I have a gripe with games that combine stealth and action.

[Zhukov]

I notice Metal Gear Solid wasn't brought up in the OP...

... MGS... MGS... MGS...

I didn't bring up MGS because I've never played more than a few hours of each one. So I'm probably not qualified to comment on the gameplay.

Nothing against the games, I'm sure they're great fun for those who can tolerate Japanese game dialogue, but I just can't stand them.

 

[shrekfan246]

I notice Metal Gear Solid wasn't brought up in the OP...

... MGS... MGS... MGS...

I didn't bring up MGS because I've never played more than a few hours of each one. So I'm probably not qualified to comment on the gameplay.

Nothing against the games, I'm sure they're great fun for those who can tolerate Japanese game dialogue, but I just can't stand them.

Fair enough. As much as I enjoy the franchise, even its writing, I always have to admit that they could've used one hell of an editor to trim down what Kojima wanted to put out there.

 

[Zhukov]

That would be equal to claiming more then one weapon makes all others an irrelevant waste of time, or more then one class, or more then one character, ...

I understand if you feel that way and we that is completely up to you, but some of us like the flexibility.

Presumably different weapons would be better for different situations, or the more powerful weapons would have limited ammo or something.

Imagine if you had a weapons that auto-killed anything in sight and had endless ammo. It would render the others irrelevant. That is what the availability of action is to stealth.

Same goes for characters and classes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRVUOGUmxJI Mark of the Ninja,Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning. Try to go all action in Mark Of The Ninja,and see how that works out for you. I'm sorry,but I like the flexibility. It even gives you different paths for upgrades. And scaring the guards by either throwing their coworker's corpse into the room or taking the lights out,killing their pal,then they notice is SO satisfying.

Uh... what?

Mark of the Ninja doesn't mix action and stealth. You practically said so yourself. It's a plain stealth game. Yes, you can run up and try to slap the guards to death, but it's not really a viable approach.

So I have no gripe with it.

Also, what you said has no connection to the post you quoted.

Also also, I have no idea what Kingdoms of Amablurbablah has to do with anything else you just said.

 

[hazabaza1]

OOOOOH
Oooh

I just thought of something.
You got a PS3, right? If so, go play Tokyo Jungle right now. If you don't know it, it's basically an animal survival simulator score attack thing. It starts you off with some fairly weak animals for you to play, and that's where the stealth-action blend really comes in.

Let's say you're a Pomeranian. You go around, eating up chickens and deer, no problem. Then you encounter... I dunno, a pack of wolves. Maybe cats, they'll be hostile towards you. If you play it stealthy you can get an instant kill on one of them. Then you'll have to fight your way past the remainder, or lure them over to an area where you can get out of sight and hide, and pick another off with the stealth kill.

When this gets really intense, however, is when you're still a Pomeranian or a deer or something and you come across a lion. Lion's are large enemies, so a small enemy like any kind of dog can't one-hit them. Stealth attacks, will, however allow you to do a lot more damage to it. So, maybe you mate, get a pack, stealth attack said lion and get your pack to attack it. If any of your puny little dogs get hit (including yourself) they're going to die. But, if you're skilled enough you can dodge and attack and stun and get the kill, but it'll take a massive long time.
Another choice you have if you insist on killing it is to lure it to a 'stealthable' area and stealth attack it for larger damage. Again, because this lion is lethal you're just increasing the chance of getting deaded.

Last choice (since you probably won't be able to outrun the lion) is to find a place to stealth and stay hidden until it gets bored and leaves. This'll also be risky because you sort of get lulled into a false sense of security the way the stealth works so it might have just been a better choice to avoid fighting in the first place.

It's late and I'm dumb so I'm describing this bad but if it's just the gameplay you're focusing on, check it out.

 

[Kopikatsu]

I find that the action options just make the stealth elements an irrelevant waste of time. You could scope out the area, plan your route and make your way silently through, distracting enemies where possible, executing silent takedowns and concealing any evidence of your passing as you go. Or you could just walk in the front door and shoot everyone in the face. Stealth and avoidance are what someone does when brute force isn't an option. When brute force is an option the only reason to be sneaky is for style points or, in some cases, because you're going for your pacifist run.

I liked how Human Revolution handled it. Making stealth your first choice is directly incentivized by the XP system. Fighting is quite simply not very rewarding.

It totally makes sense to get better at shooting by never using your guns.

I mean, if you're capable of stealthing your way through the game, then you don't need the extra XP.

Anyway, I happen to like action/stealth and action/horror games. It gives you something to fall back on when everything goes tits up. And if you aren't using a guide like a pansy, then something will probably go tits up eventually.

 

[drummond13]

I think it's interesting that you talk about how you feel games that combine stealth and action for you don't work, and then the examples you list are some of the best games made in the past couple of years.

I'm not saying you don't have a valid point; I get what you're saying. I just don't think it came close to ruining most of the games you listed.

 

[jackinmydaniels]

Having options adds replayability to a game. If you want to run in guns blazing that's totally fine, if you want to stealth through an area, that's fine as well. The games you mentioned are built with that in mind. So, to fix this whole problem you could just, I dunno, play a stealth game. There's still plenty of those in existence you know, you don't have to play a game that mixes the two if you don't want to.

 

[JDLY]

I still think SC: Chaos Theory did it best.

In later levels, you could use the shotgun attachment to just batter down anyone who crossed your path. However, that actually made the game harder. Sam Fisher controls best when you're climbing around the environment, using his gadgets and generally being a crafty sneaky bastard. The actual gun controls in the game are sluggish, and Fisher simply can't take many hits before he dies.

If you learn to use the stealth controls, then you can easily (or semi-easily, at least) move from room to room, level to level, while feeling like a total, utter badass, secure in the knowledge of just how much of a ninja you are. If you try to just roll in shotguns blazing, you're legitimately risking yourself by going directly up against heavily armed, intelligent foes.

That's where the balance needs to be. Any game which makes action the easier option over stealth has failed. If going in guns blazing is easier, then why would anyone want to play any other way? You've essentially just made a regular action shooter with a shitty stealth/cover system bolted on the side.

I was reading hoping somebody else would bring that up. Personally one of my favorite games ever.
It took me a while, but I eventually made my way through all the missions on the hardest difficulty with a 100% score at the end.

As a bit of info for anyone who hasn't played SC:CT, on the easy difficulty, you'd probably lose 5% for killing a guy, none for knocking one out. Also feel free to shoot all the lights and cameras. On the hardest difficulty, be prepared to lose 10% for shooting out one light.

 

[prophecy2514]

I still think SC: Chaos Theory did it best.

In later levels, you could use the shotgun attachment to just batter down anyone who crossed your path. However, that actually made the game harder. Sam Fisher controls best when you're climbing around the environment, using his gadgets and generally being a crafty sneaky bastard. The actual gun controls in the game are sluggish, and Fisher simply can't take many hits before he dies.

If you learn to use the stealth controls, then you can easily (or semi-easily, at least) move from room to room, level to level, while feeling like a total, utter badass, secure in the knowledge of just how much of a ninja you are. If you try to just roll in shotguns blazing, you're legitimately risking yourself by going directly up against heavily armed, intelligent foes.

That's where the balance needs to be. Any game which makes action the easier option over stealth has failed. If going in guns blazing is easier, then why would anyone want to play any other way? You've essentially just made a regular action shooter with a shitty stealth/cover system bolted on the side.

I was reading hoping somebody else would bring that up. Personally one of my favorite games ever.
It took me a while, but I eventually made my way through all the missions on the hardest difficulty with a 100% score at the end.

As a bit of info for anyone who hasn't played SC:CT, on the easy difficulty, you'd probably lose 5% for killing a guy, none for knocking one out. Also feel free to shoot all the lights and cameras. On the hardest difficulty, be prepared to lose 10% for shooting out one light.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt the hardest setting in Chaos theory limit you to just your OCP and knife, no guns at all?

Also glad someone brought up chaos theory. Must find HD collection somewhere..

 

[ClockworkUniverse]

I find that the action options just make the stealth elements an irrelevant waste of time. You could scope out the area, plan your route and make your way silently through, distracting enemies where possible, executing silent takedowns and concealing any evidence of your passing as you go. Or you could just walk in the front door and shoot everyone in the face. Stealth and avoidance are what someone does when brute force isn't an option. When brute force is an option the only reason to be sneaky is for style points or, in some cases, because you're going for your pacifist run.

I liked how Human Revolution handled it. Making stealth your first choice is directly incentivized by the XP system. Fighting is quite simply not very rewarding.

It totally makes sense to get better at shooting by never using your guns.

I mean, if you're capable of stealthing your way through the game, then you don't need the extra XP.

Anyway, I happen to like action/stealth and action/horror games. It gives you something to fall back on when everything goes tits up. And if you aren't using a guide like a pansy, then something will probably go tits up eventually.

You don't get better at shooting. XP in Human Revolution just lets you buy augmentations, which do all sorts of stuff, but only I think two or three directly make you better at shooting. That's mostly the domain of weapon upgrades, which work from a completely different reward scheme.

Furthermore, stealthing through the game absolutely doesn't mean you won't want augmentations such as jumping higher, sprinting longer, breaking into more advanced security, etc.

 

[mokes310]

Man, I love Far Cry 3! I'm playing on the hardest difficulty now, and yup, you can't really just run in, guns-a-blazing! You've gotta plan that attack out, carefully pick off those who will get you, and slowly make your way into the outpost/cave/arena of combat.

The AC series: absolutely love it and I think, for the most part, they have done it amazingly well. I don't like traditional stealth games, and I think they've found the right balance with the series. AC3, while straying from the formula a bit, was still a blast to play!

 

[Smiley Face]

I disagree. If all combat was straight-up brawling in those games, I would be bored out of my skull, I'd just start watching TV out of the corner of my eye while leaving my hands on autopilot to do all the fighting. Stealth, on the other hand, makes those games fun for me

Moreover, some of those games - Hitman, Dishonored, even Deus Ex to a certain degree - have stealth as such a viable option that you can play through the whole game virtually undetected - which is a VERY different experience to play through than fighting, particularly in Hitman and Dishonored. By including stealth mechanics, suddenly these games have more replay value and are less boring. Now, if your goal is 'get to the end of the game', then that's not really your concern, but in many situations, stealthing is faster and more efficient than systematically killing everyone. I mean, Dishonored - sneaking your way to the target is no further away than fighting your way there - the only difference is that you don't need to stop to kill the 20 or 30 guards in your path. And, if you're feeling esoteric, you can take out the target quietly, and not have to fight your way back out through the guards either.

In short, I like it, it's more fun than fighting, and there's nothing wrong with having more options, as long as they're well-developed.

 

[JDLY]

snip

another snip

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt the hardest setting in Chaos theory limit you to just your OCP and knife, no guns at all?

Also glad someone brought up chaos theory. Must find HD collection somewhere..

Effectively, but not literally. You were very limited on ammo, and anytime you took a shot, chances were very high somebody would either hear it, or notice the resulting shot light bulb/camera/body.

Hell, they investigated lights that you just fizzed out for a bit with the OCP.
Basically, it any situation you'd need to use your gun, it was because you screwed up and they were suspicious, so actually using your gun gave you away.

 

[Twilight_guy]

The problem is that if a stealth game requires stealth then often botching it up means instant death. You can't fight your way out, because that would be action, so instead you have to go through the frustration of forced stealth. I hate shit like that.

 

[Xdeser2]

By now I think that games mixing action with stealth can safely be called a trend, even if it's just a smallish trend. Recent examples include:


- Deus Ex: Human Revolution

- Far Cry 3


I'm not quite sure what has brought this about. Perhaps action game developers are looking to stave off staleness by borrowing from other genres. Perhaps there are a ton of developers who really want to make a stealth game but can't justify it to the marketing department, so they make a hybrid instead.

Thing is, it doesn't seem to have quite worked.

I find that the action options just make the stealth elements an irrelevant waste of time. You could scope out the area, plan your route and make your way silently through, distracting enemies where possible, executing silent takedowns and concealing any evidence of your passing as you go. Or you could just walk in the front door and shoot everyone in the face. Stealth and avoidance are what someone does when brute force isn't an option. When brute force is an option the only reason to be sneaky is for style points or, in some cases, because you're going for your pacifist run.

On the other side, the stealth elements tend to overpower the action options. The player always gets to see their enemies first. The AI has to be rendered nigh-retarded and nearly blind. Enemies are usually isolated or exposed so that they can be picked of one-by-one.

Combining action and stealth sounds great on paper. I like stealth games (although I've never played a truly great one, and yes I've played the Thief games) and I like action games. Mixing them together should be like the chocolate and peanut butter thing. Except it kind of isn't. It's more like putting ice cream in my seafood spaghetti.

.....Wut?

A stealthy approach makes Far Cry 3 and Dues Ex: Human Revolution far easier than a pure action guns-blazing route

 

[Zhukov]

[snip]

.....Wut?

A stealthy approach makes Far Cry 3 and Dues Ex: Human Revolution far easier than a pure action guns-blazing route

I beg to differ.

I've played both those game on the hardest settings. They are not difficult.

Being stealthy when there is nothing to prevent you just shooting everybody is like picking a lock when you have the key in your pocket.

 

[ClockworkUniverse]

[snip]

.....Wut?

A stealthy approach makes Far Cry 3 and Dues Ex: Human Revolution far easier than a pure action guns-blazing route

I beg to differ.

I've played both those game on the hardest settings. They are not difficult.

Being stealthy when there is nothing to prevent you just shooting everybody is like picking a lock when you have the key in your pocket.

Much like how in games with console commands, everyone just noclips through everything so they can reach the end faster.

Captcha: It is different

Well, okay, captcha has a point, but I guess what I'm saying is that allowing multiple options can lead to a much deeper experience.