Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Dishonored: Reviews are in, it's good! Completion hours equivalent to penis length.
Bethesda has announced Dishonored, a new first-person stealth action adventure game.
The developer is Arkane Studios, which was bought by Bethesda parent company ZeniMax in August last year.
Harvey Smith, one of the developers of the first two Deus Ex games, is co-creative director, reveals Game Informer.
Viktor Antonov, who designed Half-Life 2's City 17, is also on board.
"Dishonored is the antithesis of a edge-of-your-seat roller-coaster ride," Game Informer said.
"It's a game about assassination where you don't have to kill anyone. It's a game about infiltration where you can set up traps and slaughter the entire garrison of an aristocrat's mansion rather than sneak in. It's a game about brutal violence where you can slip in and out of a fortified barracks with nobody ever knowing you were there. It's a game about morality and player choice where the world you create is based on your actions, not navigating conversation trees."
Coming to PC, PS3 and 360 next year.
Massive picture spoilered super go!
Spoiler:
So there's not a lot of information to go on just yet, but I am intrigued.
New first screenshot! Line up for the sword-ride:
Spoiler:
Also text!
Who are you?
Players take on the role of Corvo, the Empress’ legendary bodyguard. As the game starts, Corvo is falsely imprisoned for her murder. What the corrupt Lord Regent behind the coup didn’t realize is that Corvo is legendary for a reason. He’s not only a skilled combatant accomplished in the art of not being seen, but Corvo has a suite of supernatural powers that combine with his natural talents and unusual gadgets to make him one of the most lethal men in the known world.
Why should you care?
Even if you haven’t played them, you’ve undoubtedly heard of Thief and Deus Ex. One of the main minds behind those two games, Harvey Smith, is the co-creative director of Dishonored along with Raf Colantonio, the founder of developer Arkane Studios. The two share a vision of a game that gives players the power to be creative with their skills and tactics, and invites them to come up with interesting solutions to the obstacles in front of them. Arkane is known for its immersive first-person gaming (Arx Fatalis, Dark Messiah of Might & Magic), and the power of a talent-driven publisher in Bethesda (The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Fallout 3) behind the team is promising.
How are they going to do that?
Dishonored has several major elements that combine to create its unique gameplay: mobility, powers & gadgets, environment, and AI. The trick is that a single power doesn’t just do damage or heal you. You can combine them organically to create interesting effects. Stop time and knock a bunch of stuff off a table in one direction then book it in another, so the guards search for you in the wrong place. Summon a swarm of rats to attack one guard, but possess one of the rats and escape in the chaos. Every problem has as many solutions as you want it to.
What’s the catch?
It’s an assassination game that reacts to how violent you are. An unusual “chaos” system tracks how much collateral damage you cause, and the game world changes as a result of your actions. Unlike a light/dark side meter, though, it’s a behind-the-scenes element that affects story decisions without punishing the player or pushing them to play one way or another.
So it's pretty interesting to sit down and watch Arkane Studios' Harvey Smith and Raf Colantonio play around with the tools you get in Dishonored, their first-person stealth game about an assassin with magical powers, because they insist they've taken the opposite approach.
Whenever they introduce a new power or tool during development, within hours someone on the team invents an exploit that kind of breaks the game, like coupling the high-jumping ability with a partial-teleport to travel vast distances and meddle around in the rafters of the world. Rather than shut that option down again, they then think about how they can design levels that benefit from it.
The sound of eight hooves reaches his ears, comes from the heavenly light, two wolves howls fills his heart with fear, and he sees two ravens fly. Down from the sky a warlord rides, like fire his one eye glows, and just before the preacher dies he knows his god is false.
This kills my interest. Maybe they'll do something that doesn't suck, but every implementation of such things ends up making cringe and not in a good way.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
Hell, even that train there looks like the Combine trains now that I notice it isn't part of the wall.
Well, even if it does look really similar, a stealth game in a City 17-type environment is pretty awesome.
The way I see it, sure it looks like City 17 (because it's designed by the same guy, seemingly), but I love City 17 and only wish that Valve would give us more of it. Since they're busy elsewhere, I will take the hell out of this instead.
Undead ScottsmanPuts his name on his helicoptor....so everyone knows it's his.Registered Userregular
edited July 2011
I did some cursory digging awhile back and apparently, when Bethesda got hacked a few months ago (and several hundred resume's were leaked) there may have been evidence to believe that Arkane was the third party studio that was working on Half-Life 2: Episode 4 (What's that, you ask? Episode 4? Third-party? Am I crazy? Read ye and be educated: Linky. The other rumor being that Valve, after evaluating Episode 1 and 2, decided to drop the episodes and Ep4 got canceled.
I wonder if it eventually turned into Dishonored, hence the massive similarity to HL2. (I know it has the HL2 art director, but I imagine that guy has enough range to not make everything he does look like HL2.)
"In a world of black and white, he paints in blues and greens. In a city of endless sorrow, his laughter echoes through the alleyways. In a heart bursting with love and joy, he lives as a mote of spite and apathy. He is.... Contrasting Description Man! Coming soon to a theater near you."
Undead ScottsmanPuts his name on his helicoptor....so everyone knows it's his.Registered Userregular
edited July 2011
The only other game they've released is Arx Fatalis, which was an okay action RPG inspired by Ultimate Underworld. They were working on a game called "The Crossing" which was a source engine game featuring crossplayer. (Basically the singleplayer and multiplayer components would directly interact somehow.)
EDIT: Apparently they did work on Bioshock 2 as well.
This kills my interest. Maybe they'll do something that doesn't suck, but every implementation of such things ends up making cringe and not in a good way.
In games where you don't have to kill people, there are rarely incentives for doing so, beyond, you know, not killing them.
I'd like to see a game where if I'm a stone killer the missions progress into escalating death traps because they know I'm a stone killer and want to put me down like the sick dog I apparently am. Whereas if I don't kill, perhaps things don't get so damn black and white that I can start winning over guards and locals, and maybe save the world without killing it off in the process.
In games where you don't have to kill people, there are rarely incentives for doing so, beyond, you know, not killing them.
I'd like to see a game where if I'm a stone killer the missions progress into escalating death traps because they know I'm a stone killer and want to put me down like the sick dog I apparently am. Whereas if I don't kill, perhaps things don't get so damn black and white that I can start winning over guards and locals, and maybe save the world without killing it off in the process.
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself. I like doing things differently instead of the usual destroy the fuck out of anything that moves option.
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
edited July 2011
What is blowing me away is not only the pedigree of the people making this game and that it's a first person stealth action game but that enough money is being put behind it that it's making the cover of Game Informer.
Take all my money, then take all the money of my alternate selves in parallel dimensions.
Pac Man's character is difficult to explain even to the Japanese -- he is an innocent character. He hasn't been educated to discern between good and evil. He acts more like a small child than a grown-up person. Think of him as a child learning in the course of his daily activities. If someone tells him guns are evil, he would be the type to rush out and eat guns. But he would most probably eat any gun, even the pistols of policemen who need them.
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself.
bullshit.
Sparing a life shouldn't be tantamount to not using a health kit. It should do something, or count for something. And not in an achievement sense of the word, either. If a character is basically dead when I end the level/mission/whatever because I will never, ever, see this character again unless I replay the level, it doesn't matter whether or not I killed that character. It especially doesn't help if the character lacks any unique characteristics or is in a nondescript military outfit with a gas mask on.
Granted, I'm not saying every character needs to be a rodeo clown with a personal diary. We can, however, do better and expect better. In the real world, shooting someone in the head is a big fucking deal, even in war. If you can't illustrate the positive consequences of sparing someone's life (for whatever reasons may limit this), emphasize the cost somehow. I don't think about all the goombas I've spared from not being squashed, and you're full of shit if some ephemeral, moralist choice that is in no way reflected in the game itself is sufficient reason for not killing an opponent.
"In a world of black and white, he paints in blues and greens. In a city of endless sorrow, his laughter echoes through the alleyways. In a heart bursting with love and joy, he lives as a mote of spite and apathy. He is.... Contrasting Description Man! Coming soon to a theater near you."
Just for the record that's Game Informer's description, not the studio's.
Pac Man's character is difficult to explain even to the Japanese -- he is an innocent character. He hasn't been educated to discern between good and evil. He acts more like a small child than a grown-up person. Think of him as a child learning in the course of his daily activities. If someone tells him guns are evil, he would be the type to rush out and eat guns. But he would most probably eat any gun, even the pistols of policemen who need them.
How about a game where who you choose to kill and not to kill changes the way you can complete the game. Side with one faction and keep Engineer A alive during a 'murder them all' mission nets you optional paths in the harder 'this dude be paranoid trap house' mission.
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself.
bullshit.
Sparing a life shouldn't be tantamount to not using a health kit. It should do something, or count for something. And not in an achievement sense of the word, either. If a character is basically dead when I end the level/mission/whatever because I will never, ever, see this character again unless I replay the level, it doesn't matter whether or not I killed that character. It especially doesn't help if the character lacks any unique characteristics or is in a nondescript military outfit with a gas mask on.
Granted, I'm not saying every character needs to be a rodeo clown with a personal diary. We can, however, do better and expect better. In the real world, shooting someone in the head is a big fucking deal, even in war. If you can't illustrate the positive consequences of sparing someone's life (for whatever reasons may limit this), emphasize the cost somehow. I don't think about all the goombas I've spared from not being squashed, and you're full of shit if some ephemeral, moralist choice that is in no way reflected in the game itself is sufficient reason for not killing an opponent.
While I agree with you for the most part, and I think the things you describe sound pretty awesome and I hope they're in the game, it's also true that some people just like having the option to go through a game in a unique way, even if there's no in-game reward for doing so. Even having the option of a no-kill playthrough can be a selling point for a lot of people, myself included. Granted, everyone's tastes are different, but it's still nice to have that option.
Oh yeah, this game sounds awesome, am I dreaming?, cannot wait, etc.
GaslightIt's not your faultVideo games are amazingRegistered Userregular
edited July 2011
The concept sounds promising to me, but I'm totally turned off by the art style (if the image in the OP is truly an accurate reflection of the way the game will end up). It just looks so derivative of HL2. Not that there's anything wrong with HL2, it's just...I'd like to see the concept mated with something more original and visually interesting.
Very very very very interested in this game. With a side-order of caution. I've been hurt before.
This.
Especially with Bethesda Softworks... Games they publish tend to not be all that great, and can sometimes hurt you so very badly (Brink)
We're Oscar Mike two-one Bravo. Attempting to contain Delta-Charlie-Xray-Xray. We need the situation to be less toilets ASAP. 3DS FC: 5129-0946-8305 PSN: DrSkullnumbers
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself.
bullshit.
Sparing a life shouldn't be tantamount to not using a health kit. It should do something, or count for something. And not in an achievement sense of the word, either. If a character is basically dead when I end the level/mission/whatever because I will never, ever, see this character again unless I replay the level, it doesn't matter whether or not I killed that character. It especially doesn't help if the character lacks any unique characteristics or is in a nondescript military outfit with a gas mask on.
Granted, I'm not saying every character needs to be a rodeo clown with a personal diary. We can, however, do better and expect better. In the real world, shooting someone in the head is a big fucking deal, even in war. If you can't illustrate the positive consequences of sparing someone's life (for whatever reasons may limit this), emphasize the cost somehow. I don't think about all the goombas I've spared from not being squashed, and you're full of shit if some ephemeral, moralist choice that is in no way reflected in the game itself is sufficient reason for not killing an opponent.
I'm not talking about moral bullshit, fuck that, I mow down motherfuckers all the time and it's no big deal. I don't give a shit if there's some kind of background to a character, like if they have a wife and kids, blah blah fucking blah. I'm talking about if in a game it's easier to kill someone than leave them alive (say because they're standing in front of a door you need to go through) and you choose to take the harder path of not killing them (causing a distraction that makes them leave the area, for example), it's more rewarding because you didn't take the easy way out of just shooting a dude in the face. I like having a choice to do something the hard way and the easy way is all, I don't care if there's any other reason to do so (such as more health or ammo or a different storyline).
This kills my interest. Maybe they'll do something that doesn't suck, but every implementation of such things ends up making cringe and not in a good way.
"It's a book about...characters....and stuff..."
Yeah, like, what about that sentence bothers you
Because if you are bothered by morality systems involving dialogue trees it sounds like this game will not have much of that!
The concept sounds promising to me, but I'm totally turned off by the art style (if the image in the OP is truly an accurate reflection of the way the game will end up). It just looks so derivative of HL2. Not that there's anything wrong with HL2, it's just...I'd like to see the concept mated with something more original and visually interesting.
If someone draws two pictures, is one derivative of the other?
The concept sounds promising to me, but I'm totally turned off by the art style (if the image in the OP is truly an accurate reflection of the way the game will end up). It just looks so derivative of HL2. Not that there's anything wrong with HL2, it's just...I'd like to see the concept mated with something more original and visually interesting.
If someone draws two pictures, is one derivative of the other?
If I am an artist, I may draw a horse. But If all I can draw is horses or I never try to draw anything else, I'm not much of an artist.
All I'm saying is I would have like to have seen a little more imagination go into the visuals. But hell, all we have is this one picture so who knows what the game will end up looking like.
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself.
bullshit.
Sparing a life shouldn't be tantamount to not using a health kit. It should do something, or count for something. And not in an achievement sense of the word, either. If a character is basically dead when I end the level/mission/whatever because I will never, ever, see this character again unless I replay the level, it doesn't matter whether or not I killed that character. It especially doesn't help if the character lacks any unique characteristics or is in a nondescript military outfit with a gas mask on.
Granted, I'm not saying every character needs to be a rodeo clown with a personal diary. We can, however, do better and expect better. In the real world, shooting someone in the head is a big fucking deal, even in war. If you can't illustrate the positive consequences of sparing someone's life (for whatever reasons may limit this), emphasize the cost somehow. I don't think about all the goombas I've spared from not being squashed, and you're full of shit if some ephemeral, moralist choice that is in no way reflected in the game itself is sufficient reason for not killing an opponent.
I'm not talking about moral bullshit, fuck that, I mow down motherfuckers all the time and it's no big deal. I don't give a shit if there's some kind of background to a character, like if they have a wife and kids, blah blah fucking blah. I'm talking about if in a game it's easier to kill someone than leave them alive (say because they're standing in front of a door you need to go through) and you choose to take the harder path of not killing them (causing a distraction that makes them leave the area, for example), it's more rewarding because you didn't take the easy way out of just shooting a dude in the face. I like having a choice to do something the hard way and the easy way is all, I don't care if there's any other reason to do so (such as more health or ammo or a different storyline).
I agree with this as well, and telling someone they are "full of shit" because they like to play this way is ridiculous.
My favorite way to play all the Thief games was to get in and out without anyone knowing I was ever there. Not because I cared about killing on ANY sort of morality level, but just because I enjoyed being good enough to be that sneaky and felt it fit perfectly with the protagonist.
WiiU - vamenn (MONSTER HUNTER!!!)
XBL - dachishbudoka
PS3 - dachish
"Woe be to him that defies the tree"
Pac Man's character is difficult to explain even to the Japanese -- he is an innocent character. He hasn't been educated to discern between good and evil. He acts more like a small child than a grown-up person. Think of him as a child learning in the course of his daily activities. If someone tells him guns are evil, he would be the type to rush out and eat guns. But he would most probably eat any gun, even the pistols of policemen who need them.
Posts
AJ2 soundtrack: NAME YOUR PRICE ON BANDCAMP! Album: BANDCAMP! iTunes Spotify Amazon UK
Well, even if it does look really similar, a stealth game in a City 17-type environment is pretty awesome.
This kills my interest. Maybe they'll do something that doesn't suck, but every implementation of such things ends up making cringe and not in a good way.
The way I see it, sure it looks like City 17 (because it's designed by the same guy, seemingly), but I love City 17 and only wish that Valve would give us more of it. Since they're busy elsewhere, I will take the hell out of this instead.
AJ2 soundtrack: NAME YOUR PRICE ON BANDCAMP! Album: BANDCAMP! iTunes Spotify Amazon UK
I wonder if it eventually turned into Dishonored, hence the massive similarity to HL2. (I know it has the HL2 art director, but I imagine that guy has enough range to not make everything he does look like HL2.)
"In a world of black and white, he paints in blues and greens. In a city of endless sorrow, his laughter echoes through the alleyways. In a heart bursting with love and joy, he lives as a mote of spite and apathy. He is.... Contrasting Description Man! Coming soon to a theater near you."
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
On the other hand, I really just want Arkane to make a successor to Dark Messiah.
You mean a sequel to "The Adventures of Sir Kicksalot Deathboot in the Land of the Conspicuously Placed Spike Racks?"
I could go for that.
Everything about this game sounds like it was tailor made to give me the world's largest hard on
Is... is this a dream?
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
* Which, yes, is "The Adventures of Sir Kicksalot Deathboot in the Land of the Conspicuously Placed Spike Racks" and is awesome.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
EDIT: Apparently they did work on Bioshock 2 as well.
If it is, don't pinch yourself.
I want to play this too.
It is physically impossible for me to be more totally in than I am.
All right, people. It is not a gerbil. It is not a hamster. It is not a guinea pig. It is a death rabbit. Death. Rabbit. Say it with me, now.
I'm stealing that phrase, oh yessir I am.
And this game sounds like it could be fun, guess I'm gonna wait and see!
"It's a book about...characters....and stuff..."
In games where you don't have to kill people, there are rarely incentives for doing so, beyond, you know, not killing them.
I'd like to see a game where if I'm a stone killer the missions progress into escalating death traps because they know I'm a stone killer and want to put me down like the sick dog I apparently am. Whereas if I don't kill, perhaps things don't get so damn black and white that I can start winning over guards and locals, and maybe save the world without killing it off in the process.
Playing a game and not killing everyone sometimes is the harder choice, and is a reward in and of itself. I like doing things differently instead of the usual destroy the fuck out of anything that moves option.
Take all my money, then take all the money of my alternate selves in parallel dimensions.
bullshit.
Sparing a life shouldn't be tantamount to not using a health kit. It should do something, or count for something. And not in an achievement sense of the word, either. If a character is basically dead when I end the level/mission/whatever because I will never, ever, see this character again unless I replay the level, it doesn't matter whether or not I killed that character. It especially doesn't help if the character lacks any unique characteristics or is in a nondescript military outfit with a gas mask on.
Granted, I'm not saying every character needs to be a rodeo clown with a personal diary. We can, however, do better and expect better. In the real world, shooting someone in the head is a big fucking deal, even in war. If you can't illustrate the positive consequences of sparing someone's life (for whatever reasons may limit this), emphasize the cost somehow. I don't think about all the goombas I've spared from not being squashed, and you're full of shit if some ephemeral, moralist choice that is in no way reflected in the game itself is sufficient reason for not killing an opponent.
Just for the record that's Game Informer's description, not the studio's.
PSN ID - Mostlyjoe Steam ID - dungeondweller
While I agree with you for the most part, and I think the things you describe sound pretty awesome and I hope they're in the game, it's also true that some people just like having the option to go through a game in a unique way, even if there's no in-game reward for doing so. Even having the option of a no-kill playthrough can be a selling point for a lot of people, myself included. Granted, everyone's tastes are different, but it's still nice to have that option.
Oh yeah, this game sounds awesome, am I dreaming?, cannot wait, etc.
This.
Especially with Bethesda Softworks... Games they publish tend to not be all that great, and can sometimes hurt you so very badly (Brink)
3DS FC: 5129-0946-8305
PSN: DrSkullnumbers
And it'll probably crash every 15 minutes.
I'm not talking about moral bullshit, fuck that, I mow down motherfuckers all the time and it's no big deal. I don't give a shit if there's some kind of background to a character, like if they have a wife and kids, blah blah fucking blah. I'm talking about if in a game it's easier to kill someone than leave them alive (say because they're standing in front of a door you need to go through) and you choose to take the harder path of not killing them (causing a distraction that makes them leave the area, for example), it's more rewarding because you didn't take the easy way out of just shooting a dude in the face. I like having a choice to do something the hard way and the easy way is all, I don't care if there's any other reason to do so (such as more health or ammo or a different storyline).
Yeah, like, what about that sentence bothers you
Because if you are bothered by morality systems involving dialogue trees it sounds like this game will not have much of that!
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
If someone draws two pictures, is one derivative of the other?
If I am an artist, I may draw a horse. But If all I can draw is horses or I never try to draw anything else, I'm not much of an artist.
All I'm saying is I would have like to have seen a little more imagination go into the visuals. But hell, all we have is this one picture so who knows what the game will end up looking like.
I agree with this as well, and telling someone they are "full of shit" because they like to play this way is ridiculous.
My favorite way to play all the Thief games was to get in and out without anyone knowing I was ever there. Not because I cared about killing on ANY sort of morality level, but just because I enjoyed being good enough to be that sneaky and felt it fit perfectly with the protagonist.
WiiU - vamenn (MONSTER HUNTER!!!)
XBL - dachishbudoka
PS3 - dachish
"Woe be to him that defies the tree"