the design.  I agree with your previous statement that there's no objectivity to speak of and therefore I can like it and 100 other people may not and we can be as correct as our numbers and argumentation skills permit.

[67410a4c78c16ZylonBane]

"Moose turd is a bad seasoning. No popular dishes are seasoned with moose turd."

"Pffft, lots of morons like those dishes!"

That's you. That's what you're doing right now.

[67410a4c78e98RocketMan]

Kind of but not quite.  You asked why no successful games use an interface similar to SS1.  You're insinuating that if SS1 has a good interface design, then good games today would use something similar.  I'm merely stating that this isn't necessary and the fact that it doesn't occur may have nothing to do with  SS1's interface being good or not but may in fact be a function of something entirely different, such as the tendency for most people to gravitate towards more simplistic interfaces.

To generalize, lots of good things don't exist anymore but you would seem to be suggesting that they should, if they are in fact good.  I'm just pointing out that goodness doesn't immortalize something.  QWERTY keyboards were designed to slow down typists so they wouldn't jam the typewriters.  DVORAK was arguably better but it simply didn't take and now nobody even knows what it is.  Windows used to be good and now it's shit but younger people like it.  Sound cards used to have hardware 3D reflections and 4 speaker HRTF and now they don't but modern software biased solutions have replaced them.  The things that exist today do not always follow the obviously logical evolution, that stuff should improve over time and the best designs will always persist the longest.  Instead, other factors like cost and misinformation/propaganda have a pretty strong effect.  Maybe my argument isn't cogent enough to convince you but I'm just giving you my reasons for not being convinced that SS1 had a bad interface or that current interfaces are superior because they are found in popular games 30 years later.  And since I know there are least a couple of other people who agree, my inability to make a good argument doesn't make the argument itself invalid.  In fact it would only support my previous assertion that truth is largely based on how many people you can convince, in most every-day subject matter.

[67410a4c78fe3Kolya]

Betamax!!! Hahaha. Also it's not like you actually had to use 18 keys to play SS1. 

Anyway, I liked SS1's interface (minus lack of mouselook) because its sheer abundance gave me a feeling of control in a chaotic gameworld. A lot of its options turned out to be useless when playing, but I still appreciated them being there.
My gripe with it were the unlabeled side-buttons in fullscreen view. I could never remember which did what.

But I gave up playing a few times, not because of the interface, but because I had lost track of what needed to be done

[67410a4c79189icemann]

Great post by Rocket above. So true. Newer is not always better..

Windows 10 sucks compared to 7. I HATE the move toward more simplified systems and hiding away the more technical.

Today I'm going out to buy a new phone, when I know that its a downgrade. My current phone is a Samsung Galaxy K, which has a built in camera zoom lens, which pops out of the phone (literally) when I take photos, and allows more highly zoomed in shots. Do modern phones have this? Nope. It never caught on. So was only in 2 models of phones (the S4 Zoom and the Galaxy K). 21 megapixel camera only now some 6 years after getting the phone have I found other phones with same or higher amount of megapixels.

So newer is not always better. And some things which are superior get phased out, either due to lack of popularity (like with my phones zoom lens), or to save on costs (eg like with Sony not doing backwards compatibility on their consoles, ever since removing the emotion chip from later revisions of the PS3).

This is a topic worthy of its own thread btw.

[67410a4c794cbRocketMan]

But I gave up playing a few times, not because of the interface, but because I had lost track of what needed to be done

Was it the top level missions you found confusing or the minutia involved with carrying them out (like the interface demodulator hunt)?

If you haven't finished the game I feel you owe it to yourself to determine what made you quit the last time, possibly address the root-cause and retry because finishing the game is so fun once you get a couple of beers in you and get in the groove as the hours fall off the clock.

[67410a4c795ffKolya]

IIRC I stopped at some point and then found it incredibly hard to understand what to do when picking it up again. Like I felt I'd have to listen to all those logs again and I just wasn't in for that.
I finished it eventually, just took a few runs.

SS2 somewhat addressed this with its task list, if only it was more discoverable.

[67410a4c798e6Chandlermaki]

SS2 somewhat addressed this with its task list, if only it was more discoverable.

That's why I almost always configure installations for new players with the quest marker mod. Makes it a lot easier for them.

[67410a4c799daZylonBane]

You mean the quest notifier mod?

[67410a4c79e2fNameless Voice]

And are you seriously going to stand there and swear to us that an interface that requires 18 keys and/or clicking on various panels to control your character is GOOD design? If you think this was a good design, do you wonder why no successful games use a control scheme anything like it?

Console controllers.
Most modern games' control schemes have got much worse (of course, in my opinion) because they've had to dumb them down to fit onto a console controller, removing "unnecessary" features like crouching and leaning, and squeezing multiple controls onto a single key (e.g. long-pressing on the 'inventory' key to toggle your light.)
I'd much rather have individual controls for everything.

18 keys isn't even that much?
Thief - which I'd argue has quite a good interface, mostly let down by its movement system being a little clunky - has 13 main keys + 9 weapons (at least 4 of which are used heavily) + 2 lockpick keys + various other item hotkeys.


Not that I'm saying SS1's interface is great.  It's not as bad as some people claim, but it's....  not really nice either.  Not bad for the time, but it didn't hold up well.  This was in a time before mouselook, and it feels much more awkward than similar-era Doom's keyboard-only control scheme.
(Though, of course, mostly because it was much more complex.)