Why is System Shock a Big Deal?

Blood Brain Barrier

New member
Nov 21, 2011
2,004
0
0
venn2011 said:
Blood Brain Barrier said:
I don't quite understand why difficulty in games (scavenging for survival, aiming bullets at heads, complex puzzles) is highly praised and rewarded, and yet a difficult interface isn't. If you've just awaken on board a space station with newly acquired biotech surgery, of course you're going to have a hell of a time getting around. Using half the keyboard to navigate and use your capabilities was part of the experience, and was incredibly cool to learn and master at the time.

Sure, you might not be skilled at it but I'm not skilled at targeting things with the mouse in real-time. That doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to call all shooters crap (although I can try).

So why doesn't the old argument that interfaces should be as easy and simple to use as possible, apply to Dark Souls which during my 20 minutes of playing gave rise to endlessly frustrating and unenjoyable dead ends, deaths and needlessly difficult combat?
Because those difficulty in games you mention are just features of the game, like things that you can/will do in a game. On the other hand, the interface is the in-between link that connects the player with the game. The player relies on the interface as one of tools to gather information on what's happening in the game, in order to make moment to moment judgment on what's the next best course of action. A clunky and bad interface can only serve to confuse the player and possibly even mislead them to make a wrong move.

Think of the interface as like the dashboard gauges on your car. It should be easy to read and instantaneously recognizable so that the driver can make snap decisions, moment to moment, so that he/she can stay on the road, move toward right direction, avoid accidents, keep within the bounds of the law, and etc. But if the dashboard was a clunky, cluster-mess of stuff all over the place, then the driver needs to pay more attention to it than the road. Guess what is going to happen then? Yes, an accident... maybe even death. That's not good, right?

Please, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that such antiquated interface is absolutely bad. I'm sure it has its own brand of charm and I believe there're some people (like yourself) who enjoy such stuff. But you can't say that more most people. Think carefully for a moment: there is a reason why the interfaces of video games have gotten overall simpler and slicker over the years.

And I'd say that Dark Souls is a poor example for a comparison. First of all, Dark Souls is inherently a console game played primarily on a controller. And a typical controller doesn't have a lot of buttons. I'm even willing to bet that Dark Souls may use less number of buttons than the old Doom on PC... let alone the entire half of the keyboard (plus a mouse) for System Shock. So ask yourself which is more easier to learn & master for most people. Furthermore, the interface for Dark Souls is nothing like System Shock; unlike System Shock that has a cluttered & messy interface that takes too much space on the screen, Dark Souls only has (1) Health/Stamina/Mana/whatever bars on top left corner, (2) Weapons, Items, and Spells icons on bottom left corner, and (3) a simple Soul counter at bottom right. And none of those are too big to obstruct the main view of the screen and allows the player to focus entirely on the action if needed. It's really a no comparison.
I was using Dark Souls as an example of difficulty within games, not the interface. I still don't see why we should criticize one and not another. In System Shock the interface wasn't merely a car dashboard, it was part of the game. You were a new cyber-man, you weren't supposed to be gliding around effortlessly using all your functions with ease. The slow-paced nature of the game factored that into consideration with the difficulty.

To give a new example, imagine your favorite shooter (assuming you like them) had a real (fake) gun instead of a controller/mouse. Instead of pressing a button you had to manually load ammo, cock the gun, aim physically at the screen and pull the trigger. Would such an interface be praised or condemned? It's sure as hell more immersive than pressing a button.
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
Nice article. As usual Shamus' articles ALSO get me reading a lot of the comments on them ;)
So; a classic none the less. Because LOTS of games from the early days have just TOUGH controls (sometimes related to the actual, physical controller!). It makes them what they are; hard to master, impossible to hate once you've been through them! :D
 

fenrizz

New member
Feb 7, 2009
2,790
0
0
Halla Burrica said:
Whenever I come across these articles, I do wonder how many people actually read them. If the amount of comments are any indication (which there is a very good chance isn't), then it's not many people. I think that's a shame, even if I don't care much for the articles myself, and probably would never have a positive experience with the author if I ever met him (which of course is never going to happen).
Well, I do read them every week, and I find them very interesting.
But unfortunatly, most of the time I don't have very much to add, so I don't comment.
Theminimanx said:
FoolKiller said:
I'm not even sure the timeless classics you've mentioned are so timeless. Super mario works because its 2D, but Doom is horrid as its also been done better and prettier. Also weak is Ocarina of Time and Super Mario 64. Both were epic in their time but better remembered for what they brought to gaming rather than to be played again. Oh, and same goes for FFVII.
I can't speak for Ocarina of Time because I haven't played it, but both Doom and Mario 64 are still very playable today. There's a reason all FPS games today use the exact same control scheme as Doom. You could argue that later games improved on them, (and I'd be inclined to agree with you) but that's not the point Shamus was trying to make. The point is that those games are still playable today because they have an intuitive and functional control scheme, which System Shock just lacks.
Well...
I just played Ocarine of Time on 3DS, which was a pretty nice experience, I liked it a lot.
Then I had the bright idea to fire up my N64 and try it there.
Bad call, it's age is pretty damn apparent.
 

stormtrooper9091

New member
Jun 2, 2010
506
0
0
Thing is, Dune II and System Shock were and still are far better than any Super Mario, Zelda and Doom. I'm inclined to believe those are only "better" classics because they appeared at the right time and were marketed differently.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
So are we going to see a Spoiler Warning series on System Shock? I'd love to see someone give it the proper Let's Play treatment so I can understand what was up with it without having to suffer through playing it.

Although... the control scheme you're describing doesn't sound so bad. It sounds like you use Doom-style tank controls to get around and then you have free aiming like in a rail shooter? It could certainly be worse... like tank controls and no free aiming like in Doom itself. I might have to see it in action to understand what's so awkward about it.
 

Ogoid

New member
Nov 5, 2009
405
0
0
President Bagel said:
The controls are really only awkward at first. After taking the time to fully acclimatize myself with the interface and controls, I'm no longer finding any of it all that cumbersome. The movement physics are still a bit strange (particularly jumping, and how you'll glide a tiny bit when you stop moving), but the only noteworthy complaint I have are the lackluster cyberspace sequences. This game is really spectacular and blows most modern tripe clean out of the water.
Heh, I must seriously be the only person on Earth who liked the whole cyberspace wire-frame deal; at this point I'm thinking it probably has more to do with me being a sucker for classic cyberpunk (Neuromancer, Hardwired, Schismatrix, A Song Called Youth, the works) than with how well they actually played, honestly.

Seriously though, those, along with the more free-roaming structure (and SHODAN rambling semi-coherently at me every two minutes), were what I missed the most on System Shock 2.
 

fenrizz

New member
Feb 7, 2009
2,790
0
0
stormtrooper9091 said:
Thing is, Dune II and System Shock were and still are far better than any Super Mario, Zelda and Doom. I'm inclined to believe those are only "better" classics because they appeared at the right time and were marketed differently.
I'm inclined to disagree.
Most classic games came at the right time, so that is nothing special really.

Also, I've played Dune II, and it is not in any way better than Ocarina of Time or Super Mario 64, certainly not far better.
Matter of fact, I remember Dune II as sort of shit.
Can't say I've played System Shock, but labeling it as 1 of only 2 worthwile classics seems a bit odd.
 

UberThetan

New member
Oct 6, 2014
24
0
0
A lot of you seem to be missing the point of System Shock's importance (as well as Dune 2 etc.) - their importance is based on the fact that, usually, before they came around there was precious little that did what they did. They were genesis in many ways for game concepts and techniques that are still around today. Dune 2 is fucking terrible to play these days because it didn't have the one thing that makes an RTS like it easy to play: click-dragging a box to select multiple units. If you wanted to move your army across the map, you had to do so one at a time. As a kid, I got quite efficient at it, but I don't pine for the days where click-dragging didn't exist. Doesn't change the fact that it created much of what is still around even today in the likes of Starcraft 2. Same goes for System Shock and it's mix of FPS and RPG. Or it's villain. Or it's design. The interface was terrible, which is why it's the greatest game you don't ever need to play again, but 50% of it's DNA is found in copious AAA games on the market even today. Not just Deus Ex, Thief and Bioshock.

Look at it this way - nobody wants to drive a Model T Ford these days as your everyday car, but we can still appreciate it for what it did to cars as a whole.