System Shock - Retrospective @ Resolution

System Shock ROCKS!

DArtagnan said:

Because you agree with Jemy, it doesn't mean that he's any less close-minded in general.

Click to expand...

And just because you disagree with him doesn't make him close minded or make YOU open minded. You're not the arbiter of open-minded. And you also have pretty hostile dispositions to views opposed to yours ... doesn't that make you close-minded?

DArtagnan said:

Anyway, my opinion of Jemy's persona on this board doesn't stem from this thread, it's based on several threads in which he's displayed the inability to read and respond to what people actually say and go on as if they hadn't said anything beyond a tiny subset which he then chooses to focus on.

Click to expand...

You're guilty of this, too, you do realize?

DArtagnan said:

I have no issue with his criticism of System Shock beyond disagreeing with it, and I did in fact already concede that the game is hard to swallow because of its dated visuals and controls. But if I'm going to have a debate about the merits or faults of something, people better acknowledge my points instead of ignoring that I made them.

Click to expand...

Well, you called his view immature, so it does seem like you have issue with how he criticized the game.

DArtagnan said:

I'm not sure if this is the place to discuss personal defects in general, though, but if you open a thread about that somewhere more appropriate, I guess I could join in.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that thread would get locked by the second post.

DArtagnan said:

About System Shock, I don't think anyone here has claimed it wouldn't benefit from modern technology. What I'm saying is, and let's see if you're capable of getting this instead of letting your bias against me get in the way again (which is tiresome),

Click to expand...

You're the last person who should accuse someone of personal bias. It's pretty tiresome hearing you try to brag about how open minded you are when you're the exact same as the rest of us. You're not intellectually superior to me or anyone else on this forum, but you do come across as pretty arrogant.

DArtagnan said:

that the game had fantastic level design - and it would STILL have fantastic level design if it was released today.

Click to expand...

I understand. He disagrees. I'm not sure whether I agree or not. His points about the level design mainly seemed to revolve around it not being a maze and being clearer where things were.

DArtagnan said:

The game is anything but primitive -

Click to expand...

To quote you: "let's see if you're capable of getting this instead of letting your bias against me get in the way again (which is tiresome)." I'm not using 'primitive' pejoratively. It's primitive in that it's older and doesn't have the benefit of modern technology. So it's primitive in the same way the Wright Brother's first plane was primitive. Technologically primitive. Still an amazing and revolutionary product.

DArtagnan said:

but if you can't accept certain limitations based on 15 years old technology - like flat surface textures - then you're being unreasonable.

Click to expand...

Didn't you just criticize Jemy for only honing in on specific parts of someone's arguments? Perhaps if you followed your own advice you would have noticed me saying "System Shock is a classic and rightly hailed for being ahead of its time and visionary" and that "if this game was made with today's technology it would have been easier for him to fully get into and digest." I'd prefer the game if it was made with the latest hardware and software in mind. I'm not saying the game is bad, I'm saying it's a great game and I love it.

You guys should establish a drama club.

Oh wait.

Rithrandil said:

And just because you disagree with him doesn't make him close minded or make YOU open minded. You're not the arbiter of open-minded. And you also have pretty hostile dispositions to views opposed to yours ... doesn't that make you close-minded?

Click to expand...

You're not following what I'm saying.

I didn't say that I was open-minded because I disagree with him. I'm not hostile to opposing views, why would you say that?

Anyway, you're not making much sense.

You're guilty of this, too, you do realize?

Click to expand...

Nope.

Well, you called his view immature, so it does seem like you have issue with how he criticized the game.

Click to expand...

No, I made a quip about him being younger, complete with a smiley. In that same post, I started out by saying his opinion was as valid as mine.

He responded by calling me nostalgic and immature - WITHOUT a smiley.

I'm pretty sure that thread would get locked by the second post.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you could say that would cause that, but if so - then by all means let's waste our time in this thread - as inappropriate as it is.

You're the last person who should accuse someone of personal bias. It's pretty tiresome hearing you try to brag about how open minded you are when you're the exact same as the rest of us. You're not intellectually superior to me or anyone else on this forum, but you do come across as pretty arrogant.

Click to expand...

You might perceive me as arrogant and bragging, but that doesn't really mean it's true. If you find it so tiresome, then why do you persist in this exchange? Wouldn't it just be easier to ignore me or stop wasting your time.

I understand. He disagrees. I'm not sure whether I agree or not. His points about the level design mainly seemed to revolve around it not being a maze and being clearer where things were.

Click to expand...

He's very welcome to disagree, so what's your point?

To quote you: "let's see if you're capable of getting this instead of letting your bias against me get in the way again (which is tiresome)." I'm not using 'primitive' pejoratively. It's primitive in that it's older and doesn't have the benefit of modern technology. So it's primitive in the same way the Wright Brother's first plane was primitive. Technologically primitive. Still an amazing and revolutionary product.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm talking about level design exclusively - not the level of technology. As I said, if System Shock had IDENTICAL level design - except with modern visual aesthetics - it would still not be primitive. That's my whole point, essentially.

It would be pretty silly to claim that a 15 year old game didn't suffer from "primitive" visuals.

Didn't you just criticize Jemy for only honing in on specific parts of someone's arguments? Perhaps if you followed your own advice you would have noticed me saying "System Shock is a classic and rightly hailed for being ahead of its time and visionary" and that "if this game was made with today's technology it would have been easier for him to fully get into and digest." I'd prefer the game if it was made with the latest hardware and software in mind. I'm not saying the game is bad, I'm saying it's a great game and I love it.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and it was specifically Jemy's criticism of flat surface textures I was referring to - not what you said.

System Shock. Don't know how many times i come back and play this 'gem'.

Even though i feel dead space did a really good attempt in modernizing it. System Shock is System Shock. It still doesn't look ok, but somehow system shock is the only game where i feel its ok. I usually can't stand games that are to old, but System Shock plays in a different league.

I don't feel the level design is bad. Since the story is so great and it really trigger the Sci-Fi nerd in me it would have got away with me hearding cows.

If the story fits the design, its a good level. Perhaps the level on itself is awkward and stupid. But - since its pair up with the story, i don't see it.

I don't want to see anything that could be intepreted bad about this game.

I just refuse!

I'm just going to stop here so we can get this thread back to things to do with System Shock, on the advice of my peers.

DArtagnan said:

Yeah, and it was specifically Jemy's criticism of flat surface textures I was referring to - not what you said.

Click to expand...

Huh? I haven't criticized the games flat surface textures. The lack of pixelshaders, bumpmapping etc doesn't concern me. SS have much greater variation of textures than a game like DOOM, which was uncommon back then. I did have a problem with doors not looking like doors and some doors being so generic that it's difficult to guess what's behind them.

JemyM said:

I did have a problem with doors not looking like doors and some doors being so generic that it's difficult to guess what's behind them.

Click to expand...

I never experienced that while playing SS, and that's the first time I've ever heard that complaint.

JemyM said:

Huh? I haven't criticized the games flat surface textures. The lack of pixelshaders, bumpmapping etc doesn't concern me. SS have much greater variation of textures than a game like DOOM, which was uncommon back then. I did have a problem with doors not looking like doors and some doors being so generic that it's difficult to guess what's behind them.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the door thing is because of flat surface textures.

Basically, they're using a "2D" flat bitmap image (which is basically what a texture is) and it's animated to open/close the doors - but it's without a mesh underneath, which is why doors look like walls on occasion - because there's no substance beyond the flat surface and this was before bump mapping and other similar tech that grants the illusion of depth.

I understand that criticism, and my point was that due to how advanced the game is in terms of technology and the time of release - that criticism is pretty harsh.

But, even so, that's entirely separate from the level design itself - and that's been my point all along. The level design - as in the scope/complexity/non-linearity was completely and utterly beyond anything at the time - and remains that way, pretty much, today. At least for a shooter. Only Ultima Underworld could approach the sophistication and detail of level design - and that was made by the same guys - so...

Maybe you're thinking of the density of objects, polycount, and quality of textures in modern games - but I'm talking about the fact that it's an ENTIRE Space Station that's extremely consistent and more or less entirely open for exploration from the get-go. If you look at Bioshock or similar modern games, you'll find comparitively small levels, with little or no consistency. Basically, as I said, each level is a very beautiful thing to behold - but it's a theme park and Rapture doesn't feel like this giant city as I think it should.

You could say it's like the difference between Babylon 5 and Star Trek. Babylon 5 is like a consistent whole - with everything interconnected and with a purpose. Star Trek sort of "resets" with each episode - with only quite limited consistency between them.

THAT's good level design - but of course, that's just my opinion.

Let me butt in here for a moment. The mods here are pretty tolerant, except for one thing. We don't like personal attacks. There's been far too much in this thread and the ONLY reason I haven't locked it, is because SS is one of my all time favourite games and I want to encourage discussion of the GAME, not each others shortcomings!!

Never finished it but loved what i played of it. Shodan was cool ='.'=

The portable version may just change that soon!

It's great to see System Shock getting some love! I always feel like a black sheep in my preference of it over SS2 - which is great in its own ways, but I loved SS way more especially from storytelling and RPG-philic perspectives.

Maybe I'm not so much black sheep as I am old sheep.

I think the original is superior to the sequel in every way, but graphics. Perhaps it's because I'm old too!!