My problems with Dishonored- a bit of constructive criticism.

[Nulmas]

I just finished my second playthrough of Dishonored and I guess I was underwhelmed.

The biggest problem with the game is that it seems like it could be so much more. In a gameplay perspective, it's fun enough. It reminds me of Thief, which is a good thing. However, I feel like I didn't get enough chances to play around with the game's mechanics due to it being so short.

The length of the game was not apparent in my first playthrough, me being distracted with exploring every nook and cranny, but once I finished and started it back up, I finished it in a single afternoon. And with a lot of saving and reloading, mind you, since I decided that my second playthrough would be a pure stealth one without killing a single enemy.

But the biggest problem mentioned above comes from its story and setting. Not that they're bad, mind you. Quite the contrary: they're some of the most interesting I've seen in recent years.

However, they seem to be a bit underdeveloped. You kind of get the feel of a big world somewhere out there, but you never get a change to play through it.

On the other hand, I loved the fact that they never mention some plot information outright

Spoiler

Like the fact that The Heart is actually the Empress's heart

and that you can only find about some stuff by playing the right way

Spoiler

for example, on my first playthrough, I never found out that the Lord Regent/Royal Spymaster had imported the rats (and therefore, the plague) to get rid of the poor

but these details are so infrequent that they only leave me wondering what could have been. Plus, a lot of information is still missing, almost as if it is sequel fodder.

In a few words, it's a good game but it goes by so fast that it almost feels like there's a whole act missing.

Anyway, I'd like to get some opinions on this. Oh, and thanks for reading

 

[Kopikatsu]

In a few words, it's a good game but it goes by so fast that it almost feels like there's a whole act missing.

That's exactly how I would describe Vanquish.

Anyway, I played through a few missions in Dishonored before dropping it. First person platforming is a horrible bastardization of mechanics and camera angles, as is first person stealth and first person melee combat. Dishonored focuses on all three. It admittedly did all three a hell of a lot better than I would have expected to be possible...it gets a 6/10 using the full 1-10 point scale. Maybe a 7 due to a couple interesting additions like the Heart's use on random people to discover things about them and eavesdropping being implemented well enough.

Edit: Changed my mind. It gets a 4. Thought about it and I realized that the last game that I couldn't finish playing through because of how horrible I thought the mechanics were was three years ago. Cross Edge. Loved everything but the gameplay. God the gameplay sucked.

 

[daveman247]

snip

I thought blink pretty much erased the annoyance of first person platforming


Apart from it being a bit short, and the story a bit regular (Should have been better, especially with such an awesome world) i enjoyed it very much. The level design was awesome, with a lot of it feeling like an actual building. Unlike in deus ex hr where sometimes it felt like the levels were just built around the options.

This is One of those cases where the gameplay is so good i can overlook a few things.

 

[Ruedyn]

In a few words, it's a good game but it goes by so fast that it almost feels like there's a whole act missing.

That's exactly how I would describe Vanquish.

Anyway, I played through a few missions in Dishonored before dropping it. First person platforming is a horrible bastardization of mechanics and camera angles, as is first person stealth and first person melee combat. Dishonored focuses on all three. It admittedly did all three a hell of a lot better than I would have expected to be possible...it gets a 6/10 using the full 1-10 point scale. Maybe a 7 due to a couple interesting additions like the Heart's use on random people to discover things about them and eavesdropping being implemented well enough.

Edit: Changed my mind. It gets a 4. Thought about it and I realized that the last game that I couldn't finish playing through because of how horrible I thought the mechanics were was three years ago. Cross Edge. Loved everything but the gameplay. God the gameplay sucked.

A 4 because not playing through it reminded you that there is a much worse game out there? Oookay then.

Anyways, yeah it was a bit too short. Open world would've been lovely, but meh.

 

[Kopikatsu]

In a few words, it's a good game but it goes by so fast that it almost feels like there's a whole act missing.

That's exactly how I would describe Vanquish.

Anyway, I played through a few missions in Dishonored before dropping it. First person platforming is a horrible bastardization of mechanics and camera angles, as is first person stealth and first person melee combat. Dishonored focuses on all three. It admittedly did all three a hell of a lot better than I would have expected to be possible...it gets a 6/10 using the full 1-10 point scale. Maybe a 7 due to a couple interesting additions like the Heart's use on random people to discover things about them and eavesdropping being implemented well enough.

Edit: Changed my mind. It gets a 4. Thought about it and I realized that the last game that I couldn't finish playing through because of how horrible I thought the mechanics were was three years ago. Cross Edge. Loved everything but the gameplay. God the gameplay sucked.

A 4 because not playing through it reminded you that there is a much worse game out there? Oookay then.

Anyways, yeah it was a bit too short. Open world would've been lovely, but meh.

Reviews are subjective opinions. I did not have fun playing the game. The game's base mechanics were so abhorrent to me that I couldn't even finish a game that I paid $60 for.

It's lucky that I gave it as high as a 4. Partially because that world was somewhat interesting, even if the world wasn't nearly as built up as I'd have liked it to have been. 'Course, since I never finished it, maybe some of the later missions throw a ton of information about the world outside of your little boxed off, predetermined mission areas.

Edit: Cross Edge had nothing to do with my saying Dishonored deserves a 4 from me. I was just saying that it was the first game in three years that I felt was so horrible that I couldn't even see it to completion. And that's saying something, because I have played a LOT of games in those three years.

Edit 2: The closest you can get to objectively rating games is to go purely on production value. But that's better at weeding out the bad games than tell you which ones are good. For example, on that scale, ME3 would get an 11/10.

 

[The Madman]

I do feel the ending felt a bit rushed and that the game could have explained and expanded on things a bit more. Just one more chapter perhaps might have been nice, slipped right in there between 8 and 9. Something that perhaps clarifies things some and allows some resolution to a few sub-plot in a satisfying manner!

That aside when my main complaint about a game is "I want more!" they've clearly done something right. Loved the gameplay, loved the setting, loved the game in general. I hope it sells well so that developers will consider doing more games in this style, also I want Arkane Studios to do well so they can finally get around to making Arx Fatalis 2.

...as is first person stealth...

Can't agree with you there at all. Stealth is best in first person, it allows a level of tension and intensity that third person camera simply can't provide. When you can just pan the view around a corner or see directly behind your character there's no challenge, no sense of personal risk. When you're playing a stealth game in first person even something as simple as leaning from behind a corner becomes a finger-biting experience, this adds to the sense of tension which is what drives a good stealth game; the drive to not be caught. First person also allows for a higher importance on sound quality as you're hearing everything from the same perspective of the character...

So basically Thief did it best. First person stealth is the best sort of stealth, it simply provides the more intense and atmospheric experience which ultimately is what stealth games should be all about.

 

[rbstewart7263]

I dont know not every game needs a gta/skyrim feel to it in my personal opinion. the size ofthe game was what allowed for all of those small details. youd lose those for a large but ultimately empty sandbox most likely and while youd have more to do the game would most likely lack that magic.

 

[Kopikatsu]

...as is first person stealth...

Can't agree with you there at all. Stealth is best in first person, it allows a level of tension and intensity that third person camera simply can't provide. When you can just pan the view around a corner or see directly behind your character there's no challenge, no sense of personal risk. When you're playing a stealth game in first person even something as simple as leaning from behind a corner becomes a finger-biting experience, this adds to the sense of tension which is what drives a good stealth game; the drive to not be caught. First person also allows for a higher importance on sound quality as you're hearing everything from the same perspective of the character...

So basically Thief did it best. First person stealth is the best sort of stealth, it simply provides the more intense and atmospheric experience which ultimately is what stealth games should be all about.

I feel that first person stealth is too restricting and the first person makes it difficult to tell when you're hidden, look around cover (the 'peek' function has always bugged the crap out of me in every game ever, usually rebind those immediately), and makes it hard to judge distance accurately...which helps immensely when trying to stay just out of an enemy's LOS. There's also the lack of peripheral vision which third person games can simulate. Third person also allows you to plan your route better because the range of sight is much greater, allowing you to peek over cover to get a good grasp on your surroundings. You mentioned that it lowers tension, and I would actually agree with that, but I'd trade atmosphere for a more tactical approach. Especially since, as I mentioned, the tension added by having a first person camera is more due to the camera scheme's limitations in providing a clear picture than anything else.

But I guess the basis of the differing viewpoints is that you prefer 'sneaking' stealth and I prefer 'predator' stealth.

Anywho, besides the camera scheme, I'll just throw out one of the major reasons why I feel that Dishonored is poorly designed.

Combat vs Stealth: The game gives you a TON of fun, lethal toys...and every time you even think about using one, it slaps your hand away and makes you sit in the corner with a dunce hat. Even though the game claims to cater to both playstyles (run-'n-gun and ghost), it really doesn't. This is especially apparent in the endings, where there is the 'good' ending for stealth and 'you suck' ending for...not stealth. Sure, you can only kill the few people who really deserve it and still make out with the good ending, but it just doesn't sit right with me. But seriously. You have like twenty weapons/lethal powers...but if you want the good ending, you'll be stuck with only sleeping darts (arrows?) and choking people out. Woo. Fun. Corvo's arsenal makes it seem as though you should be fighting your way through the stages, but the game punishes you for that. No vital information for you! Or more equipment. Or the good ending. Oh, running low on coins because you needed health potions 'cause you weren't sneaking around? Have some more guards! But go stealth? You'll have about ten times more items and money than you'll ever need because you never use anything but Blink, Possession, and Sleep Darts/Arrows. And there are less guards running around, so stealth becomes even easier as you go on.

Also, the AI is retarded. There's no satisfaction in stalking them in the dark, slowly picking them off one by one. They don't care. They don't even notice unless there's a dead body sitting right next to them. Not even a "Hey, where did that guy that I was just talking to go?" It makes the stealth extremely unsatisfying. Every time I finished a level purely via stealth, it felt like winning the special olympics as the only guy not in a wheelchair.

 

[distortedreality]

Is there any news of story extending DLC? I tend to agree with the OP - there was so much potential there that was left untapped. I hope the world gets more of an exploration, because what we see is really interesting, and I would love to see more.

 

[The Madman]

...
But I guess the basis of the differing viewpoints is that you prefer 'sneaking' stealth and I prefer 'predator' stealth.

Anywho, besides the camera scheme, I'll just throw out one of the major reasons why I feel that Dishonored is poorly designed...

Not going to quote everything because I dislike being spammy, but I did read everything and I continue to disagree both on stealth gameplay in general and Dishonored.

Spoiler: For spammy reasons I'm also spoilering my response.

You say 3rd person allows for a more 'tactical' approach but other than making the experience easier and less atmospheric it's not like it limits your tactical abilities in any way to play in first person. It simply makes things more challenging, forcing the player to adapt to the limits of... well, having only two eyes. Some of the most intense gaming experience I've ever had, regardless of genre or age, are moments like the Thief series provides where you're constantly looking around you, glancing over your shoulders and clinging desperately to the shadows as you listen intently for any noise that might mean your approach is being given away. It's these sorts of atmospheric and intense moments that for me define the entire stealth genre, not just jumping from cover to cover to avoid the line of sight cone from some generic guard. That feels more like a timing puzzle more than being stealthy. Which isn't to say that you don't do that in a game like Thief, but without the aid of cover mechanics and being forced to rely purely on your own limited sight and sound makes it all the more intense and it's that intensity which makes it interesting.

Similarly in terms of being tactical finding a nice high perch and observing the guards patrol patterns, figuring out when one is alone or when you can slip by and how is just as valid only the act itself is all the more challenging and entertaining.

I love that Dishonored lets me play like this in some admittedly limited fashion, I really do. It gives me hope that maybe just maybe Thief 4 wont be the utter crap I'd long ago given it up as most likely being.

As for your comments on Dishonored you said you only played a few levels, so why does it matter about the ending to you? Besides, having played the game to its conclusion I found it satisfying. Certainly not the best ending I've ever seen and I'd definitely have liked more. Some sense of closure over the smaller details, a more thrilling final confrontation. It would have been nice, but the ending certainly was no crushing disappointment either. Meanwhile ending aside it seems your complaints have more to do with personal playstyle than the game itself; just because the game allows you to do something doesn't mean doing so wont also have consequences. I like that personally. Someone running around slaughtering everyone in their path *should* have different consequences compared to someone who killed no one and was rarely seen.

Dishonored is also very much a game that asks to be replayed, another element of ye olden gaming style mechanics I'd long given up on. It's like in Deus Ex, Planescape: Torment or even the more recent Vampire: Bloodlines where if you want the full story you'll want to play through the game multiple times. Therefor getting one ending or another isn't a detriment, it's just seeing another aspect of the setting. High chaos playthrough will reveal new dialogue and secrets a low chaos playthrough will not, characters will say different things and when interacted with do different things. Personally I'm looking forward to replaying the game because I know I can play it almost entirely different and even receive a slightly different narrative experience as well.

Again, I like that very much. I like it when a game gives me options and doesn't treat me like an idiot who needs their hands guided every step nor someone who needs every little detailed explained to them. I like figuring things out for myself, exploring, trying new approach.

...But then that's me. Obviously that's not for everyone. I can certainly see the appeal of a more direct front-loaded cinematic experience, but the gaming industry is full of those right now. Personally I'm just happy to see games like Dishonored still exist, flaws and all (And the game *DOES* have flaws, can't really argue with your AI complaint for example.) it's a refreshing breath of fresh air.

 

[Freakazoid]

I do agree with Kopikatsu on the whole AI thing. Plus the arsenal thing really annoyed me. What am I supposed to do with all these spring razors dammit? I just feel that the game isn't really as open-ended as it seems.
As far as first-person goes, I really don't understand the complaints about combat. I actually thought the sword fighting was pretty good. I enjoyed the fact that it was a sort of slow strategic affair because of the high amounts of damage the enemies deal and the advantage that a perfect parry gives you.

 

[IronMit]

The game looks interesting. Nice to see a few different stealth and almost platformer mechanics being implemented in a new setting. Will be waiting till it's £10.

More interested in Hitman, further improvements on the already very good AI from previous games. So good in fact they added another feature where you can challenge each other to assassinate different people in the level and have a different experience. And from what they showed it actually worked,

Hopefully it's as good as it should be,

Good AI is what immerses me. Heard people complaining that they stopped time and killed 6 out of 7 guards in dishounoured and the 7th guard wasn't fazed. Then they threw the head of his fellow guard at him and he didn't care. It's almost 2013, on a game where enemy AI is so important they should of figured out a lot of scenarios.

 

[chikusho]

First person platforming is a horrible bastardization of mechanics and camera angles

Blink solves first person platforming.

 

[Kellogs Fried Chickn]

Although well executed I would not call this a mechanically impressive game. They could have added much depth with the current mechanics had they expanded them a bit.

AI still shoots the game in the foot - no, it'll never be good enough. The guards should start noticing when half of them are absent, sleeping in a dumpster. The game fails in stealth runs as you can take as much time with them as you like, knocking them out and dragging them to a nearby dumpster, often noticing there are less bodies than there should be, creepy.
Have you noticed the communicative devices often stuck to walls? I sure have - they look very dangerous - but luckily my voyeuristic fixations haven't.
Corvo also appears to emit no odors as he keeps passing through kennels of excitable hounds without anyone noticing. Perhaps he really is a ghost, reliving his failure beyond death for the amusement of the Outsider.

A sequel, in terms of Corvo's story, is unlikely. He isn't supposed to be some destined hero buy just a regular elite schmo that failed to prevent a coup and keep to his old loyalties. My hopes lie with reused assets and a prequel in 2014.
I do recall that certain key members of the team would not immediately jump on a sequel, so hopefully enough of the staff would work on it to keep it from straying too far. Or, you know, give it to Obsidian Entertainment, they seem to specialize in story and sequels, but we'll have to get used to bugs instead of rats.

 

[Ix Rebound]

That's why I'm hoping for a sequel that will hopefully expand to an open world.

I don't think they would be able to make a sequel, the endings cut off all loose ends and due to the whole "good" and "bad" conclusions they would have a hard to continue it

 

[Fraught]

Anyway, I played through a few missions in Dishonored before dropping it. First person platforming is a horrible bastardization of mechanics and camera angles, as is first person stealth and first person melee combat. Dishonored focuses on all three. It admittedly did all three a hell of a lot better than I would have expected to be possible...it gets a 6/10 using the full 1-10 point scale. Maybe a 7 due to a couple interesting additions like the Heart's use on random people to discover things about them and eavesdropping being implemented well enough.

I thought the platforming was great. I mean, sure, you can't as good a sense of where you're gonna land in first-person games, but I thought the animation was great and it gave a sense of weight to how the character moved. Not to mention that I thought the way you had to peek around corners and other things that were there expressly because of the first-person perspective, were great, and immersed me much more into the whole "silent assassin" role.

Then again, I thought using The Heart to read people's thoughts would be interesting, but it's just a few lines that it repeats over and over again with every character, so I'm surprised that's what you found "interesting".

That's why I'm hoping for a sequel that will hopefully expand to an open world.

I don't think they would be able to make a sequel, the endings cut off all loose ends and due to the whole "good" and "bad" conclusions they would have a hard to continue it

I did do a Low Chaos run, though it does give you a more positive ending, which leaves less room for a sequel, but even with the Low Chaos ending, there are literally over a dozen million ways the story could further develop from there.

Besides, Dishonored only dealt with the actions of one tyrant in the game universe's history. Not to mention it's just Dunwall, the capital of Gristol. Like mentioned before, there's a whole world out there that the game didn't touch, and Arkane could easily just forget about the story of the first Dishonored and even continue a completely new storyline somewhere else, with new characters.

 

[SajuukKhar]

That's why I'm hoping for a sequel that will hopefully expand to an open world.

I don't think they would be able to make a sequel, the endings cut off all loose ends and due to the whole "good" and "bad" conclusions they would have a hard to continue it

Not really, Fallout frequently tells people their ending is wrong and no one seems to care.

 

[Piorn]

I am already deeply in love with the lore, and would love a game that expands on it without explaining too much. Especially the whales.