The problem with STEALTH in videogames

[SigilFey]

That said, it's hard to deny that it's immensely satisfying to roll around in the shadows and stab people, too. It'll be a tough balancing act.

Sure! And why not? It's a perfectly valid way to choose to play. Something that's become blurred over time is the concept of "multi-classing". Originally (PnP D&D), only a fighter could realistically charge in and taking enemies out. Everyone else was support. A cleric might be able to do that with certain enemies (undead, demons, zealots of an opposing faith, etc.). A mage would hang way...way back and begin whipping up the proverbial fireball, but if an angry squirrel bit him on the ankle, he would lose the spell or go down. A thief would either run up a tree and loose a few arrows...or just slink off into the shadows and stay there. He might sneak out toward the end of the combat to finish off one enemy with a backstab. See, none of those other characters were meant for combat originally.

Then, we started doing the Fighter / Mage, Fighter / Thief, Fighter / Cleric thing. THAT'S where the image of a thief in leather armor, dual-wielding daggers came from. Or a cleric in full plate armor wielding a giant mace. Or the chain-mailed warrior with an axe in one hand and glowing ball of magic engulfing the other. That was bloody fun, and it made combat bloody fun.

Now, every option has become Fighter / XYZ. I miss the days of the mage saving everyone from a group of bandits by throwing up an illusion and letting then just walk by. Or the cleric summoning a holy light to scare the snot out of a bunch of goblins and send them screaming for their holes. Or the thief telling everyone to stay put while he ran off alone into the woods, making little clicking and chittering noises to draw off a bear (only to make his way back later and explain that he led it to a nearby river and it was busy hunting fish.)

For all of their problems, I believe Bethesda is one of the few developers that still take pride in their work, and don't simply try to maximize profits for the publisher portion of Bethesda. They may try to adjust their games to appeal to a "wider audience", but they still care about making fun, immersive worlds for us to explore. You might not share my optimism, but I honestly believe that the stealth mechanics will only get better over time.

I hope they learned their lesson with the lackluster response to FO4. Personally, I didn't really care for it. The story was okay, but I found both the world (which was absolutely beautiful) and the gameplay to be incredibly monotonous and unfulfilling. I agree with you completely that the team is passionately driven, and it shows. I simply think that they've developed some bad habits over time. Maybe they're just tired of making inherently the same thing over and over again. Hm...maybe, they should try something totally new...! (I mean that with 50% of the snarkiness it seemingly carries.)

 

[Snowflakez]

-snip-

I wish we had room in our D&D campaign for one more! You sound like the ideal player. Just recently, my group pulled off a hell of an infiltration mission. It was the first time a plan we put together actually worked - amazingly well, too. TL;DR, we needed to use a spell to copy the contents of one book inside a guard barracks to an empty book that we had on-hand.

Less TL;DR:

Spoiler

We all have 5k bounties on our heads, so we had to take advantage of some powerful disguise magic on the part of our Mage (and me, the Warlock) and elaborately lure the guards away from the barracks to complete the mission. We had our Wizard tiefling run off about a mile away and throw a bunch of "bag of tricks" creatures in front of a tavern. She ordered them to chase her around the tavern (but not hurt her). This caused a HUGE ruckus, and made it all the easier for us to run up to the guard barracks in a panic, claiming there was some shit going down on the other side of the city. Every single guard ran out except 3, which we dispatched with a sleep spell.

There's plenty of hilarious details, but I'd rather not go too far off topic. My point is, I know exactly what you mean when you say you miss the PnP adventures where each person had a role to fill. I'd love to pick a "Thief" like character in an ES game and actually have dungeons and quests cater towards a non-lethal, stealthy play style more often.

Maybe they're just tired of making inherently the same thing over and over again. Hm...maybe, they should try something totally new...! (I mean that with 50% of the snarkiness it seemingly carries.)

That's actually exactly what I think is happening. They are getting bored of making the same thing over and over - Fallout and Elder Scrolls. Pete Hines actually said some time ago that the team has earned the respect of the publisher portion of Bethesda, and as a result, the ability to choose what project they want to work on next, instead of becoming the next Assassin's Creed. Cranking out the same games in a series over and over is enough to tire anyone out, even if it might be more profitable in the short term.

In other words, Publisher Bethesda doesn't force the Developer Bethesda to make stuff they don't want to make.

This is why they still have my respect, despite everything. They seem to treat their team with basic human decency, and it sounds like -- right now, anyway -- that team is working on what they want to work on. Whether that's this rumored "Starbreeze" space game (RPG?), or something else entirely, I don't know., but more power to them.


CDPR is much the same. Instead of pumping out a fourth Witcher game (Which, let's face it, would probably have been easier to make now that the engine is in place, and sold like hotcakes) they are delving into something completely new. Not only is Cyberpunk as a genre foreign territory for them, but the many, many new mechanics and styles of gameplay that go with it are as well. Stealth is certainly one of the key examples of that, especially since they haven't done stealth mechanics before.

I hope they learned their lesson with the lackluster response to FO4. Personally, I didn't really care for it. The story was okay, but I found both the world (which was absolutely beautiful) and the gameplay to be incredibly monotonous and unfulfilling.

Agreed. It just felt...Wrong. I loved the heck out of New Vegas and played it for hundreds of hours, and Oblivion and Skyrim for well over 1,000 hours each. Fallout 4 couldn't hold my attention for more than 60 or so - still, IMO, good value for the money, but not nearly as good as other Bethesda games.

 

[Suhiira]

This is almost perfectly indicative of my point. Stealth has transformed into Stealth Combat in the modern industry. Granted, the limited capabilities of the earliest software RPGs basically did this because they had to, and the habit has been around for a long time. But rather than getting off that track and back to the organic variety of "solutions" that PnP RPGs provided...most games have simply added more combat options (and better graphics). When it comes to stealth -- the whole point is to reach a resolution without combat. That's what stealth is. Even an "ambush" is not really "combat". Combat only occurs if the ambush fails. The opposing side is wiped out before they can react (which is why it's considered such a dirty and underhanded tactic).

Good job of pointing out the common (within the video game industry) total misrepresentation how stealth is used vs it's reality.

Another common problem is that in many games stealth is some sort of invisibility. This is more the result of lazy or rushed programming then anything else, but it's become so widely accepted and expected that real stealth ... a reduction (not elimination) of your chance of being spotted ... is often viewed as somehow cheating the player out of what they "should" have and "deserve".

I admit freely that most players are not going to be as interested in deep, diplomatic, dialogue options or planning out the intricacies of stealth missions as they will be in pulling a trigger and watching the blood spray.

This too is a HUGE part of the problem.
Most people have only played action games (especially the ones that call themselves "role playing" games) but really don't know, or care, about anything but the action to the point they often complain that role-play elements slow the game down and make it uninteresting.

Now, every option has become Fighter / XYZ. I miss the days of the mage saving everyone from a group of bandits by throwing up an illusion and letting then just walk by. Or the cleric summoning a holy light to scare the snot out of a bunch of goblins and send them screaming for their holes. Or the thief telling everyone to stay put while he ran off alone into the woods, making little clicking and chittering noises to draw off a bear (only to make his way back later and explain that he led it to a nearby river and it was busy hunting fish.)

You an me both, you an me both.

I guess this really points out the "problem" with most video games. They center around combat often to the exclusion of everything else, Diablo anyone?
Call of Duty? Team Fortress? DOTA 2?

 

[Snowflakez]

This too is a HUGE part of the problem.
Most people have only played action games (especially the ones that call themselves "role playing" games) but really don't know, or care, about anything but the action to the point they often complain that role-play elements slow the game down and make it uninteresting.

Honestly, that's fine. It's a different audience. You can't (And shouldn't) force them to enjoy a game like what I believe CP2077 will be (Heavy on the RP and story, like the Witcher 3). You can try to grab their interest, sure, but you probably won't keep it for as long as it might grip some of us. I spent hundreds of hours in the Witcher 2, and more than that in the Witcher 3 - but many of my friends only got a few days worth of playtime out of it before deciding they'd had their fill.

Same goes for stealth. Different games for different audiences, and that doesn't really mean their tastes are inferior or better.

And I don't really think it's much of a problem to combine the action-y style of the Elder Scrolls games with RPGs. After all, if it was just one or the other, these games might not have pulled the millions in that they have. They are popular for a reason, and that's partially due to their wider appeal. All that means is that the Elder Scrolls gamer are just "hybrid" titles. They don't try to be excellent stealth games, nor do they try to be excellent RPGs, nor do they try to be excellent action games.

They throw in a little of everything to appeal to everyone, and the formula works (I don't include the Fallout series here).

There are other games that lean one way or the other and specialize, but ES games are (ironically) a jack of all trades, so to speak, but a master of none. What they really nail down (IMO) is the immersion and the sense of pride and accomplishment™ players get from exploring the world. I'm not saying that style of creating games is better than CDPR's, but it's certainly no worse just because it isn't perfect in any one area.

 

[Suhiira]

Honestly, that's fine. It's a different audience. You can't (And shouldn't) force them to enjoy a game like what I believe CP2077 will be (Heavy on the RP and story, like the Witcher 3).

I totally agree !
But by the same token they shouldn't be trying to force me to enjoy their preferred style of gameplay.

I've said it before, if CP2077 turns out to be just another shooter with a few RP elements tacked on (Fallout 4 anyone?) I won't be bothering with it. I'm certain however many people will enjoy it.

 

[cyberpunkforever]

it would be great if it ofers both options, go stealth or just run and shoot
and not being punished by not using stealth lik in dishnored, that the character is weak and slow and only option is stealth
i hope we can use both styles and these work correctly


i'd like an option to sprint and shot at the same tim, like in Titanfall
and option to give order to companion and using stealth he attacks an enemy, like in Shadow of War

 

[Suhiira]

i'd like an option to sprint and shot at the same tim, like in Titanfall
and option to give order to companion and using stealth he attacks an enemy, like in Shadow of War

Trouble is, CP2020 uses fairly realistic physics and shooting mechanics, and we presume (no proof yet of course) CP2077 will do the same.
Try running and shooting at the same time in real life you'd be lucky to hit the broad side of a barn ... from the inside.

 

[Snowflakez]

Trouble is, CP2020 uses fairly realistic physics and shooting mechanics, and we presume (no proof yet of course) CP2077 will do the same.
Try running and shooting at the same time in real life you'd be lucky to hit the broad side of a barn ... from the inside.

I think it's pretty likely that moving and shooting makes its way to the game. Even more realistic shooters have it. It doesn't have to be accurate or effective, but if I need to run from one piece of cover to the next, using FNFF's/CP2020's "suppressive fire" type of tactic could be quite useful.

Basically, all I want to do with suppressive fire is cover an area with bullets, not actually hit someone who is ducking behind cover and only popping out occasionally.

The need to stand still and shoot seems archaic from a gameplay perspective (to me). A few of the Resident Evil games (if not all, I never played the whole series) use that mechanic, and that's really only because it's survival horror.

Realism is one thing, gameplay is another. If I can move and shoot in real life (I can) I should be able to do it in the game, basically. As I said, it doesn't have to be effective, but it should exist. Besides, cybernetic arms and legs are a thing, so stabilizing your gun while moving seems much less of a problem in that case.

But that's just me. Personally, I could care less if it's in or not. If CP2077 really does have the ultra-lethal shooting mechanics from the tabletop, I'm most definitely not going to be running around like a madman, hoping bullets will magically whiz by me.

 

[sv3672]

It could depend on the player's character skills, a character without combat experience would be inaccurate under anything but ideal conditions, while accuracy penalties would be reduced for a combat oriented role, so running and shooting at the same time would become a viable tactic, for example.

 

[Loostreaks]

I read somewhere that CP2077 would have STEALTH in it and this has me worried.

The main problem with stealth in games is that the game usually encourages you through its story and reward system to go stealth, like in for instance Deus Ex MD.
The problem is that you miss out on all the cool weapons and abilities when you take the stealth option as you never get to fire your weapon against enemies. The stealth gameplay of hiding and memorizing guard patrol routs has been done to death and is not a compelling gameplay mechanic and if you are discovered by the enemy you usually reload a previous checkpoint and start over.
I say lets skip stealth all together and go out guns blazing instead.

With that approach, they'd need to design gameplay entirely differently, and something that wouldn't really work well with intent behind Pondsmith's system.
I agree that rpgs, Fallout 1/2 in particular, have terrible and extremely simplistic stealth systems.
What I'm hoping is that we'll see more interlocked/active systems between enemy AI and player actions. If you disable power/light/security/take out too many guards/etc...all of this would affect one another.
I can't really see this as guns blazing game...more about misdirection, containing conflicts, manipulating, knowing the environment. MGSV ( dynamic mission, action to stealth flow)+Shadow Tactics ( level design and using the environment) essentially. Those two are best examples of action stealth and tactics.
Really hope CDPR's developers took time to study them.

 

[Suhiira]

Realism is one thing, gameplay is another. If I can move and shoot in real life (I can) I should be able to do it in the game, basically. As I said, it doesn't have to be effective, but it should exist.

I don't recall saying you couldn't Run 'n Gun, I merely said don't expect to hit anything except by accident.

This is one of the commonly implemented shooter game mechanics that's a total and complete immersion breaker for me.
Don't get me wrong, I understand why it's usually in games, it's all about action, the more that a player can do the better; bunny-hopping circle-strafing at a full sprint ... and oh yes, the recent incorporation of wall running.

 

[sv3672]

This is one of the commonly implemented shooter game mechanics that's a total and complete immersion breaker for me.
Don't get me wrong, I understand why it's usually in games, it's all about action, the more that a player can do the better; bunny-hopping circle-strafing at a full sprint ... and oh yes, the recent incorporation of wall running.

It is not realistic to be able to defeat hundreds of skilled and well equipped enemies as a one man army in any case, one way or the other, action games need to sacrifice realism to make it possible. Whether it is by allowing the player's character to survive many shots, or to heal the damage any number of times in a few seconds with easily available consumable items, or with regenerating health, or with limited and exploitable AI (stealth is a special case where it is implemented on purpose as a complex gameplay mechanism), or allowing Doom-like "run and gun" arcade shooting, or, if everything else fails, letting one survive death by reloading saves as often as necessary, games artificially even the odds in the player's favor. Of course, how it is done exactly, it does depend on the (sub-)genre of the game.

 

[Suhiira]

It is not realistic to be able to defeat hundreds of skilled and well equipped enemies as a one man army in any case, one way or the other, action games need to sacrifice realism to make it possible.

And just why does a game need to allow you to be able defeat armies single-handedly?
Personally I get a lot more satisfaction out of defeating a couple worthy opponents then slaughtering 500 cannon fodder.

 

[sv3672]

And just why does a game need to allow you to be able defeat armies single-handedly?

It probably sells better.

 

[exogenesis09]

It is not realistic to be able to defeat hundreds of skilled and well equipped enemies as a one man army in any case, one way or the other, action games need to sacrifice realism to make it possible. Whether it is by allowing the player's character to survive many shots, or to heal the damage any number of times in a few seconds with easily available consumable items, or with regenerating health, or with limited and exploitable AI (stealth is a special case where it is implemented on purpose as a complex gameplay mechanism), or allowing Doom-like "run and gun" arcade shooting, or, if everything else fails, letting one survive death by reloading saves as often as necessary, games artificially even the odds in the player's favor. Of course, how it is done exactly, it does depend on the (sub-)genre of the game.

First of all the game is not realistic.. Second action games is trying to make it close to realistic because it’s part of the graphics to connect and affect Systems such as Combat. If i am going to get to choose for combat on shooting. I’d like to have smooth character animation as Uncharted 4 and fluid combination combat experience of DMC, Witcher 3 and Bloodborne. Fast paced as any Esports Game and Slow Paced as any Singleplayer games that’s my dream to have a such a game where Singleplayer and Multiplayer Games gap to each other is not far. Well I guess I could say one of them is Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2? They are both become successful at Singleplayer and Multiplayer. That’s why I respect and hard fan of Blizzard since I started playing games. (Yes both games is one of my best games of all time)

i truly wished that CDPROJEKT Red will take this path too but more on Singleplayer. Maybe later they will do Blizzard did 15 years ago then maybe we going to have a Multiplayer. You may not a fan of Multiplayer but that’s the reality. Multiplayer what makes Game keeps alive for years/decades.

 

[Snowflakez]

With that approach, they'd need to design gameplay entirely differently, and something that wouldn't really work well with intent behind Pondsmith's system.
I agree that rpgs, Fallout 1/2 in particular, have terrible and extremely simplistic stealth systems.
What I'm hoping is that we'll see more interlocked/active systems between enemy AI and player actions. If you disable power/light/security/take out too many guards/etc...all of this would affect one another.
I can't really see this as guns blazing game...more about misdirection, containing conflicts, manipulating, knowing the environment. MGSV ( dynamic mission, action to stealth flow)+Shadow Tactics ( level design and using the environment) essentially. Those two are best examples of action stealth and tactics.
Really hope CDPR's developers took time to study them.

I completely agree.

Also, after having read the CP2020 rulebook in more detail, it's clear that a huge emphasis is placed on ambushing and caution over 1v10 firefights. This is primarily because of the ultra deadly nature of the tabletop (it's super easy to die if you try to go in guns blazing). I know this game isn't going to be as brutal as 2020 (that wouldn't translate well to video game form), but if they care at all about the source material, I think they'll try do something like you said here.

Simplistic stealth would suck, though. I'm hoping for depth.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Simplistic stealth would suck, though. I'm hoping for depth.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with "depth", but... Gotta remember that an RPG -optimally- is like a swiss army knife, lots of tools that all serve their purpose but none matches the indiviual specialist tools (i.e. the knife is not a kitchen knife).

Highly indepth stealth is usually only found in games specifically crafted for it. An open RPG that needs to take a lot of approaches, characterbuilds and player whims into account shouldn't be demanded of that (just like combat shouldn't be demanded to be that of the 'bestest' shooter around -- or a shooter at all). Going that route with a game like this might lead to a weird gameworld that feels too "designed" and specific (i.e. levels that look clearly like shooting ranges or stealth ranges) which is just jarring.

I think there needs to be allowed to be some looseness to it as to how it works based on the character systems (there the whole range of the skill ot take into account unless they've decided to oversimplify or get rid of those -- neither of which would be surprising in this day and age) and more "emergent" , non-scripted results, rather than going for some sort of razor sharp and specific design.

 

[Suhiira]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with "depth", but... Gotta remember that an RPG -optimally- is like a swiss army knife, lots of tools that all serve their purpose but none matches the indiviual specialist tools (i.e. the knife is not a kitchen knife).

Highly indepth stealth is usually only found in games specifically crafted for it. An open RPG that needs to take a lot of approaches, characterbuilds and player whims into account shouldn't be demanded of that (just like combat shouldn't be demanded to be that of the 'bestest' shooter around -- or a shooter at all). Going that route with a game like this might lead to a weird gameworld that feels too "designed" and specific (i.e. levels that look clearly like shooting ranges or stealth ranges) which is just jarring.

Excellent point.
While it's relatively (relatively ...) easy to design a game around a single theme, stealth for instance, it's virtually impossible to design one around many because of contradictory requirements. CP2077 will not, can not, simultaneously be the best stealth and shooter and open world and story driven and character freedom and etc. and etc. game ever made. Anyone expecting it to be is delusional.

 

[Snowflakez]

Certainly not asking for CP2077 to have the same stealth mechanics as a stealth game. Not sure how anyone could get that from what I said. I just said I wanted depth - that is very different. I'm asking for mechanics beyond the ultra-simplistic stealth you see in games like the Elder Scrolls titles. I do not think this is a big ask, being that stealth and ambushing is a central part of CP2020's gameplay.

Distraction items (not hard to implement), the ability to shoot out or interfere with light sources (even GTA V has this for its very brief stealth encounters, and that game is about as far from a stealth title as you can get), and stealth skills/perks that go beyond "you're 30% harder to see now, have fun".

Since hacking is also another big part of CP2020, I'd expect it to make its way to the stealth system in some way. I won't be disappointed if it doesn't, but it would make sense. Hacking into turrets, cameras, etc. seems like common sense for a game in this setting, especially after reading the 2020 rulebook. Note, I'm not talking Watch Dogs level hacking here, just stuff like "oh you took this perk, now you can hack turrets to shoot baddies instead of friendlies, or oh this perk lets you toggle cameras off and on". That sort thing.

Regarding "specific design", I also wasn't at all referring to specific "Stealth" or "Action" sections. In fact, I really, really hope that doesn't happen outside of story missions where it might make sense. To that end, Bethesda's approach to level design was just fine, in my opinion. If I stumble upon a cave, I chose how to proceed, the game didn't tell me "here's how you're going to do this because we designed this level in a specific way", outside of a few specific quest-specific areas.

Plenty of darkness to sneak in, plenty of more open areas to take down baddies toe-to-toe, nice mixtures of high and low ground for archery, magic, and other shenanigans. It was just natural, and I totally want that in 2077.

Anyway, back on topic... Stuff like nonlethal takedowns (or indeed "takedowns" at all), tranquilizer/stun weapons, etc. would be pleasant additions, but I most definitely don't expect them, nor am I entirely convinced they'd work well in an RPG setting. Those are mental stretch goals - if the game has a solid baseline system in place, that's the sort of thing I'd expect mods to add in later on, for example.

Of course CDPR can't do everything here, I'm well aware of that. But, again, I must reiterate that stealth/ambush mechanics are very much a core part of the experience in 2020, and unlike many other features that will inevitably get cut, stealth actually translates just fine over to video games.

 

[Suhiira]

Distraction items (not hard to implement), the ability to shoot out or interfere with light sources (even GTA V has this for its very brief stealth encounters, and that game is about as far from a stealth title as you can get), and stealth skills/perks that go beyond "you're 30% harder to see now, have fun".

The problem is many of these mechanics also require unrealistic reactions from guards.
"Gee, that's the 4th time I've heard a sound from over there, no reason to be at all concerned."
"Damn, another lights gone out, that's three in the last two minutes, no point worrying about it."

Plenty of darkness to sneak in, plenty of more open areas to take down baddies toe-to-toe, nice mixtures of high and low ground for archery, magic, and other shenanigans. It was just natural, and I totally want that in 2077.

Umm ... CP2077 isn't a midevil setting, there are plenty of ways to see/sense in the dark.
In fact if I were to design a secure location in CP2077 I'd make it pitch black and use thermal, motion, and low intensity radar sensors. Get past that sucka!