The problem with STEALTH in videogames

+
It seems like we're going in circles here.

Suhiira;n9966121 said:
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."

Look, you have to eventually balance gameplay with realism.

We can shoot down ideas all day because they're unrealistic, but then we'd be going back to the discussion we just had regarding complexity of stealth in a game. For all I know you could be playing devil's advocate, or just bringing up another thing to consider, but if your point of view is that you don't want the game to be a stealth game (because that would shift the focus - something I agree with, by the way) but you also don't want "unrealistic" stealth mechanics (which you're going to have to have at least a few of, since the game isn't a dedicated stealth game) I don't think it's possible for anyone to win here.

There has to be some compromise. I can guarantee you that CDPR isn't going to make this revolutionary new enemy AI that can adapt realistically to every situation... Not only would that be incredibly difficult (and maybe even impossible with our current level of tech, though I don't know for sure) and sap resources from other parts of the game, but you also want the player to have fun and occasionally feel like a badass. That's at the very core of Cyberpunk, and indeed roleplaying in general. Note - that does not mean having them go on a 1v50 stealth mission and successfully kill every single enemy without anyone realizing it.

On top of all that, we've already had stealth games where the enemies remember past disturbances and encounters - the Thief series had that, if I'm remembering things correctly. It's not that difficult to do.

From a gameplay perspective, it would result in the enemies searching for much longer and being much more thorough after the 2nd time a sound is made (or even after the 1st). If they actually saw you and a fight broke out briefly, after which you disappear into the shadows, the "alarm level" (so to speak) could be set on "alert" for 24 in-game hours, or something to that effect. I think Dishonored had one situation where an entire building would go on lockdown once you were discovered. Maybe something like that could be implemented.

But now we're getting into the "detailed stealth mechanics" that you guys don't seem to be a fan of in a more general RPG. If you want ultra realistic stealth, there are plenty of stealth games for you to play. If you're OK with mildly realistic stealth that doesn't come at the cost of other aspects of the game (and the overall RPG focus), then you will probably (hopefully) enjoy whatever CDPR comes up with.

Suhiira;n9966121 said:
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!

I never said it was a medieval setting.

I know there's a lot of advancement between 2020 and 2077 (As I have actually said on numerous occasions), but not every enemy is going to have access to the tech you mention, and a stealth player with the ability to hack could pretty easily disable radars, sensors and thermal cameras.

If you are walking into a warehouse with basic thugs that don't have much tech (due to being against it, or just being broke as hell), I see no reason lighting shouldn't play a role in sneaking about.

And anyway, the 2020 rulebook doesn't even lay out many rules for stealth, so CDPR can really do whatever the heck they want. All it goes into is ambushing and backstabs in the combat section, and a little bit about the Stealth skill itself. Googling Cyberpunk 2020 stealth rules doesn't turn up much of interest, either, just a few people discussing what they do in their own campaigns.
 
Last edited:
Snowflakez;n9965571 said:
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 was exaggerating to underline the point (plus, I didn't know what you meant with depth or simplicity -- Skyrim's detection mechanic, for example, is not completely out of place even if it might need some tweaking). People have (and have had) the tendency to put out "I'd love the game to have [insert specific feature of a specific game built specifically for that said feature]" kind of suggestions. And then there's the thing that if you make one feature specifically heavyhanded, it tends to overshadow the other features (see stealth vs combat in the new Deus Ex games for an example, or look at how Divinity Original Sin games boast about "PnP levels of freedom" but the combat aspect is so overpowering that you hardly get to enjoy anything else for stressing over how hard your characters can hit).

In my mind it's not at all important that this or that game did this or that feature one way or another; but what matters is how can a feature be implemented with this games foundation (PnP RPG roots and cRPG implementation -- in case those are still at play in more ways than just nominally) in mind regardless of if some other game did it better or worse.
 
Suhiira;n9966121 said:
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."

These specific issues are not that hard to solve, AI alertness could accumulate over time, and/or have a minimum level that is raised permanently after detecting some serious anomaly like a dead body. The classic Thief games have these to some extent, more so in Deadly Shadows, even if the reactions are often minor. But players are not bothered too much by the lack of realism if it is not to the extent of something like NPCs saying "it was nothing" not long after being shot with arrows in Skyrim, and it may make the gameplay worse if the player is punished for using the stealth mechanics (which may be why guards comment on the lights going out in the Thief series, sometimes even relight them, but there are no real severe consequences).
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9968331 said:
I was exaggerating to underline the point (plus, I didn't know what you meant with depth or simplicity -- Skyrim's detection mechanic, for example, is not completely out of place even if it might need some tweaking). People have (and have had) the tendency to put out "I'd love the game to have [insert specific feature of a specific game built specifically for that said feature]" kind of suggestions. And then there's the thing that if you make one feature specifically heavyhanded, it tends to overshadow the other features (see stealth vs combat in the new Deus Ex games for an example, or look at how Divinity Original Sin games boast about "PnP levels of freedom" but the combat aspect is so overpowering that you hardly get to enjoy anything else for stressing over how hard your characters can hit).

In my mind it's not at all important that this or that game did this or that feature one way or another; but what matters is how can a feature be implemented with this games foundation (PnP RPG roots and cRPG implementation -- in case those are still at play in more ways than just nominally) in mind regardless of if some other game did it better or worse.

Hopefully by this point enough people have read a few of the things that I've said to know that I'm very much aware of the risks associated with going too far in one direction or another. Too much roleplaying and dialogue and you alienate a certain part of the playerbase, too much stealth and you alienate another... so on and so forth. I totally agree that it's a bit of a balancing act, and it's important not to be too heavy-handed with any one element of the game. I do think dialogue may play an important role, though, just because it's CDPR we're talking about.

My suggestions were just that - suggestions. I was merely asking for a more sophisticated stealth system from CDPR than what we saw in Skyrim. I also agree that Skyrim's detection mechanic is just fine, I just think with so much tech and it being a totally different type of RPG (this isn't a Skyrim-level sandbox, probably), more resources may be able to be dedicated to a more in-depth stealth system.

Not Deus Ex-level, not Splinter Cell-level, just something deeper than standard that has been established in games like Skyrim and (god forbid) Fallout 4. I think CDPR can pull it off. I mean, if you're playing a hacker character, wouldn't it be a bit weird to be in a high-security area filled with cameras, turrets and lights without the ability to do anything to them? It might be fine from a development standpoint (limited resources and overall RPG focus), but that would be pretty strange for the player.

kofeiiniturpa;n9968331 said:
...or look at how Divinity Original Sin games boast about "PnP levels of freedom" but the combat aspect is so overpowering that you hardly get to enjoy anything else for stressing over how hard your characters can hit).

I feel the need to emphasize how much I agree with this. I loved both Original Sin 1 & 2, but combat was way too frequently one of the only ways to get through an encounter. The stealth system was atrocious and felt completely out of place (A walking bush/rock? Really? I know the game's humorous, but come on...) and don't even get me started on the original game's insanely horrible rock-paper-scissors dialogue system (Even with an AI companion). Thank god that was scrapped in the sequel.

sv3672;n9968341 said:
These specific issues are not that hard to solve, AI alertness could accumulate over time, and/or have a minimum level that is raised permanently after detecting some serious anomaly like a dead body. The classic Thief games have these to some extent, more so in Deadly Shadows, even if the reactions are often minor. But players are not bothered too much by the lack of realism if it is not to the extent of something like NPCs saying "it was nothing" not long after being shot with arrows in Skyrim, and it may make the gameplay worse if the player is punished for using the stealth mechanics (which may be why guards comment on the lights going out in the Thief series, sometimes even relight them, but there are no real severe consequences).

Yes, precisely. This. This is the point I'm trying to make.

But, again, that conflicts with Suh's (understandable) aversion to making the game too stealth-focused, so it's really not possible to simultaneously satisfy both arguments.

I'll gladly take somewhat unrealistic stealth (with a wee bit more depth than Skyrim's system, perhaps?) if it means the combat, hacking, dialogue, story and world aren't compromised (Due to not going too hard in the stealth direction).
 
Last edited:
Snowflakez;n9968411 said:
Hopefully by this point enough people have read a few of the things that I've said to know that I'm very much aware of the risks associated with going too far in one direction or another.

Haha, don't count on people keeping a tap on you. I've had to repeat and clarify my position(s) since day one. :D

Snowflakez;n9968411 said:
Too much roleplaying and dialogue and you alienate a certain part of the playerbase,

Well, the notion of an RPG needing to be careful to not alienate people who do not like RPG's with too much roleplaying elements sounds a bit silly to me, but I suppose in this day and age it is a valid one.

You can add RPG elements to any feature through the character systems, of course, so it's rarely a matter of will X overpower the RPG side of the game if implemented, but more about why does it do so (if it does) when it really doesn't have to.
 
kofeiiniturpa;n9968511 said:
Well, the notion of an RPG needing to be careful to not alienate people who do not like RPG's with too much roleplaying elements sounds a bit silly to me, but I suppose in this day and age it is a valid one.

You can add RPG elements to any feature through the character systems, of course, so it's rarely a matter of will X overpower the RPG side of the game if implemented, but more about why does it do so (if it does) when it really doesn't have to.

Yeah, I agree. In an ideal world, that wouldn't be the case, but for better or worse, RPGs have become mainstream. People are clearly fine with how the Witcher 3 handled it (if it's success is anything to go by), though, so I'd expect something similar in CP2077 regarding the amount and frequency of dialogue scenes.

Basically, I understand that it's important to balance everything. CP2077 doesn't need to be stealth-focused, and it doesn't need to be combat-focused. Having good mechanics for both is enough, it doesn't need to be the best in its class in any one area.

Dialogue and roleplaying should obviously be where the focus is, I'm just saying there is such a thing as "too much" from an overall success standpoint, especially in a game that chooses to cater to other playstyles as well. The Witcher 2 was very popular, for example, and was almost entirely dialogue-focused. The other mechanics (including the combat) were mediocre at best, the story, dialogue and roleplay were areas where the game really shined. However, players didn't really have many other things to do other than get to the next dialogue scene, so it was a take it or leave it type scenario. If you don't like super dialogue-heavy games, you probably wouldn't enjoy the Witcher 2.

As a result of that focus, it didn't have the wider appeal or success that TW3 had. Part of this is undoubtedly due to clever marketing, but the open world, more accessible combat and the more in-depth potion/crafting system CDPR implemented in TW3 all played important roles in its success. If players didn't want to go through the main story, they could just ride around, collecting crafting recipes and ingredients and slaying tough beasts in shorter Witcher contracts.

What really blows my mind is that CDPR still managed to retain the excellent RPG experience TW2 provided without sacrificing all of this new stuff.
 
That's probably true. I don't like to make a lot of Witcher comparisons here, though. I'm not a superstitious person, but one of my biggest concerns for CP2077 is that it's just "Witcher 3 with guns" in a similiar fashion as Fallout 3 was just "Oblivion with guns" (following the success of the other franchise, not the ideals of the one being used); that the aesthetic changes but the game doesn't in any meaningful way.
 
kofeiiniturpa;n9968761 said:
That's probably true. I don't like to make a lot of Witcher comparisons here, though. I'm not a superstitious person, but one of my biggest concerns for CP2077 is that it's just "Witcher 3 with guns" in a similiar fashion as Fallout 3 was just "Oblivion with guns" (following the success of the other franchise, not the ideals of the one being used); that the aesthetic changes but the game doesn't in any meaningful way.

Understandable. I only bring up the Witcher to show the overall split of RPG/combat/etc. The only thing I really want to be carried over is story and side quest quality. Everything else can be scrapped and made anew, as far as I'm concerned.

But yes, that's a valid fear. I don't think it'll ultimately come to pass, though. It seems like CDPR is really aiming for something far more ambitious than TW3 here. The post apocalyptic setting of F3 gave Bethesda more leeway to make it "Oblivion with guns", because of the very low NPC density and the lack of any major cities or other settlements.

With CP2077...It'll be tougher for CDPR to do that, I think. We're talking about a sprawling city with an awful lot of people, not to mention what sounds like horizontal movement with aerodynes and planes and the like (though we've already argued that topic to death and back). I'm not saying it can't happen, but CDPR will have a lot more justifying to do if it does, compared to Bethesda.
 
Snowflakez;n9968301 said:
Look, you have to eventually balance gameplay with realism.

We can shoot down ideas all day because they're unrealistic, but then we'd be going back to the discussion we just had regarding complexity of stealth in a game. For all I know you could be playing devil's advocate, or just bringing up another thing to consider, but if your point of view is that you don't want the game to be a stealth game (because that would shift the focus - something I agree with, by the way) but you also don't want "unrealistic" stealth mechanics (which you're going to have to have at least a few of, since the game isn't a dedicated stealth game) I don't think it's possible for anyone to win here.
Primarily playing "Devils Advocate".
And considering these points is necessary (IMHO) otherwise just do what many games do, make stealth some sort of invisibility or quick-time event. Certainly functional solutions, if not what I'd consider good ones. And yes, gameplay does, must, win out over realism. But just because it's a game doesn't you should totally ignore realism in favor of the most fun gameplay option.

Snowflakez;n9968301 said:
I know there's a lot of advancement between 2020 and 2077 (As I have actually said on numerous occasions), but not every enemy is going to have access to the tech you mention, and a stealth player with the ability to hack could pretty easily disable radars, sensors and thermal cameras.
Nope.
Unless they do something totally stupid and put the controls of the security system on a public or even local net. And any fool that did anything of the of the sort in would last about 2 seconds in the security business. Such systems are hard as hell to bypass ... that's why they are called "Security Systems"

If the place you want to enter has that good a system your options really boil down to "Shoot your way in" or "Deception".
Pay off an "Inside Man", get false IDs/uniforms/whatever and "stealth" in in plain sight, create a distraction elsewhere in the facility, hire a Rockerboy to start a riot and blend in with the crowd, etc. etc.

Snowflakez;n9968301 said:
If you are walking into a warehouse with basic thugs that don't have much tech (due to being against it, or just being broke as hell), I see no reason lighting shouldn't play a role in sneaking about.
Totally agreed.
But that doesn't mean classic stealth is going to, or should, work everywhere and in every situation.
By making some situations differ you add a huge element of immersion to a game. The standard solutions do no work, time to get creative.

sv3672;n9968341 said:
These specific issues are not that hard to solve, <clip>
No, they're not, and that was part of my point. So few games every try.
If you want a "good" stealth system in your game the easy solution isn't (probably) going to be the way to implement one.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9968511 said:
Well, the notion of an RPG needing to be careful to not alienate people who do not like RPG's with too much roleplaying elements sounds a bit silly to me, but I suppose in this day and age it is a valid one.
The problem is that not alienating the majority of the mass market action game crowd means watering down the RPG elements to merely superficial levels.
I say ... fugg 'em.
It's an RPG, don't expect/demand that it play like an action game.

GTA5 works pretty damn well in that it's an open world action game where you can do pretty much as you please with minimal consequences. CP2077 does not, should not, be the same sort of game.
 
Last edited:
Suhiira;n9969331 said:
The problem is that not alienating the majority of the mass market action game crowd means watering down the RPG elements to merely superficial levels.
I say ... fugg 'em.
It's an RPG, don't expect/demand that it play like an action game.

GTA5 works pretty damn well in that it's an open world action game where you can do pretty much as you please with minimal consequences. CP2077 does not, should not, be the same sort of game.

I agree, but I'm saying I think we can have the best of both worlds. I think we can have an excellent RPG with good combat and good stealth (not "phenomenal", mind you). The Witcher 3's combat was very fun and well-done, IMO, and more than satisfying. Of course, that was a melee system, so adding both stealth and shooting to the mix will be tricky... but I have faith that CDPR can pull it off.

I also agree that CP2077 shouldn't be the same sort of game as GTA V. I think the only reason that comparison ever comes up is because CDPR has said they want CP2077 to be more of a sandbox than TW3. That could mean any number of things, really, but without definitive statements one way or the other, people are going to speculate.
 
Snowflakez;n9969441 said:
I agree, but I'm saying I think we can have the best of both worlds. I think we can have an excellent RPG with good combat and good stealth (not "phenomenal", mind you). The Witcher 3's combat was very fun and well-done, IMO, and more than satisfying.

Just to clarify. What exactly do you mean by ”good” here? Good in what context? As separate entities (”good RPG” + ”good stealth/combat”) or as a unified gameplay experience (”good RPG stealth and good RPG combat)? Because one can understand that both both ways.

I mean, as with your example, Witcher 3’s combat was just a hack & slash (with very little RPG in it) that would’ve worked just fine (if not better) even without any of the hamfisted character perks and XP it had. By that merit, would good combat in CP mean a good and slick FPS game combat in your book (like, say, Gears of War or Battlefield)?

Suhiira;n9969331 said:
The problem is that not alienating the majority of the mass market action game crowd means watering down the RPG elements to merely superficial levels.
I say ... fugg 'em.
It's an RPG, don't expect/demand that it play like an action game.

Agreed. There is enough action games existing and upcoming, but too few honest cRPGs.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9970151 said:
Just to clarify. What exactly do you mean by ”good” here? Good in what context? As separate entities (”good RPG” + ”good stealth/combat”) or as a unified gameplay experience (”good RPG stealth and good RPG combat)? Because one can understand that both both ways.

I mean, as with your example, Witcher 3’s combat was just a hack & slash (with very little RPG in it) that would’ve worked just fine (if not better) even without any of the hamfisted character perks and XP it had. By that merit, would good combat in CP mean a good and slick FPS game combat in your book (like, say, Gears of War or Battlefield)?

Both, I suppose. I think it's possible to have good stealth and combat mechanics that both stand on their own as fun experiences, while also intertwining them well with the RPG systems. Note - when I say "well", I mean "generally good" not "perfect". Personally, I didn't really have a problem with the Witcher 3's combat system, and felt it was very much affected by the RPG systems. Not all of the perks were great, of course, but most of them I liked, especially the combat and magic trees (I think most people agree the potion tree was garbage). They unlocked new abilities (for both combat and magic trees), damage increases and a few other things as well.

What exactly makes you say it would have worked better without perks and XP? Just curious. I certainly wouldn't have enjoyed it as much if all I could do was dodge, parry and slash. Using alternate Quen to heal up in a tough fight, alternate Aard to free up some space for maneuvering, etc. felt great to me.

To answer your first question about what I mean by "good", I mean..Well, good. I didn't expect to need to explain it. Somewhere between Skyrim-level stealth and Deus Ex-level stealth would be "Good" in my book, as it probably would be in most people's books. It does not need to be too advanced (Here's 30 stealth gadgets to use) nor too simplistic (stab the dude because you're behind him and stuff). Some middle ground seems do-able.

Shooting combat is a different story. Frankly, I don't play many shooters. I don't usually like them unless they have other things to enjoy (stories, sandbox elements). I guess one decent shooting game I know of is GTA V. It had good shooting mechanics. They weren't particularly advanced, but they worked well. Point your gun, shoot the bad guy. Take cover. Shoot the bad guy some more. Reload. Do it again. It all felt smooth to play. CDPR will probably tweak this quite a bit (or do something totally different), but I'd be happy with that.

All of that said, I don't think we're going to see true "RPG combat" and "RPG stealth". I think anyone who is actually expecting some sort of D10 or D20 RPG system here for stealth checks and combat rolls will be in for a rude awakening come release.
 
Last edited:
Snowflakez;n9970171 said:
What exactly makes you say it would have worked better without perks and XP?

The character systems felt they were more of an afterthought (I found them ineffective and nearly useless). I lieu of how the character systems did work (no how they could’ve) I think the game would’ve worked better with just gear progression. A narrative heavy action adventure with some CYOA elements and open world simulation, instead of pretending to be a bigass RPG with some fanservice elements loosely harkening back to the genre label.

That might sound harsh, but it’s not a slight towards neither the game nor its makers. Just how the experience opened up to me.

To answer your first question about what I mean by "good", I mean..Well, good. I didn't expect to need to explain it.

Your ”good”, my ”good”, and that other guys idea of ”good” might not coincide.

All of that said, I don't think we're going to see true "RPG combat" and "RPG stealth". I think anyone who is actually expecting some sort of D10 or D20 RPG system here for stealth checks and combat rolls will be in for a rude awakening come release.

I expect to ultimately be disappointed. I don’t have much trust in big releases anymore. I do have a lot of ’fingers crossed’ hopes and wishes, though.

It’s obviously not going to be a dicerolling game either, but given what has been said about it, I think it would be fair (even if not realistic) to expect a game that at least tries to nod towards its RPG heritage and sport a versatile and comprehensive set of charactersystems that make an actual gameplay difference instead of merely some fanservice namedrops on a modern overstreamlined perk chart slammed on top of the same gameplay as any other similiar game RPG or not.
 
I'll keep pushing for the dual combat system.
The default system is basically shooter mechanics, as an alternative at the start of a new game you can choose to have a pause option (like say DA had) so you could stop the action at will and plan your next move. AND in this second system character skills, not player ones, are used to determine hit probability ... some sort of tab targeting as well.

Keeping the two systems separate, you can't use both in the same game playthru. should keep everyone happy.
You don't like shooter ... you have the option to play the game as a non-shooter, you don't like RPG combat, again your game doesn't use it.
I really laugh at the shooter fans that complain about VATS in Fallout 4, no one is forcing you to use it.
 
The number one problem with stealth in video games is like any other problem in video games, number one is disregarding history. If developers never played Thief, the most advanced stealth game ever made since it's release in 1998, then what kind of topic is this? Not very productive one.
 
To me the number one problem with stealth is enemies' behavior in general, specially the following problems:
  • enemies recognizing the player footsteps a mile away
  • enemies methodically patrolling from one corner to the other without looking around or behind them (like never seriously?)
  • enemies returning right back to routine after seeing something extremely suspicious "Oh look a dead body! Guess everything is alright."
  • enemies shooting the player with high accuracy with inhuman reacting speed when spotting the player (perhaps they should react in a more human way?)
  • enemies not changing their tactics and not reacting properly when their buddies are disappearing one by one (radio checking anyone?)
  • and lastly, for the love of all that is stealth...enemies that only react to things around them and don't look for the player, specially when they know that the player is near (enemies should be making group formations to watch for their flanks)







Shadow of mordor is a great example of good enemies reaction when spotting the player, since enemies there show surprise when seeing the player. The only problem is that they do it everytime, so it gets easy for players to kill enemies.

The Metro series are also a nice example of enemies looking around them when patrolling.
 
Last edited:
kofeiiniturpa;n9970311 said:
The character systems felt they were more of an afterthought (I found them ineffective and nearly useless). I lieu of how the character systems did work (no how they could’ve) I think the game would’ve worked better with just gear progression. A narrative heavy action adventure with some CYOA elements and open world simulation, instead of pretending to be a bigass RPG with some fanservice elements loosely harkening back to the genre label.

That might sound harsh, but it’s not a slight towards neither the game nor its makers. Just how the experience opened up to me.

All fair points. The Witcher 3 really was only an RPG in the modern sense of the word, and that means a great deal of streamlining. It's unfortunate in some ways, but at least its attracting more people to the genre. Maybe a few of them will check out some older RPGs that are better examples of the genre's roots.

kofeiiniturpa;n9970311 said:
Your ”good”, my ”good”, and that other guys idea of ”good” might not coincide.

True. I guess I was referring to what the public (fans of shooters and fans of stealth) might consider above average, but you're right that it's a very subjective term by nature. From discussing CP2077 with you throughout a few threads, it's already clear that we have very different ideas regarding what would be a good or a bad mechanic.

kofeiiniturpa;n9970311 said:
I expect to ultimately be disappointed. I don’t have much trust in big releases anymore. I do have a lot of ’fingers crossed’ hopes and wishes, though.

It’s obviously not going to be a dicerolling game either, but given what has been said about it, I think it would be fair (even if not realistic) to expect a game that at least tries to nod towards its RPG heritage and sport a versatile and comprehensive set of charactersystems that make an actual gameplay difference instead of merely some fanservice namedrops on a modern overstreamlined perk chart slammed on top of the same gameplay as any other similiar game RPG or not.

Smart. Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic. I want the game to be fun, and I ultimately think it will be, but I'm still keeping my expectations in check.

It's funny, but the only game that actually came out and met (and exceeded, in some areas) my expectations was Skyrim. Even there a lot of people will disagree, but I got my start with the franchise by playing Oblivion. So, in many ways Skyrim was quite an upgrade, even though it was streamlined as well. It just seems crazy to me that no other game has blown my mind like it did. Maybe I've just gotten older and more cynical.
 
Lisbeth_Salander;n9972401 said:
enemies recognizing the player footsteps a mile away

How far away enemies can hear the player from, it depends on how the AI is configured and possibly a number of factors. Of course it is unrealistic that they can tell the player's footsteps apart from any other footsteps, but there is not much that can be done about that gameplay wise.

enemies methodically patrolling from one corner to the other without looking around or behind them (like never seriously?)

Dishonored 2 has that, but it usually just makes the game more frustrating, because enemies randomly detect the player in situations where it is very difficult to avoid. The player can hardly react to a guard suddenly and unpredictably looking around (which covers a large FOV in a short time), it turns sneaking into a Russian roulette. Although it can also be good in a game like Dishonored where it is normal for the protagonist to occasionally engage in combat, just not the majority of time.

enemies returning right back to routine after seeing something extremely suspicious "Oh look a dead body! Guess everything is alright."

They should not say that everything is alright (it does not happen even in the first Thief game from 1998), but returning to patrol after the intruder gets away and is not found for a long time is not that unrealistic. Of course, the time is shortened a lot in games, but it is necessary for balancing reasons.

enemies shooting the player with high accuracy with inhuman reacting speed when spotting the player (perhaps they should react in a more human way?)

It depends on the game, the guards in Thief 1-2 do not react fast, but they are quite lethal when they do hit the player, and healing items are scarce.

enemies not changing their tactics and not reacting properly when their buddies are disappearing one by one (radio checking anyone?)

Another gameplay balancing issue, if the player is punished for taking out one guard, the choices left are to either take out all of them (no one can radio check at that point), or reload the game.

To summarize, realism sometimes needs to be sacrificed to an extent to make a better game, regardless of the genre. :)
 
sv3672;n9972881 said:
Dishonored 2 has that, but it usually just makes the game more frustrating, because enemies randomly detect the player in situations where it is very difficult to avoid. The player can hardly react to a guard suddenly and unpredictably looking around (which covers a large FOV in a short time), it turns sneaking into a Russian roulette. Although it can also be good in a game like Dishonored where it is normal for the protagonist to occasionally engage in combat, just not the majority of time.

To summarize, realism sometimes needs to be sacrificed to an extent to make a better game, regardless of the genre. :)

Great points, and I agree. Especially with these.

In theory, the idea of an enemy turning around mid-patrol could make sneaking gameplay more dynamic and fun.

In reality, as you said, it makes it frustrating and unfair for the player. If the only path forward in a certain area is through a hallway, or the only path to knock-out/kill a certain enemy (By necessity, perhaps as part of the mission's requirements) involves sneaking behind him, it'd be stupid and overly punishing for them to turn their head mid-path, detect me, and turn my otherwise careful sneaking into a wasted effort.

And yeah, realism absolutely has to be sacrificed for gameplay purposes, especially in a game that isn't a stealth game. We can talk about all the ways CP2077's stealth could be unrealistic, but it's supposed to be a stealth simulator - it isn't the next Deus Ex, Dishonored or Splinter Cell. It's an RPG with (presumably) many ways to approach a situation, with stealth being one of them.
 
Top Bottom