Is this as fun as System Shock 2

[Slim_Cognito]

System Shock 2 was a masterpiece. I enjoyed the story and slowly exploring more and more of the ship. I don't get the same vibe from System Shock 1 Remake's trailer and videos so far. The enemies does look cool but is the whole game going to take place inside some neon tetris location?

[Depili]

There is a quite big difference on the tone of the original games, which is also carried to the remake. Basically SS1 was more of a shooter with some horror elements and SS2 is more focused to rpg horror and resource management.

The story is quite nice in SS1 and the audiologs are vell made, and you will be exploring more and more of a large space station as you go, so in that both of them are similiar. SS1 had larger and more maze like levels.

[Devoras]

System Shock 2 is still one of my favorite games I've ever played, and I had never played the first one. I didn't like this remake, it's nowhere near as good as system shock 2. I dropped it after 4 hours. I did enjoy the exploration in this game, and the color palette didn't bother me, I feel it works for the environment. I also liked the inventory management in this game. The story isn't anywhere near as good as system shock 2, however the audio logs are good and there is some environmental storytelling like in system shock 2, ie. bodies on the ground in some places, etc.

However what I really hate and was the dealbreaker is the horrible minigames that you have to go through, they're terrible. Particularly cyberspace, it's a simplistic and ugly horrible 3d shooter that you may have to repeat several times. Also the puzzles are a mess, at least unless you look up online how the puzzles actually work, the hard part is knowing what you're even looking at and supposed to be doing. Once you have that down the puzzles aren't that hard, but they're so badly designed visually that unless you specifically know what you're looking for and where it is, you're going to miss important information that you need to complete them. For instance, a pathway will be hidden behind a button that you will not see unless you know to specifically look for those hidden pathways, and even then you'll need to get really close to your monitor to see them, or a magnifying glass.

The thing I enjoyed most about the game was the exploration, I thought it was the best game I've played in the last decade for the exploration. Actually I might even go so far as to say the exploration is better than it was in system shock 2, but that's the only aspect of the game that I enjoyed. I only made it to the second level of the station and another horrible cyberspace minigame before I dropped it, so I don't know if it gets better or worse after the first couple of levels.

[Kalameet]

SS2 is IMHO an overall better experience.
While SS1feels and plays like a dungeon crawler set in a cramped (and somewhat ugly) maze, SS2 is a RPG and its levels are more developed, colorful, open and "original".

Even if SS1 got a whole remake, it still looks as clunky/flat as the original SS1. SS2 is a product of a different era.

[Stargoat]

I strongly disagree with the posts above. While I love SS2, I found the RPG elements to be somewhat lacking and a source of frustration more than anything else, and the original System Shock to be a more cohesive experience overall.

The narrative of System Shock makes more sense than its sequel, even if it isn't as spectacular or surprising. Both games respect your agency as a player, but System Shock really drives home the sense of confusion and helplessness, and the psychological aspect of the player character's redemption for a situation they are largely responsible for is entirely absent in SS2.

In terms of gameplay, SS1 is both more and less complex than its successor. You have more tactical freedom because you aren't locked into options based on a particular build, but there's not as much choice in general - it's mostly down to your own exploration, similar to Metroid. This also makes it a more balanced experience. Unlike SS2 where objectives can only really be completed in one specific way, there is a little bit of flexibility in SS1 with regards to the path you can take, which leads me to Cyberspace.

Cyberspace seems to catch a lot of flak for not being enjoyable, but it isn't supposed to be. It's supposed to be terrifying and disorienting, and something that you want to be engaged in only as necessary - that's why the 'Recall Escape' program exists; complete the objective and GTFO. There aren't actually a whole lot of mandatory Cyberspace segments, and if you pay attention to the clues the game gives you, it again respect's the player's judgement as to whether to risk the journey or not. It's another puzzle.

The puzzles are, incidentally, in both the original and remake, far and away better than the puzzles in System Shock 2 - whether the puzzle is 'how do I complete this objective' to the rewiring puzzles or navigation, SS1 really respects the player's ability to figure stuff out, and it's very satisfying to solve a puzzle not by blind luck/character stats (SS2's hacking puzzle) or by being explicitly told what to do (SS2's quest/story puzzles), but by your own ability.

The original System Shock has a (somewhat fair) reputation for being quite clunky to play. The remake, in contrast, plays beautifully. Combat is fun, there's some good platforming and exploration, and it looks great to boot (the post commenting that SS Remake is as graphically dull as the original is... confusing to say the least).

Ultimately, whether you enjoy SS1 or SS2 more is going to come down to your personal preference. Both are good games, and while there is definitely a huge amount of overlap in the kinds of experiences that they offer, there's still enough difference that it's worth playing both.

System Shock 2 did a lot that the original didn't, but System Shock explored some really interesting mechanics and ideas that games (including those it directly influenced) to this day have still not re-explored, and for that reason alone it's worth checking out. The remake is as good as any, perhaps an even a better, way to experience that.

[Depili]

system shock 2's biggest fault IMO is that the skill system is completely bonkers and it is quite easy to make non-viable characters

[Cynical]

Aside from the 1994 controls, horrible cyberspace, and SS2's excellent stealth mechanics that it inherited by being built on Thief's engine, SS1 is a better game than SS2, and the remake preserves everything that made SS1 better while fixing the controls and partially fixing cyberspace. SS1 is *far* less linear, and lets you approach tasks in the way you see fit for the most part; doesn't completely ♥♥♥♥ the bed for the entire last third of the game; SHODAN is actually a presence on the ship, and the game does a better job at making you feel like you're struggling against a malevolent AI that's taken control of a space station; and its level design is generally more interactive and more interesting.

[immodium]

SS1 had the better Shodan and story. Also Citadel Station is a far more memorable experience than the Von Braun.

[Stargoat]

Originally posted by immodium:

SS1 had the better Shodan and story. Also Citadel Station is a far more memorable experience than the Von Braun.

The Von Braun has its moments like the Engineering Rave Tunnel and the absolute horror show that is Hydroponics+.

That being said,
I was absolutely shattered by Flight Deck when I originally played SS1. I think that's the point where the malevolence of SHODAN is the most apparent. [SS1 spoilz]

The closest SS2 gets is SHODAN's reveal, which can be seen a mile away and her SS2 character is this weird quasi-ally right up until the end. On the other hand, I see SS2 being less about SHODAN and more about the Many, and they're super creepy. [SS2 spoilz]

[MrBananaGrabber]

No, this is vastly inferior to SS2. You're better off just playing Prey again instead of playing this.

[Zalugar]

Originally posted by MrBananaGrabber:

No, this is vastly inferior to SS2. You're better off just playing Prey again instead of playing this.

As someone who just played both the remake and then SS2 for the first time, I disagree. They do different things in different ways. Like in SS2, you get an extremely limited selection of weapons limited by character build and inventory; in SSR, you just get every weapon limited by inventory. Perks to skills are you can min-max weapon damage in SS2 with skill levels and modifications, where in SSR you can just get every weapon upgrade.

I'm not entirely sure how to put it in words, but I felt the desire to stealth a lot more in SSR than in SS2. I didn't really needed to peek around the corner in SS2 to see if any enemy was there because there was just kind of always an enemy there, even if I had cleared it a dozen times before. SS2 really rewards being very aggressive in combat, the best way to mitigate damage even. Especially since you can't lean and attack.

Hacking. I prefer player skill-based minigames over RNG percent based hacking/repair/modification. I would have loved trying to do pipe dream or something while hacking a turret trying to kill me. Not that turrets ended up ever being worth hacking.

Weapons having conditions was neat in concept for finding an early broken weapon, but in practical use I'd find a working version of that weapon so that I didn't need to repair the first one by the time I had the stats to use the thing. Weapons having conditions didn't particularly change my style of gameplay or add anything. If it broke, I'd repair it, and once I had enough repair tools with decent maintenance skill, I'd just maintenance it and never use repair again. SSR just doesn't have weapon condition outside of overheating.

SS2 is kind of floaty and the platforming is sluggish, such as holding spacebar to sometimes be able to climb a box and sometimes not, sliding a bit, and really needing to wriggle around just to enter and exit through one specific vent in hydroponics. But all the 'movement jank' is fine; I grew up playing janky control games and am fine learning to adapt to the controls rather than rant until they adapt to me.

I had fun with both games, don't get me wrong, but they're pretty different games. SS2 is definitely heavier on the item management (which I like), has more story elements including specific enemy lore through research, and I liked the multiple factions things it has going. But SSR definitely has better combat, and I preferred the level design in SSR as well. Has secret doors, too.

I did, however, completely skip everything Psi. That's for another playthrough sometime. I thought the game would forcibly restore my psi points somehow after drinking it all gone with booze and it just never did, hilariously.

Oh, but I will saying being able to kill enemies with cargo lifts in SS2 was a big plus. That was funny as could be.

[ZylonBane]

Originally posted by Zalugar:

Especially since you can't lean and attack.

False, unless you're talking about melee, but what sort of loon would try to melee around a corner?

[Zalugar]

Originally posted by ZylonBane:

False, unless you're talking about melee, but what sort of loon would try to melee around a corner?

While I did try that, every time I tried to lean and shoot, it would reset my position. Did have a few random mods installed, so it could've been any of those. Could still just run in and out of corners so it didn't really matter. Plus I eventually just adopted a zerg rush strategy anyway. I did also try to lean and melee attack, for the record. Can't make cheese without going through the proper steps.

Biggest use I got out of leaning was hacking turrets.

[ZylonBane]

Lean-shooting around corners is a very common tactic in SS2, so lord only knows how you manged to break it.