System Shock Remastered Official Early Pre-Alpha Trailer.

[snapshot]

How dare you Insect, Running on UE4.

Website : http://systemshock.com/ (By Nightdive Studios).

[Trycon]

The weapon could use some feedback...

Other than that, it's looking really good. I'm glad they've switched to UE4 since the Unity engine has a history of not being that well optimised... on consoles.

[geo]

With the publicity the remake is getting, perhaps Unreal / Epic mentioned it would be cool if they made the game in the Unreal engine. Atmosphere looks great. The breaking apart enemies is fantastic. Perhaps the one thing in a long time that made me say wow at a trailer (not that I watch a lot of trailers).

This trailer comes out at a great time to hype up Turok 2.

Oh and didn't GameTrailers fold last year?

[snapshot]

I think they sold GT rights to IGN lol.

[vinnie245]

IGN has control over the GT channel, why they dont just use their own youtube channel i've got no idea.
Still looks really good and considering i never played the original System Shock this should hopefully be a great way to get into it.

[geo]

DMGUYDZ64 said:

I think they sold GT rights to IGN lol.

Sour taste. Their services overlap. Do they just keep GT for the traffic?

Anyway I'm happy for Night Dive once again. They've come a long way and its great one of them is a Doomer.

[Aquanet]

UE4 has become the autotune of gaming.

On a more serious note, good on them for not turning this into a crafting/survival/multiplayer/base-building game.

[geo]

Aquanet said:

UE4 has become the autotune of gaming.

On a more serious note, good on them for not turning this into a crafting/survival/multiplayer/base-building game.

UE4 does have so many built in functions. Its beautiful in a way. If I could wrangle together more money to make a game I'd use it. Modelers and animators are justifiably expensive.

[Agentbromsnor]

One thing that I think kind of defined System Shock was the clunky RPG interface. With all of that stripped down, I'm afraid that the game will just be a rather bare-bones survival horror FPS.

I would love to be proven wrong on this though!

[Edward850]

Agentbromsnor said:

One thing that I think kind of defined System Shock was the clunky RPG interface. With all of that stripped down, I'm afraid that the game will just be a rather bare-bones survival horror FPS.

I would love to be proven wrong on this though!

You're already wrong from that start. It's a pre-alpha trailer, not a gameplay demonstration. Inferring that the gameplay has been "stripped down" isn't just jumping to conclusions, it's fabricating the concept of said conclusions from a couple of thousand light-years away.

[Mr. Freeze]

Edward850 said:

You're already wrong from that start. It's a pre-alpha trailer, not a gameplay demonstration. Inferring that the gameplay has been "stripped down" isn't just jumping to conclusions, it's fabricating the concept of said conclusions from a couple of thousand light-years away.

Jesus, the defensiveness. Oh and

Fader also clarified that they now considered the game a more "faithful reboot" than a remaster; the game's story, character, weapons, levels, and enemies remain as in the original game, but they are applying "modern design principles" to rework some of these and add in others to make the game more playable for current audiences

Sucks to be the people who kickstarted it on the basis that they'd be getting a faithful remaster.

[Edward850]

Mr. Freeze said:

Jesus, the defensiveness.

That wasn't defensiveness, that was pointing out an observation. And upon further research, turned out to be entirely bang on the money.

The other thing I heard was people were worried that the gameplay was becoming stripped down due to the simple combat shown in the video. Gameplay wasn't a priority for assessing the engine since, again, everything we've researched indicates Unreal can offer the same (if not better) foundation for the gameplay systems
We're only 20% through our vertical slice, and there's still a lot to do. The next steps are getting interesting creature and environment behaviors, while also iterating on the hacking puzzles, cyberspace, weapons, and items
This is a big game, so we're trying to tackle these components in order, starting with a solid tech foundation and an effective the process for getting art into the game. For now, we chose to bring art in we could finish quickly so we can get the other departments (like design) testing their stuff in engine. More elaborate and iconic art is coming, but remember, for this early stage of v slice, it's about establishing a solid foundation to build upon.

[Jonathan]

I'm a backer for this. To my eye, nothing in the teaser looks especially better, or worse, than the earlier demo. But if the developers feel UE4 is a better choice for what they want to achieve, then I've no problem with it.

I don't like the attitude that, because you chose to donate to a project, the developers are obligated to deliver the product exactly as you imagined it at that point in time. As a backer, you're not signing a contract for delivery of goods, you're making a long-term bet on somebody's artistic vision.

That's not to say that developers have carte blanche to do whatever they like. But I make a clear distinction between changes made a result of a good faith intention to deliver the best product, in line with their vision, and a bad faith attempt to mislead potential backers, or under-deliver on earlier promises.

For example, if the developers announced that, instead of a full remake, they were only going to build the first level of System Shock, that would be clearly unacceptable, and I'd expect my money back. On the other hand, deciding to make a less exact but, in their opinion, better remake, is clearly a decision made in good faith. And so, even if I personally might have preferred their earlier vision for the game, I should accept that this is their decision to make, not mine.

[dew]

Replicating System Shock's famously awkward UI just to remain faithful to the original sounds like the worst idea ever. Maybe shoot yourself in both feet while you're at it?

Also I'm one of the guys who intensely disliked the previous engine, so I welcome the switch to UE4. The previous faithful layout recreation fell right into the uncanny valley for me. Old tile layouting with primitive geometrical shapes and intricate high-def wall detail were clashing irreconcilably in my brain.

I would prefer toning down the glowy lights though. It's like even industry professionals can't keep their mitts from the glowy sparklies when working with UE4, heh.

[Liberation]

I tried the kickstarter demo which was on offer, which was running on the unity engine, glad there changing up to the unreal engine, that's good news!

The demo looked the part but it felt very clunky, so I stopped playing and went and played through the original instead.

stats

time 8:13:22
kills 683
regenerations 7
difficulty index 7
score 1242767

Looking forward to the new version, I was broke for the kickstarter which sucked really, nevermind!

[DooM_RO]

Jonathan said:

I'm a backer for this. To my eye, nothing in the teaser looks especially better, or worse, than the earlier demo. But if the developers feel UE4 is a better choice for what they want to achieve, then I've no problem with it.

I don't like the attitude that, because you chose to donate to a project, the developers are obligated to deliver the product exactly as you imagined it at that point in time. As a backer, you're not signing a contract for delivery of goods, you're making a long-term bet on somebody's artistic vision.

That's not to say that developers have carte blanche to do whatever they like. But I make a clear distinction between changes made a result of a good faith intention to deliver the best product, in line with their vision, and a bad faith attempt to mislead potential backers, or under-deliver on earlier promises.

For example, if the developers announced that, instead of a full remake, they were only going to build the first level of System Shock, that would be clearly unacceptable, and I'd expect my money back. On the other hand, deciding to make a less exact but, in their opinion, better remake, is clearly a decision made in good faith. And so, even if I personally might have preferred their earlier vision for the game, I should accept that this is their decision to make, not mine.

Engines are not just about graphics. Unity is also not a good FPS engine. The SS demo ran really badly on my 970.

[Egyptian Guardian]

Are there actually people complaining about the engine it is running on?

Although the visuals may be off, the lighting and high-res textures look fantastic as shit, and it takes a powerhouse just like that to captivate an updated remaster on one of PC classical games.

Would you rather have it run on the idtech5 engine, one that is known for numerous performance issues?

[Koko Ricky]

Looks a bit too much like Doom.

[snapshot]

GoatLord said:

Looks a bit too much like Doom.

Except it's slower and has RPG Elements such as inventory.

[Agentbromsnor]

Edward850 said:

You're already wrong from that start. It's a pre-alpha trailer, not a gameplay demonstration. Inferring that the gameplay has been "stripped down" isn't just jumping to conclusions, it's fabricating the concept of said conclusions from a couple of thousand light-years away.

I hear this "it's an alpha!" argument all the time, and I'm just going to be frank here:

If you're a developer and you're posting a PUBLIC trailer as a way of promoting your upcoming game, then of course I'm going to judge it based on that. There's nothing else to talk about. What else are you supposed to do? Just look at it and go "well, this will probably be absolutely nothing like the final product, but it looks alright anyway I guess".

I'm sorry, but the idea that you're somehow not allowed to form an opinion based on released footage, weather it be pre-alpha, alpha or beta, is fucking ludicrous. If a developer feels confident enough to use their current build as the basis for footage of their public promotional trailer, they can expect people to at the VERY LEAST draw comparisons to it and the final release. To expect anything different is just silly, if you ask me.

Now, I personally thought the trailer looked okay. However; with one of the most recognizable elements of the original System Shock taken out, I've got to ask if the remaining game will hold people's interest. BioShock is already more or less a stripped down version of System Shock (2) (and I don't mean that in a negative way), and that series has been going for three games now. I personally love horror-shooters like this (same reason I also enjoyed Doom 3), but I know for a fact that a large portion of gamers don't. In fact, all of my 'gaming friends' can't stand to play anything horror-related. With this in mind, I think it's very reasonable to ask the question of how this will make a solid return in the market upon release.

[Edward850]

Except you can't ask to see how your house is going and then complain that it's just a bunch of posts in the ground.
If you want to see a finished product, you have to wait for it to be finished first. They haven't even finished the vertical slice yet, and they even outright stated this video is not intended to show gameplay. Your complaints are meaningless.

Likewise, you keep using the phrase "stripped out" implying they removed a gameplay element you expect to see. Occam's razor doesn't work with your viewpoint however, as the most logical answer is it just isn't finished enough to show off or represent yet.

[Agentbromsnor]

Edward850 said:

Except you can't ask to see how your house is going and then complain that it's just a bunch of posts in the ground.
If you want to see a finished product, you have to wait for it to be finished first. They haven't even finished the vertical slice yet, and they even outright stated this video is not intended to show gameplay. Your complaints are meaningless.

Likewise, you keep using the phrase "stripped out" implying they removed a gameplay element you expect to see. Occam's razor doesn't work with your viewpoint however, as the most logical answer is it just isn't finished enough to show off or represent yet.

The difference is that the building company doesn't go and put the 'posts in the ground' on their company's promotional flyers. If you're promoting a product, it better be worth showing off. If not, it shouldn't be part of a promotional trailer.

Work in progress stuff should be shown as just that. Likewise, the whole modern "early access" thing seems to me like it's just a way for developers to make money being lazy and selling a product based on an idea alone, not on how it will actually perform. If this trailer has nothing to show for it, then I ask again: why even bother putting it up in the first place?

Edward850 said:

Likewise, you keep using the phrase "stripped out" implying they removed a gameplay element you expect to see.

I don't see how this is a bad thing... If this is supposed to be a remake of an existing game, wouldn't you expect people to draw comparisons to its source material?

Edward850 said:

the most logical answer is it just isn't finished enough to show off or represent yet.

That's YOUR interpretation, unless you can cite a source to back up that statement.

If you visit a baker, and you ask for a loaf of bread, and he hands you a slice of bread instead, you're not going to say "I'll just wait because I'm sure the rest of the bread is still to come". No, you would complain about the baker not meeting your expectations, and rightfully so. If they're expecting people to pay for their product at the end of the day, you have every right to be critical of it. Especially when it's a remake of an existing game. After all, their target audience is most likely going to fans of the original System Shock, because I don't think they're betting on the small margin of horror-fans to pad their wallets.

[Edward850]

Agentbromsnor said:

That's YOUR interpretation, unless you can cite a source to back up that statement.

http://forums.nightdivestudios.com/index.php?threads/system-shock-pre-alpha-video-feedback.108/#post-434

You also conveniently ignored my point about Occam's razor, so think about this; What's more likely going on here:
A bunch developers who are diehard fans of the original System Shock have decided in their design document to remove an iconic function of the original game with absolutely no internal infighting at all (you will always see internal infighting, it's unavoidable). OR what you are being shown is nothing more that a video intended to show backers that they have moved their production to UE4 and have shown off a few compiled assets?

Remember this is a kickstarter project, not a normal AAA game. The stakeholders are the public so videos like this are a lot more common. It's like how Unreal4 is being made where you could see the entire production pipeline and repo.

[dew]

Agentbromsnor said:

If you visit a baker, and you ask for a loaf of bread, and he hands you a slice of bread instead, you're not going to say "I'll just wait because I'm sure the rest of the bread is still to come". No, you would complain about the baker not meeting your expectations, and rightfully so.

This parable probably sounded a lot less retarded in your head.

[june gloom]

Agentbromsnor said:

If you visit a baker, and you ask for a loaf of bread, and he hands you a slice of bread instead, you're not going to say "I'll just wait because I'm sure the rest of the bread is still to come". No, you would complain about the baker not meeting your expectations, and rightfully so.

Congratulations. You've finally found something dumber than a car analogy.