Arkane PREY - Arkane's immersive coffee cup transformation sim - now with Mooncrash roguelike mode DLC

[Durandal]

From Neogaf, I will just leave it here:

Well I finally finished it and honestly I did not enjoy it, it just wasn't for me. For the first few hours I loved it, a solid 8.5/10 but after that it got insanely difficult, even on normal difficulty and later easy difficulty enemies were always extremely tough mostly due to the fact that resources were so rare, I was almost always walking around on 30HP with no ammo or items that could help me so I spent a lot of my time dying or running away which just isn't fun at all. I've never done such a massive 180 on a game before. I really struggled to finish it in the end, especially once those bloody military bots came into it, they would literally kill me in 2 seconds on easy difficult and they were absolutely everywhere and relentless.

I don't mind games that are hard and rewarding or if they're tough but it makes sense but that's not Prey for me, Prey was just frustrating and overtuned, even when I switched it to easy enemies would swarm and surround you, constantly harassing you every step of the way and without any resources to deal with them it just became tiresome with the constant deaths. I honestly can't remember disliking a game this much that I actually finished. I think I'm more upset because there's so much I do like, the visuals, audio, atmosphere and some of the gameplay mechanics are really great but at the end of the day fun is most important and I just didn't have any past maybe the 5 hour mark.

How I yearn for the day when Arkane is freed from Bethesda's grasp and is no longer weighed down by PLAYTESTERS.

 

[Sentinel]

Just played through it.

Pretty mundane Arkane Studios garbage. It's okay, that's it. Mimics were pretty cool enemies though, wish the others had been as creative as those little buggers.

Now is it okay or garbage? Because these don't mean the same thing. Or does it mean that Arkane makes so good games, that even their garbage game can be considered okay.

The game has really good atmosphere and surprisingly the soundtrack/audio is good. I didn't really care for the story much. Level design and exploration are also very good.
However I think the gunplay/combat are unadulterated shit. Whenever you get detected you might as well quick load than suffer through it. The story didn't impress either. The gun upgrade system is also shit compared to BioShock.

 

[Nekot-The-Brave]

http://kotaku.com/podcast-how-preys-best-characters-came-to-life-1795332509

 

[Excidium II]

Main thing that bothers me about this game is that the positional audio is completely borked.

 

[Dev_Anj]

What's next, objects being highlighted across the room because looking, sorting and interacting naturally is a chore? Objectives being marked across map because carving your own way through the world is tedious? Walking over pickups auto-picks it up, because we can? Oh wait...

Ah, false equivalence. Another typical CyberP tool.

What you need to talk about is how does inventory sorting add anything. Tetris is not a game about positioning, it's just a game about trying to fill up lines to push up a score. How can there be any meaningful element to sorting stuff in a plain grid, especially when most games with grid inventories usually have loads of small objects mixed in with a few large ones, making the whole process very simplistic?

Also, how is looking around for opening containers anything comparable to sorting inventory? You just press a button near them to open them, that's it. The only engaging part here is scanning the environment for interactable items, which, honestly, SS2 didn't have a lot of. Taking it to extremes is bad too, see also moon logic in many bad adventure games.

Objective markers are bad but they don't outright tell you the way to go, just your destination. It can be argued that in many old games maps with labels did the same thing for you, only a little less directly.

By your logic, it seems like pressing 3 keys to move forward and 4 keys to jump would be better because "they are more complex and intelligent!!1" Which, as you should know, is a dumb argument.

 

[Ash]

Manual management of grid-inventories by design for dummies:

1. it's psuedo-realistic. Not always a good thing for games, but was with classic RPGs and Immersive Sims that specifically strove to be realistic, in moderation.
2. relation with real time inventories. Using the inventory, picking up objects and such is not trivial matter when the inventory does not pause the game, and enemies can spawn nearby. especially when you have to do a bit of tetris to accomplish the task at hand.
3. It's VERY simplistic, but still intended to enjoyable. Much like most game mechanics. It's named "inventory tetris" or an "inventory puzzle" for a reason. Tetris and puzzles are both associated with fun.
4. It's further sense of full control. You grab the object and move it to the desired location, or, while still grabbed, you can toss it out of the inventory. It's the closest it gets to the illusion of reaching into a space, arranging the objects within, having full control over your possessions, especially in combination with real time. Auto-sort OTOH promotes disconnect from your possessions.

Auto-sorting creates further disconnect with your inventory and the whole in general, removes the tetris element, and whatever else that may offer. As usual the intricacies of classic design flies over the average modern gamer's head, instead considered needless bloat. Not to mention it was hardly a chore at all. You're all free to dislike manual arrangement of inventory, providing you're actually informed of its function and intention and not just running your mouths ill-informed as usual.

Nonetheless, it'd probably be futile in Prey because the game is full of junk hoarding and no real time inventory is present, because accessibility. Just don't go saying stupid shit like Shock 2 or Arx needed an auto-sort, or that Prey is better than Shock 2 precisely because it has it while Shock doesn't.

 

[toro]

I think my IQ went south-side just by reading this retarded discussion about inventories.

 

[Ash]

Hmm, maybe your opinion on what is a worthy successor to Shock or not is not to be trusted after all. The little things matter. Games are made up of thousands of design decisions and every one counts.

 

[Excidium II]

Will the story explain why all bathroom stalls can be unlocked from outside.

 

[Dev_Anj]

1. it's psuedo-realistic. Not always a good thing for games, but was with classic RPGs and Immersive Sims that specifically strove to be realistic, in moderation.

What? Yeah, a grid where everything fits neatly into squares is totally "psuedo realistic".

2. relation with real time inventories. Using the inventory, picking up objects and such is not trivial matter when the inventory does not pause the game, and enemies can spawn nearby. especially when you have to do a bit of tetris to accomplish the task at hand.

This has nothing to do with grid inventories. Absolutely none. You can have real time inventories without having them based off grids.

3. It's VERY simplistic, but still intended to enjoyable. Much like most game mechanics. It's named "inventory tetris" or an "inventory puzzle" for a reason. Tetris and puzzles are both associated with fun.

AKA "It's good because I like it!"

4. It's further sense of full control. You grab the object and move it to the desired location, or, while still grabbed, you can toss it out of the inventory. It's the closest it gets to the illusion of reaching into a space, arranging the objects within, having full control over your possessions, especially in combination with real time. Auto-sort OTOH promotes disconnect from your possessions.

Once again, nothing about the above applies specifically to grid inventory. Absolutely nothing. You can always make such an inventory system without drawing it around a grid.

Jesus Christ, why am I even bothering to respond to this inanity seriously.

 

[Darth Roxor]

inventory tetris is gud

 

[Doktor Best]

inventory tetris is gud

Its a nice side dish gameplay element. As long as it doesnt overstay its welcome its pretty enjoyable.

Loot quantity in general should be toned down a notch in many games. Worst offender here are of course Bethesda games in which you spend about 60% of the time picking up loot and throwing away loot with worse gold to weight ratio. Feels like larping a hobo on a waste site, just without the fun parts.

 

[vortex]

What are other games which have 3D metroidvania megadungeon design? I only know of Arx Fatalis.

 

[Ash]

What? Yeah, a grid where everything fits neatly into squares is totally "psuedo realistic".

Uh, it is. Block represents space, icon represents object, cursor represents hand that you pick up and arrange the objects with. It's a highly abstract 2D representation of objects in a 3D space. Inventory systems haven't come a lot closer to reality than that despite it not being particularly close at all and many years having gone by. Not to say they should, mind.

This has nothing to do with grid inventories. Absolutely none. You can have real time inventories without having them based off grids.

Once again, nothing about the above applies specifically to grid inventory. Absolutely nothing. You can always make such an inventory system without drawing it around a grid.

You are so incredibly retarded. Like critical mass retarded. You've been on ignore for approximately four-five months now and you're still trying to prove to me you're not an idiot and failing miserably.
Whether or not some of my points apply to other forms of inventory systems is entirely irrelevant. Were talking about grid with manual sorting by design vs grid with auto sorting. You know, what's actually relevant to the topic at hand? Of course some points can apply to other systems, those with forced manual management.

 

[Israfael]

I really don't get why you argue about this - if you don't like the sort button, unbind it and dont use it. No one forces you to press Y, you can do it manually if it's enjoyable. After all, people in certain age bracket really do enjoy it:

What are other games which have 3D metroidvania megadungeon design? I only know of Arx Fatalis.

They flat out said that Arx was the main inspiration for them, which is a sort of gutsy thing to say, considering that 'bugs' is probably the thing the average Joe reviewer would remember about it, and 99% of them probably have never heard about Fatalis

 

[ciox]

I don't hate inventory tetris but I only really appreciate it in a deep simulation game like something explicitly survival horror or atmospheric or focused on few systems at once, not quite as much in games where it's jostling for attention with a thousand other systems, a weight system can work just as fine in those and leave you with time for the 999 other systems.

What are other games which have 3D metroidvania megadungeon design? I only know of Arx Fatalis.

Presumably the 3D metroid games.

 

[Ash]

I really don't get why you argue about this - if you don't like the sort button, unbind it and dont use it. No one forces you to press Y, you can do it manually if it's enjoyable. After all, people in certain age bracket really do enjoy it:

What are other games which have 3D metroidvania megadungeon design? I only know of Arx Fatalis.

They flat out said that Arx was the main inspiration for them, which is a sort of gutsy thing to say, considering that 'bugs' is probably the thing the average Joe reviewer would remember about it, and 99% of them probably have never heard about Fatalis

The level of entertainment it may or may not provide was merely one point of a handful given. But sure, feel free to ignore those other aspects despite having them laid out before you.

As for optional vs non-optional, and why it's a problem. Well, as you can see much of this flies over the heads of many as it is. Much like with objective markers, objective reminders, button prompts and all the other handholding shit (which I hear you cannot turn much of it off like you could in Dishonored? ), most gamers aren't going to see any value in turning it off/ignoring the auto sort option. After all, why ignore a feature, it's there for a reason!? And it makes things more convenient!

...and it is there for a reason. Prey much like Dishonored before it is designed to be highly accessible, and real time inventories and such don't exist. Not to mention it is junk object-laden so manual management is more likely to actually become tedious. Again, I'm arguing for manual management in defence of prestigious classic game design the likes of System shock 2, Deus Ex and Arx. I'm not overly bothered how it is in Prey. I knew the game was going to be typical modern Arkane and the demo was enough to see I was right. But again, kudos for seemingly being 100x better than Bioshock nonetheless. Not that that is difficult to accomplish.

 

[Dev_Anj]

You are so incredibly retarded. Like critical mass retarded. You've been on ignore for approximately four-five months now and you're still trying to prove to me you're not an idiot and failing miserably.

Oh, the irony.

I didn't try to prove anything. I just caught you fucking up yet another thread and decided to step in, rather foolishly. It's good to see that you're not a learning animal, though. Keep up with your irate rants about how much x is better than y because you liked it, though!

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Despite all the SS throwbacks, this game really is bethesda at heart, isn't it?

1. Trademark trash collecting as an underlying mechanic that takes a lot of gameplay. I still can't imagine why someone sees picking up banana skins as something I'd like to be doing in a computer game, but there you go.
2. You can be sure that point one will be connected to a crafting mechanic that, while robust, is ultimately pointless, since you don't really need it and it's not fun. Like someone pointed out, why the hell is crafting weapons even an option when they don't degrade? On the other hand, the few items that are in fact useful completely break the game. Neuromods, lol.
3. The difficulty not coming from any interesting mechanics, but the fact that higher difficulty levels result in some enemies dishing out ridiculous damage, while at the same time taking even more ridiculous amounts of ammo to kill. On hard a phantom can kill me in two shots, while the first shot leaves me with like 20-30 hp at full armor. At the same time it takes like two pistol mags to take down. The first time I've met Technopath I've used all my shotgun ammo to kill it, while shooting at point blank range. Fun combat indeed.

There are other smaller things, like making upgrade system that has like 5-6 levels of minuscule dmg upgrades instead of giving a few possible, but impactful options. But really, those three things are like Skyrim or F4 embodied.

 

[Jasede]

Miniscule? They doubled my weapon damage!

I'd write a longer response but I'm busy right now. I thought about it for a while and agree that grid based without sorting is the way to go. I uninstalled popamole trash Arcanum and replaced it with incline: Diablo.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Strongly agreed re: junk juggling. The moment I have to stop and drop a lemon peel to pick up a banana peel because my inventory is full, something in your game has gone horribly wrong.

However:

The first time I've met Technopath I've used all my shotgun ammo to kill it, while shooting at point blank range. Fun combat indeed.

Meanwhile, I threw a bunch of explocanisters at my first technopath and then finished it off with the stun gun, so...

 

[Israfael]

When I played SS2 for the first time, my inventory was half full with potted plants, monkey brains, tumours and whatnot at the point where I got to the reactor part, so it's sort of faithful replication of what was there in the first place

 

[Darth Roxor]

except there's no need at all to pick up potted plants, and monkey brians/tumours can be taken once and then discarded once you've researched them

 

[ciox]

Many modern and some old SS2 players do insane amounts of hoarding because the recycler while portable is not available from the beginning, so they stash things in advance.

Not having a trader that accepts/recycles all kinds of equipment isn't enough to prevent hoarding, you really need either NO way to break down equipment into resources OR a way to break down equipment that gives very little resources, is attached to the player, and cannot be upgraded (because if it could be upgraded players would again hoard in anticipation of using the upgraded recycle to get more resources)

 

[Cowboy Moment]

1. Trademark trash collecting as an underlying mechanic that takes a lot of gameplay. I still can't imagine why someone sees picking up banana skins as something I'd like to be doing in a computer game, but there you go.

Kinda. It's not that big of a deal, and you end up carrying a bunch of stupid +1 HP soda cans and other crap in SS2 as well, but they really could just skip the trash and have recycling/crafting mostly be used to convert some resources into others.

2. You can be sure that point one will be connected to a crafting mechanic that, while robust, is ultimately pointless, since you don't really need it and it's not fun. Like someone pointed out, why the hell is crafting weapons even an option when they don't degrade? On the other hand, the few items that are in fact useful completely break the game. Neuromods, lol.

On Nightmare I certainly needed to craft a bunch of ammo, I imagine you'd need even more if you wanted to use the more exotic guns. As someone who uses two pistol clips on a Phantom, you should be able to understand this. And you can craft weapons for the sake of flexibility - you can decide that you don't want a particular weapon to take up inventory space (Q-Beam in the early game, for instance), so you recycle it, and then you have the option of crafting it again later on if you want to. Don't see why this is so difficult to understand.

Making Neuromods is definitely dumb though. Maybe it wouldn't be if exotic matter was much difficult to come by and you needed to actively hunt more Typhon for it, but as is, there's little reason not to mass produce mods in the mid-game.

3. The difficulty not coming from any interesting mechanics, but the fact that higher difficulty levels result in some enemies dishing out ridiculous damage, while at the same time taking even more ridiculous amounts of ammo to kill. On hard a phantom can kill me in two shots, while the first shot leaves me with like 20-30 hp at full armor. At the same time it takes like two pistol mags to take down. The first time I've met Technopath I've used all my shotgun ammo to kill it, while shooting at point blank range. Fun combat indeed.

Meanwhile, the difficulty in SS2 came from all the interesting combat mechanics and enemy behaviour? Enemies are quite tanky indeed, but that's balanced against the relative rarity of the tough ones. There's never any more than one Technopath or Telepath in a given level, and Phantoms are similarly rare at the beginning of the game, when they actually require significant resources to kill.

Besides, you're either exaggerating or don't understand the damage mechanics. Disabled enemies take more damage (what disables them depends on enemy type), and all enemies also have weak points. I guarantee that if you EMP a Technopath and shoot it in the face from point blank, it'll go down relatively quickly (unless it's an unupgraded shotgun and you have no Security weapon talents, in which case maybe Fallout 4 is indeed the game for you). A Phantom also never takes two pistol clips to kill, not even with an unupgraded pistol and no buffs.

That's not to mention that there's almost always some way to use the environment to do tons of damage to enemies. Technopaths specifically, for instance, have no way of breaking out of GLOO, and take massive fall damage once completely frozen. I literally killed the first one I met by accident this way.