Styx: Assassins Creed does stealth better

[josemlopes]

The title is bait but for fuck sakes, here comes a game that does justice to the stealth genre, no hand holding, huge levels, multiple paths, platforming where if there is space to walk on top of you can, etc... basicly a huge call back for something like the original Thief and yet most reviews complain that its frustrating and hard to control while using examples like Assassins Creed as better stealth games.

They complain that the combat is poor because, get this, if you are fighting against multiple enemies you will certainly die as opposed to something like Assassins Creed where the enemies attack one by one giving you the chance to survive. Its a fucking stealth game, you shouldnt fight in the first place, in fact, the hardest difficulty doesnt even let you fight, the moment an enemy gets in arms reach of you he just executes you.

God, I am raging over here because of how most complains seem to be that the game isnt doing things like the Thief reboot did, yet they shat all over the Thief reboot even if apparently its the game they want out of a stealth game.

Im not really saying that everyone needs to like this game but get better arguments then "They didnt make what made that other game so fucking shitty, so this one is shitty too".

Remember how people didnt like that jumping was context based in Thief? Well in Styx you can jump to anything as long as there is room to walk on top off, the game plays like any old schooll platformer, time your jump and aim properly or you will fail the jump. Want to drop on to a ledge? Walk slowly into it and the character will grab it, we had this shit since 3D platforming was invented, why do they seem to have such a big problem with it?

Are people that attached to the auto-pilot platforming that Assassins Creed made popular that when its something different people call it buggy?


Well... either way, I recomend the game and am curious if anyone else also played it to share their thoughs of the game too.

Also the game is 30$, fucking well priced

 

[Windcaler]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

 

[josemlopes]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

Yeah, I get what you mean.

The combat in Styx really isnt good because it isnt even combat, you get locked on a 1v1 fight if at arms reach (in the hardest there is no fight, the enemy just grabs and executes you) where you have to defend multiple attacks pressing the X button when he lunges the sword at you (you cant move and there is no button prompt to help the timing, you really have to look at the movement of the enemy), after around 2-3 parries you kill the guy. If there are more enemies around you or they are alerted by the fighting noise they will come to kill you while you are fighting.

It isnt bad at all though because it isnt combat, its just a way to defend yourself if spotted, you are not supposed to be able to go front to front with an enemy and take no punishment from it. That combat is just there to give an opportunity to survive if you are in an isolated encounter, yet many reviews seemed to miss that point and demanded that the player should be able to actually fight your way through.

Then there is the platforming that I kid you not, is exactly like so many platformers were before Assassins Creed, yet they have a huge issue with the game about it.

 

[Windcaler]

To repeat, if a game doesnt have good combat or in your words doesnt have combat at all thats something a consumer needs to know. You may like that and thats fine but another consumer might hate it. The only right answer is to address the point and let the consumer come to their own conclusion of if thats what they want out of the game.

However I did watch a few reviews and I noticed many of them had an issue with the controls especially during platforming sections. Elder-geek made it a point to show many instances where it looked like Styx should have grabbed onto something but instead ended up falling to his death and this was really the only big negative point he brought up(his point was not that the platforming is different but that it was imprecise). Not having played the game I dont know how common that is but in any platform Ive played if controls arent dead on then the games going to suffer.

 

[josemlopes]

snip

The platform takes a while to get used to at the start because its what a platformer game would be 10 years ago where it is very unforgiving about how well your character is angled (the angle is very important and so is the speed, if you are holding still and then jump straight away you wont reach the distance, you have to run a little bit (1 step is enough) to make a longer jump.

Apart from the first mission I havent got any issues with the platforming, its basicly as it was with PS1 platforming games where there isnt much room for doubtfull jumps.

There are some things that arent well explained though, for example the "if you walk to the edge he will drop and grab the ledge but if you run he will fall", that seems kind of a given but it actually took me some time to understand the way it worked because usually there is a dedicated "grab ledge" button now. The other thing is that if you jump to a ledge, while holding the jump button the character will remain on the ledge after landing, if you just press the jump button and release before grabbing the ledge he will grab the ledge and quickly jump on top of it (good for when you want to be fast).

Another thing however is that some reviews forget to mention that its a budget title with a budget price tag, 30$ is almost half then most games, yet it is reviewed while being compared to 50$/60$ games.

I dont know, I had to rant somewhere, not because of the scores but because what they wanted the game to be was what made Thief such a pile of shit instead of seeing for what it is and how (even with the flaws that it has) it manages to be a good pure stealth game that so many people (and reviewers in some articles) have been asking for since the original Thief games came out.

 

[TheGamerElite33]

Assassins creed has stealth? thats new to me. considering "stealth" in Assassins creed is very very basic and easy.

 

[Danny Dowling]

so Styx is good then? that's great news, I'll pick it up at some point

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

snip snip snip

I found this looking for the Escapist review for Styx, I could only find previews. Is it because Styx sits in a limbo between AAA and indie, I wonder.

I'm with you, I think kids today don't know what stealth is. I saw a lot of Steam threads ***** about not being able to AssCred your way out of being caught. The fighting mechanics reflect that 1 on 1 is a last resort, and you are punished by the guards being more alert in that area if youre seen. the fact you're dead if more guards join in shows how under powered you are and why Styx has to sneak around.
It's like complaining that on Road Rash you can't get off your bike n street fighter your opponents.
Splinter Cell Blacklist was the biggest offender of this. Lots of ammo, no real insentive to stay hidden as there's no punishment for CODing it. (Well Fishers voice was a no no too)

Biggest complaints for me; radroaches should attack humans too, could be fun leading them to use as a distraction.
also the moving to a ledge slowly to drop n hold on, not easy in a rush to not be spotted

 

[Kopikatsu]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

I should point out that grading scales aren't actually 1-10 for major review sources like GameStop and IGN. They're more along the lines of the school system's grades, where 7 is 'serviceable' and really anything below an 8 isn't worth your time. Many, many complaints have been levied against using the system like this but it's what they do. So a score of 6-7 is actually terrible, especially for a major AAA release.

 

[Savagezion]

Awesome. Had this game on my wishlist. Great to hear, I may be buying it this weekend. I was undecided but I think you just talked me into it jose.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

A stealth game that punishes you for being caught?

BRB, buying 5 copies.

 

[sageoftruth]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

Yeah, I get what you mean.

The combat in Styx really isnt good because it isnt even combat, you get locked on a 1v1 fight if at arms reach (in the hardest there is no fight, the enemy just grabs and executes you) where you have to defend multiple attacks pressing the X button when he lunges the sword at you (you cant move and there is no button prompt to help the timing, you really have to look at the movement of the enemy), after around 2-3 parries you kill the guy. If there are more enemies around you or they are alerted by the fighting noise they will come to kill you while you are fighting.

It isnt bad at all though because it isnt combat, its just a way to defend yourself if spotted, you are not supposed to be able to go front to front with an enemy and take no punishment from it. That combat is just there to give an opportunity to survive if you are in an isolated encounter, yet many reviews seemed to miss that point and demanded that the player should be able to actually fight your way through.

Then there is the platforming that I kid you not, is exactly like so many platformers were before Assassins Creed, yet they have a huge issue with the game about it.

I have a question. It sounds like you get locked into a tricky battle if an enemy reaches you. One thing I loved about Thief was that running away was always an option. Does Styx give you that choice, or are you forced to fight?

 

[josemlopes]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

Yeah, I get what you mean.

The combat in Styx really isnt good because it isnt even combat, you get locked on a 1v1 fight if at arms reach (in the hardest there is no fight, the enemy just grabs and executes you) where you have to defend multiple attacks pressing the X button when he lunges the sword at you (you cant move and there is no button prompt to help the timing, you really have to look at the movement of the enemy), after around 2-3 parries you kill the guy. If there are more enemies around you or they are alerted by the fighting noise they will come to kill you while you are fighting.

It isnt bad at all though because it isnt combat, its just a way to defend yourself if spotted, you are not supposed to be able to go front to front with an enemy and take no punishment from it. That combat is just there to give an opportunity to survive if you are in an isolated encounter, yet many reviews seemed to miss that point and demanded that the player should be able to actually fight your way through.

Then there is the platforming that I kid you not, is exactly like so many platformers were before Assassins Creed, yet they have a huge issue with the game about it.

I have a question. It sounds like you get locked into a tricky battle if an enemy reaches you. One thing I loved about Thief was that running away was always an option. Does Styx give you that choice, or are you forced to fight?

You only get locked if you are in arms reach, later on you can upgrade so that if the enemy close enough to start the fight you may still be able to roll away from him.

 

[teh_Canape]

I understand having a problem with reviews especially when they dont review the game on its own merits instead of expecting it to be something else (except in the case of sequels) but it might help to talk about who specifically is making these kinds of complaints.

This reminds me of a video I saw just the other day of a guy complaining about destiny reviews saying they were bullshit because they said the "game sucks" in the usual paraphrased way. He quoted Gamestop, IGN, and something else. Curious I actually went and read their reviews of Destiny and looked at the scores to find they were actually pretty positive. Scores ranging from 6-7 on a 1-10 grading system mean the game is above average or even good and reading what was written in the actual review (which is what I wish more people did instead of quibbling over scores) was mostly positive as well, detailing destiniy's faults as well as strengths. Yet in his eyes these reviews were saying the game sucked.

I remember seeing a similar discussion from UnitLost about reviews not taking into account what destiny really is saying it had to be reviewed as a loot based shooter and not a story driven game but I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance. If im a consumer and I want a story driven FPS I want to know that destiny has a bad story. It informs me and allows me to make an informed purchasing decision. Thats what reviewers are supposed to be doing, informing the consumer.

Likewise with Styx if it has bad combat once you get discovered that something I want to know as a consumer so I can make an informed purchasing decision. Likewise if the stealth is good I want to know whats good about it, what kind of stuff can I do with it? What kind of stuff can I not do with it? Its all about informing consumers and I feel many reviewers and entertainers are forgetting that. The scoring system makes it even worse because it seems like you have to review a game from the stance as an everyman rather then discuss how mechanics work that a variety of players may or may not like.

Yeah, I get what you mean.

The combat in Styx really isnt good because it isnt even combat, you get locked on a 1v1 fight if at arms reach (in the hardest there is no fight, the enemy just grabs and executes you) where you have to defend multiple attacks pressing the X button when he lunges the sword at you (you cant move and there is no button prompt to help the timing, you really have to look at the movement of the enemy), after around 2-3 parries you kill the guy. If there are more enemies around you or they are alerted by the fighting noise they will come to kill you while you are fighting.

It isnt bad at all though because it isnt combat, its just a way to defend yourself if spotted, you are not supposed to be able to go front to front with an enemy and take no punishment from it. That combat is just there to give an opportunity to survive if you are in an isolated encounter, yet many reviews seemed to miss that point and demanded that the player should be able to actually fight your way through.

Then there is the platforming that I kid you not, is exactly like so many platformers were before Assassins Creed, yet they have a huge issue with the game about it.

I have a question. It sounds like you get locked into a tricky battle if an enemy reaches you. One thing I loved about Thief was that running away was always an option. Does Styx give you that choice, or are you forced to fight?

can't tell you if you are about to get into combat or osmething because it never happened to me, but you always have the chance to turn invisible and quickly move away unless the enemy is too close

mind you, turning invisible eats up a shitload of mana Ember and lasts like 2 seconds though, so you're better off just not getting caught