Comment on Years later, Arkane’s Dishonored is still a modern stealth classic
Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
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.
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.
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)
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.
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?
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.
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
hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 months ago
Yes, its a deliberate choice.
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.
Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
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.”