SSR RPG Mechanics Discussion.

[66eede15b8d7bZylonBane]

HL2 = Source engine. HL1 = Heavily modified Quake engine. Now, the Source engine DOES have "bits" of the Quake/HL1 engine, but it's essentially an entirely new engine.

Source derives directly from HL1's GoldSrc engine.

When we were getting very close to releasing Half-Life (less than a week or so), we found there were already some projects that we needed to start working on, but we couldn't risk checking in code to the shipping version of the game. At that point we forked off the code in VSS to be both /$Goldsrc and /$Src. Over the next few years, we used these terms internally as "Goldsource" and "Source". At least initially, the Goldsrc branch of code referred to the codebase that was currently released, and Src referred to the next set of more risky technology that we were working on. When it came down to show Half-Life 2 for the first time at E3, it was part of our internal communication to refer to the "Source" engine vs. the "Goldsource" engine, and the name stuck.

HL1 was a decent shooter with a strong beginning in terms of narrative. Quite overrated, though.

Oh my god shut up already with the "____________ is so overrated" routine.

[66eede15b91a1DKDArtagnan]

Source derives directly from HL1's GoldSrc engine.Oh my god shut up already with the "____________ is so overrated" routine.

Another tantrum because HL1 is overrated? Impressive

Obviously, Source was based on GoldSrc, why else would there still be bits of the old code in there?

Here:

Source distantly originates from the GoldSrc engine, itself a heavily modified version of John Carmack's Quake engine. Carmack commented on his blog in 2004 that "there are still bits of early Quake code in Half-Life 2".[5] Valve employee Erik Johnson explained the engine's nomenclature on the Valve Developer Community:[6]

You understand what distantly originates means, right? It means it's essentially a new engine - but with roots in the old one. They replaced the old code bit by bit - which you can read on wiki.

If you want to argue semantics, which I'm sure you do, then you can do it with yourself. Pretend that Source is just an updated HL1 engine if you must. I'm sure you'd argue that Windows 10 is just an updated DOS too, right?

Zylon "sense" indeed 

[66eede15b92a8ZylonBane]

D'awww, that's the most adorable ego-shielding reality distortion field you have there. It must be tough having everyone constantly telling you you're wrong just because you are.

[66eede15b94efLearonys]

D'awww, that's the most adorable ego-shielding reality distortion field you have there. It must be tough having everyone constantly telling you you're wrong just because you are.

Than tell him how he is (i'm not picking sides by the way). Or is his opinion wrong because you said so?

For once, stop the circlejerk, don't avoid the subject and get straight to the point.

[66eede15b95deDKDArtagnan]

I'm as wrong as I'm dim.

That should be good enough for Zylon.

Can we get back to SS mechanics?

[66eede15b9a69Aurora]

If you want to argue semantics, which I'm sure you do, then you can do it with yourself. Pretend that Source is just an updated HL1 engine if you must. I'm sure you'd argue that Windows 10 is just an updated DOS too, right?

As somebody who has played and created levels and other assets for Half-Life since 2001, I must add my five cents to this discussion.

My experience with GoldSrc (HL1) and Source (HL2) is that the latter derives directly from the former. In Source you have an updated renderer alongside a new texture system, a new physics engine, an I/O interaction system for the entities, things like physics models and bone weights for all the models for characters and objects, obviously updated networking code, an updated BSP format for the levels, displacement brushes for terrain, and so forth.

However, all the basics are mostly the same. I could take the source of a Half-Life 1 level and open it in the Source version of Hammer Editor - which looks 99% the same as the old Hammer, or Worldcraft if we go back to the 90s. I could make a few changes replacing some key assets like weapons and some different entity functionality, taking maybe half an hour, and I could then compile the level and have it working in Half-Life 2.

The comparison between DOS and Windows 10 is completely inappropriate, as converting a DOS application into a Windows 10 is a whole different matter. It is more like Windows XP versus Windows 7 with GoldSrc and Source.

[66eede15b9cf5Nameless Voice]

Here's what I think would work in terms of an RPG system for System Shock, without deviating too much from the original theme and style of the game:

Instead of finding specific versions of hardware, you instead find hardware components, which allow you to upgrade the hardware of your choice.
The hardware components would act in a similar way to cyber modules, allowing you to choose what to improve next, but they would be an in-game item and only available by finding them.

You would also be able to use the same components to upgrade / modify your weapons.

So, for example, you could find a TNB Capacitor, and find yourself wondering if you should use that (along with some other components) to assemble a power reducer for your sparq beam, or if you should keep it until you also find an AP Relay and use those two components to build a damage absorption upgrade for your shield generator.

What I'm proposing here is basically a crafting system used as a character progression mechanic.
You get progression and meaningful choices, all while sticking within the realm of an entirely player-centric (rather than character-centric) experience, where you find and use extra tools to give yourself an advantage, rather than a more abstract levelling system that defines what your character can and cannot do.

Of course, it would take a lot of effort to balance it, especially when the original game was designed with you getting certain hardware at certain times in mind, but any RPG system would require heavy balancing.  One nice aspect of this system is that, because you are upgrading yourself with various types of components rather than one single type of "experience", the placement and rarity of each type of component can be adjusted to keep the game more balanced - e.g. you won't start to find the components needed for a max-strength shield until you reach a late level.

[66eede15b9ee9Hikari]

I can totally get behind that, since it feels like a natural extension of what's there and acts as a bridge between this and shock 2 without forced 'oh you looted x cybermodules off of crewmember y.' which would be stupid for narritive reasons (nanites are not wide spread yet. Yes you could argue as a research station citadel might have nanogoop being tinkered with, but it's... well it doesn't fit unless they want to rework the timeline.) Then there's the fact Shock1's biggest strengths is it's a metroidvania where your progression is more gear based than stat based, and more of the station opens up with gear gotten or things done as opposed to hitting a beefgate where enemies are vastly overleveled compared to you.

I'm sure somebody has been insane enough to fight diego with just the pipe and win.

Rather I'd like to see you able to loot broken and or VERY rarely intact implants off crew and cyborgs and harvest those for components. Part of the hacker ethos and image is being able to build your own gear, fox what is broken, and otherwise mcguyver a solution out of duct tape and bailing wire with maybe a little bit of bondo thrown in.

[66eede15ba314Join2]

Here's what I think would work in terms of an RPG system for System Shock, without deviating too much from the original theme and style of the game:

Yeah, something like that is what I thought for a subtle expansion. It'd hardly even change the game experience that much, and could potentially do a lot of good for the game. I still wouldn't say no to everything but the kitchen sink though, especially since Immersive Sims have been so starved of moderately extensive RPG systems that provide real meaning in over ten years, primarily because accessibility & sales.

[66eede15ba468Nameless Voice]

You could argue that Immersive Sim and RPG are two completely different genres.  An immersive sim focuses on putting the player into a situation, giving them the tools they need, but then relying entirely on the player's skill to do things; meanwhile, an RPG tends to focus on building a character with specific skills, making things rely more on your character's skills than on the player's.

Both are equally valid games, as are mixes of the two - but I think what bothers a lot of people is that SS1 is strictly an immersive sim, while SS2 is a hybrid of the two.

[66eede15ba64dicemann]

And if you change that thing that the original was, your game is no longer that and instead is something different. When that is the case you really should not be using the name in full with no extra words added. Add a word at the end, or several to differentiate it.

To use a movie example. The recent Ghost Busters movie reboot changes much of what made the 80s original so good, and yet they've gone and used the exact same name which does a disservice to the 80s original. If they had gone with an added word like "Ghost Busters - The new generation" etc would have been all good. But as they went and name-maked it they pissed alot of people off since it's using the base name, whilst being completely different to the original.

[66eede15ba781Join2]

To use a movie example. The recent Ghost Busters movie reboot changes much of what made the 80s original so good, and yet they've gone and used the exact same name which does a disservice to the 80s original.

The idea here though is to not change what made it good, rather it is to add more good on top of an already good game the same way giving it expanded audio design, level design etc will. 

[66eede15ba881icemann]

Yes, but judging purely by the demo you have:

* Inventory - Changed entirely (more like SS2 with the tetris style inventory)
* Music style - Changed entirely.

To name two. So that's a direct change right there which isn't just an addition.

[66eede15ba986Join2]

Oh I'm no fan of the music change. Fucking orchestrated soundtrack, surely NightDive are joking...

I was referring to the RPG elements exclusively in my previous post.

[66eede15bab67voodoo47]

rpg elements I actually don't mind (if done right), but as mentioned, not offering a classic mode for those who know they don't want them is probably a bad idea (they'd be tossing a significant portion of fans/players/backers overboard).

inventory is just a placeholder so we have no idea what the final version will look like, but the music.. yeah, we better not see that stuff in the final version. it's not a showstopper though I think, modding something more fitting in shouldn't be a big deal.

[66eede15bac50icemann]

It's a real shame that Night Dive have not come out and addressed any of these issues. It's not like they wouldn't be aware of it all. Been one big wall of silence.

[66eede15bad8fKolya]

It's probably a smart move for them to weather the initial tumult and then see what the main points of criticism are and what they can do about it.

[66eede15bae97Hikari]

Given a revised demo is coming out next week? Good of them to keep silent. Granted after this first week ti'd be better for them to speak up in my opinion but eh.

Also pretty sure a few of the unregestered folk have been night dive people so may be a case that we kinda scared them off. Oops.

[66eede15baf77icemann]

Or we showed them the areas most discussed, which flowed through working out what areas they agreed with and so got to work on.

[66eede15bb0cdfox]

Stephen Kick commented here: https://www.systemshock.org/index.php?topic=8796.msg103320#msg103320

[66eede15bb64dJoin2]

Lets do a quick draft of what moderately extensive RPG systems could look like. Obviously this will be low effort, but on the right track:

xp/currency reward methods:

-As in System Shock 2 or Deus Ex, never reward the player based on their chosen actions, aside from how well they explore.
-Rewarding for objectives could be a realism issue, as there's no one to transmit you any virtual currency. As an alternative, simply place select rewards in or near to objective locations, though obviously don't always do this to not make it a clear gamey rule/to keep it feeling organic.

System #1: Hardware Upgrades

-upgrade your found toggle-able hardware like shield, boots, target, lamp etc.
-choose between one of x number of upgrades per hardware.
-currency in the form of "hardware modules" that are found in the world and are exclusive to hardware system.
-Examples:

• Targeting module #1: enemies armor levels and weaknesses are displayed alongside their health bar
• Shield module #1: Shield energy drain is reduced by 35%
• Shield module #2: Shield damage protection is boosted by 15%

^each hardware tree you can only choose from 1 of any given modules. So you can't have both Shield module 1 and 2 in the same playthrough.

For balancing reasons, perhaps each "hardware module" object found in the world should be exclusive to that piece of hardware. So you find the targeting upgrade module, which lets you upgrade targeting by selecting one of the available upgrade choices, but doesn't let you upgrade the shield, you need to find the shield upgrade module for that. This would cut down on freedom a little rather than having universal modules, yet it would be much easier to balance as a result.

System #2: Software Upgrades

-A large selection of very minor, primarily passive abilities.
-Types of software should be numerous, but the effects of each very minimal to keep things player-focused.
-All software upgrades are physical objects found in the world (something that adds software scripts or whatever), but you can only equip so many at once.
-Examples:

• +5 max energy
• Restoration chambers respawn you with +10% additional health
• Biometer resonates/fluctuates when an enemy is in close proximity

System #3: Weapon modification

-I doubt anyone would object to this if executed well, but again, try to keep things extensive in choice, yet keep each individual boost minor in effect.
-Some can be bought from a replicator/vending machine, others found in the world. 

System #4: Cyberspace Hacking Software

Take the vanilla system, and expand. Short duration boost-thrusters, different types of weapons rather than just shooting low-poly blobs, keep the recall thing...could be for the best to keep it simple and linear in progression here as in vanilla, but still should be expanded upon.

System #5: Perks in the form of OS upgrades.

-Copy OS upgrade system as a base concept, but balance it better.

System #6: Vending machines

-Currency = virtual credits.
-Player can buy food, select software, ammo, health, batteries, stims, and select weapon modifications.
-Credits are finite and extremely scarce. Think about the # of things you bought in your average shock 2 playthrough, then halve that amount. 
-Health and ammo are more expensive than is the norm in your typical RPG as such vital resources should never be expendable.
-Perhaps prices could scale based on difficulty level.

------

Not featured: base technical skills and attributes. None. Though I'd like them, it's best to keep things primarily based on player skill as in the original.

Other potential systems: implants, certain inventory items providing permanent boosts when held onto or used, or something new entirely.

So, you have it all in the form of hardware/software/physical objects in the world, nothing restricts the actions present in the original, e.g, nothing influences the logic puzzles and the player is not gimped in any way - accuracy is constant, player can equip any weapon etc, yet there's still plenty of choice that ideally would be countered by much smarter AI and tougher challenges in general.

[66eede15bbcb5Dj 127]

-Credits are finite and extremely scarce. Think about the # of things you bought in your average shock 2 playthrough, then halve that amount. 

There's a problem with that. Half of zero is still zero! :p

[66eede15bbf3aunn_atropos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DZFJaHl4vg

[66eede15bc104icemann]

In one of the recent Kickstarter updates they go on to say:

RPG elements - We understand this is a pretty vague term and has been confusing to backers. The original System Shock was ahead of its time and introduced a lot of new elements to gaming. We want to preserve that innovation and present a game we feel modern gamers will enjoy. Our goal is to have the gameplay somewhere between System Shock 1 and System Shock 2, with sprinkles of BioShock on top (rich melee attacks and ranged weapons, vending machines, upgrades, and damage types). If there’s enough of a demand, we’ll add a “Classic Mode” to one of the stretch goals that disables all RPG stuff as an option.

Yet they don't have it visible in the current lot (or from what I can see looking at them). So that means it's beyond $1.9 million making it next to impossible (going off the slow rate of $$$ pledges) that it will make it in. I don't see how that will appease the "purists" out there.

If anything it should be alongside the RPG elements stretch goal of $1.4 million.