I bailed on Dishonoured for one very specific reason; the morality system.
Dishonoured is, in my opinion a spectacular example of game design, and an equally spectacular example of how to break your game design by not understanding the way players interact with the tools you give them.
Dishonoured is a stealth game. It’s also a game with a superb combat system, and a really fun and exciting set of powers for the player to enjoy using. These things can, sort of co-exist, if somewhat uneasily. But then you add the morality system.
The morality system, in effect, punishes you for playing the game in a non-stealthy way. Or, more specifically, for playing with the wrong kind of stealth. The morality system wants you to ghost the whole game, slipping past every opponent without the slightest evidence you were ever there. But doing that means not engaging with most of the powers and any of the combat.
Having the option to follow a ghost playstyle is great. But when the game sets up a bunch of really fun mechanics, then punishes you for engaging with those mechanics in exactly the way they were designed to be engaged with, that just sucks.
Can you explain why you think the game punishes the player for engaging in combat and killing enemies? I get that the events in the game may change but I’m not getting how that’s a punishment to the player.
You get a bad ending if you kill too many people, and the non-lethal option is just the chokehold for the most part. I bailed for the same reason the first few times I tried to play through the game. The morality system is really the games only critical flaw (or they need more non-lethal options)
Non-lethal also means avoidance rather than conflict. But ultimately, “bad ending” is subjective. You still save the princess, it’s just a more murdery vibe.
Also you get to kill the baddies yourself, it’s the good ending where most are killed for you right?
I guess it’s personal preference. I prefer for choices I make in the story to affect the outcome. If my gameplay has an affect, I feel like I’m being forced into a playstyle. I know it’s stupid, but I have trouble getting out of that thought process. For me it’s similar to why I can never get into bayonetta or devil may cry, the scoring system for each encounter stresses me out. I just want to have fun
There’s also a lot of stuff throughout the game about how the city gets more corrupted, more rats everywhere, that sort of thing. Some of this makes some stuff harder, some of it is just vibes. But all of it is the designers very noticeably wagging their finger under your nose for engaging with the mechanics they made and actively encouraged you to engage with.
To me it feels more about consistency. The world aligns with your expressed ideology.
If you’re using the sneaking and non-lethal tools the world becomes a place that believes in the value of life, if you murder indiscriminately the world becomes a place of punishment, where nobody is innocent and the only way forward is to let a plague descend on the land.
Plus, arguably, the parts that get harder when you go lethal are balanced by the inherently more difficult nature of the non-lethal approach.
Appreciate the response. I feel that I’m in the minority when it comes to caring much about good or bad endings. Usually if a game has several endings I’ll replay it to get the other endings. I’ve never really felt that a “bad ending” was a punishment though. Even if I get immersed in the character I’m playing, I never felt as though I experienced the negative outcomes. I was playing Baldur’s Gate 3 with a friend and he was getting mad at me because I wasn’t playing lawfully good lol. That game was designed to keep progressing no matter what choices you make. You can kill the most important characters but the game keeps going. Yet he felt as though we would have to reload a previous save if I did something too “wrong”. Anyway, I just find the difference of opinion on the topic interesting lol sorry for the wall of text.
IMO the combat mechanics shouldn’t have been there in the first place, but the developers were terrified of making a player-character that wasn’t a demigod that can slaughter an entire army.
I still think Dishonored 1 & 2 are both really good games, but its like they made Portal but just let you break the walls of the test chambers and walk right through if you felt like it.
I’d be happy with either option. If you’re going to punish the player for not doing perfect (eg, no kill) stealth, don’t tease them with a bunch of really exciting combat mechanics. If you’re going to include all the exciting combat mechanics, don’t punish people for using them.
Dishonored is a descendant of the looking glass studio, 0451 immersive sim games, such as Deus Ex. These are games have flexibility, they let you choose how you approach. You can fight, or you can sneak, or you can do both. The game succeeds on this goal, as you can have a very satisfying time with the combat or the stealth, and you can do both. You can fight your way out of failing to sneak.
The morality system gives the game reactions to your actions, gives your choices an effect outside of the level you’re currently on. It does encourage a specific play style but that is deliberate. The outsider is a malevolent force, who doesn’t care for this world. He gives you these powers that come with a cost. Getting the good ending requires to resist the temptation. That’s the point.
Do not cite the deep magics to me, I was there when they were written. I grew up on System Shock and Deus Ex, and that’s exactly why I found Dishonoured so hard to get into. Those other games gave the player a complete free choice in how to approach them, but Dishonoured doesn’t do that. It presents an apparently wide open field, but the moment you pick a particular path and set off down it, the game wags its finger and says “Oh no, not like that. That’s not how you’re supposed to play.”
I adored dishonored, I played through them a couple times so I could see both endings, and I felt like it provided a really different experience.
I especially liked how you could do ng+ in dishonored 2, meant I could replay it as the other character with a bunch of free upgrades and unlocks to get things started.
If you like dishonored you should try prey by same studio. Level design is amazing and character interaction/plot changes based on how you play and where you are when certain events happen.
I do recall they all lacked depth and combat programing. I think the game direction focused on the environment and story more than combat. Which is how I also remember dishonored.
I’ve started playing it and it hooked me for a bit but once it really opens up I’ve been struggling to stick with it. Very interesting premise and characters so far though, I have no idea who can actually be trusted and that feels intentional.
Yeah I can see that. 1st play through I stuck to objectives so I knew what was going on. Next round, I intentionally did stuff out of order which changes a few things. Easy to get lost 1st time around. Especially as environment changes.
All instances of combat in Dishonored are completely optional in Dishonored. It’s actually one of the built in challenges of the game that you are rewarded for. Beating the game with out ever being seen is called Ghost and beating it with zero kills is called Pacifist.
I wanted that game to have good stealth mechanics, but it honestly didn’t. Start up the game, stealth into some shadows. Find a trash can, throw it 50’+ away from you and watch as every enemy within earshot runs directly at you.
Considering that they don’t notice until the trashcans land, that’s not a valid question. And obviously they’re not all looking in your direction when you yeet the trashcan, so again, invalid question.
One of my favorite trophies to get was the no kill run on the first dishonored. A lot of fun finding all the different ways to be a ghost. Though I wish they had more stealth magic, most of the stuff was combat based if I remember correctly
I loved CS1 and have had CS2 since launch. I just can't get into CS2 - it's just not fun.
A large part of that is Paradox Mods in CS2. When CS1 launched from day one you could go onto the steam workshop and download player made models - houses, offices, train stations, roads etc. It grew rapidly and continuously, and it meant every city you made you could customise and change. The game was constantly refreshing and fun, and you could make whatever you wanted.
For CS2, 2 years on and you still can't add custom assets to the game. Paradox/CO have released themed region based asset packs that they have made and the mods are there, but the player made assets remain largely missing. And I suspect the reason is Paradox Mods and the upcoming console version - the PC version seems to have been held back from being good so Paradox can get it's console launch. There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding that the player made content was what made CS1 so great. I suspect CO get that, while Paradox only cares about DLC.
There’s been a ton of back and forth finger pointing but the more I hear about it (and other news about Krafton), the more my gut tells me that Krafton are the bad guys.
I mean it’s pretty obvious they are. The original reason Krafton gave for firing the founders was that Subnautica 2 was being pushed out before it was ready just so the founders could get their bonuses.
Krafton has since dropped those arguments in the legal fillings and changed their reason for firing them to some nebulous shit like:
“abandoned their posts” and “deceived” their employer.
I mean come on. This isn’t even a both sides issue anymore.
Latest development makes it seem like Krafton just wanted to save the cash to plow into their lame AI venture.
I mean honestly, when has a video game company actually been on the right side when things came to a head with the founders?
“The termination notices of the founders gave one reason for their termination,” said Fortis, “and that was the supposed lack of readiness of Subanutica 2 for release. Krafton reiterated that basis for its actions repeatedly.”
Fortis called it a “seismic shift in the case” and “a little bit bewildering”. This was also echoed by the judge, Lori W. Will, when the parties met for a ruling on the filed motions, saying: “Well, that’s something that we definitely need to get to the bottom of today, because that is precisely what was cited as the reason in the answer.”
Krafton’s representatives were not clear about why this argument has been taken off the table, only that it has been, and that it’s no longer why they are saying the founders were terminated.
Instead, Krafton is focusing on the argument that the founders “abandoned their posts” and “deceived” their employer. Causing more confusion is the accusation that the founders downloaded files and kept devices with confidential information on them. This only came to light after the termination, so its relevance has been questioned.
Nothing about PUBG and Subnautica 2 publisher Krafton’s recent decision to become an “AI-first company” look good. The company plans to drop over 130 billion won ($88 million) into the project, recently stopped hiring new employees, and started a voluntary resignation program for its employees in South Korea this week.
Far down the ladder from these decisions is Eleventh Hour Games, the developer behind Last Epoch, which Krafton acquired in July. The timing couldn’t have been worse as it happened right after the founders of Subnautica developer Unknown Worlds were unceremoniously fired for what they claim was a move to avoid paying a $250 million earnout.
Wow this is terrible news. Basically Paradox owns the IP to Cities Skylines and Colossal Order seemingly want out.
I'd say a large reason CS2 has been such a mess is because it was rushed out, the paradox mod system is just not fit for purpose and there remains a ridiculous focus on getting the console version released + move on to DLCs rather than fixing the main game. I'd put most of the blame on Paradox's shoulders to be honest.
It'll be interesting to see what CO does next. CS1 was a great game, CS2 could have been a great game. Will they do another city sim or more onto something else? Seems a shame if they move on as they have grown so much expertise in the genre. I'm hoping they're cutting free to do a game with their own vision, which was how CS1 came to be.
Apropos of nothing more than my idle speculation, I’d guess they will return to the transport tycoon genre if they are able to do so. Before Skylines took the crown from SimCity as the preeminent example of the genre, they made the Cities in Motion games, which were narrowly focused on improving the mass transit of existing cities (as opposed to building the city itself). I know the second CiM game had some interaction between the city and your efforts as transportation czar (in the same way you could indirectly influence a citiy’s development in, say Railroad Tycoon), but the emphasis was always on transit. I imagine the newly independent team will want to keep their focus narrow, unless another publisher swoops in to replace the safety net.
Huge player of Cities in Motion 1/2. I still play both of them to this day.
Cities in Motion 2's city building elements were basically a prototype for Cities Skylines. The look and feel very similar (of course CiM2 didn't really have city-building management layer, just public transit).
arstechnica.com
Najstarsze