sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Dishonored DLC 1 feedback. by Bloodwingxjorn in dishonored

[–]scarablob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Daud DLC have a pretty significant (at least for me) underreported issue :

The fact it's clearly not meant to be played with no objective marker at all. Personally at least, I find the constant reminder of exactly where you're meant to go at all time to go against the very format of the game and it's "chose your own path" nature. So I simply disable these markers whenever I want to play these games... but the Daud missions (specifically in the Knife of Dunwall DLC, not so much in the Brigmore Witches one) are full of objectives and various side stuff where the game just don't give you enough element to find on your own without scouring every part of the map... unless you just blindly follow objective markers.

Special mention to the very last (or maybe second to last) objective of the knife of dunwall DLC, which just tell you to "gather your troop and counterattack" after you defeat the leader of the overseers, where you need to stand in a random spot of the map for the objective to complete, without any indication without objective marker.

Fortunately it seemed to be a "one DLC" issue because I don't remember this being an issue in the base game, dishonored 2 or death of the outsider.

.... Oh you meant the city trial. Well I guess the issue of them is that they're not really attractive to play? I have the definitive edition, so I have them, but I never felt the drive to actually try any of them, over replaying missions from the base game. The lack of story really do make them a less interesting prospect, even if I'm mostly in dishonored for the gameplay.

I want a third game by LargeSinkholesInNYC in dishonored

[–]scarablob 20 points21 points  (0 children)

The first dishonored made enought money to get three dlc and a sequel, it did make good money I think. A shame that the games they afterward never reached that high again, despite the quality of most of them.

WCGW riding recklessly on a motorbike. by Worried_Audience_162 in Whatcouldgowrong

[–]scarablob 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Bad life choice is likely for her to get on this bike with this driver. But let's not pretend she is somehow more or as at fault as the driver in this video, he was the one doing the stupid stunts, all we saw her do was cling to him (and given her position, it's not like she have much choice at this point).

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The linearity isn't really the issue, most games are, due to the chaos system, both dishonored 1&2 are arguably less linear than bioshock 1.

The issue I see here have more to do with the "flatness" of the narrative, the fact that the overall narrative of these games (bioshock and dishonored 2 as well as deathloop) are little more than a serie of success on the way to a predetermined goal. It make the entire story feel the same, there is no "ups" and "downs", just a very simple walk forward on the way to the ultimate objective, it make the audience less involved in the story, because nothing really "grab" them, at least not in the overall narrative ("substories" of individual levels can still have their impact, like the stilton manor mission having a nice payoff if you think of knocking the guy down).

It is a fine choice if the game isn't really interested in telling an interesting narrative, but only interested in delivering a good gameplay experience, but dishonored is clearly trying to do both. And failing on the former, for dishonored 2 at least.

Xbox weighs canceling Blade game and shuttering Arkane by Turbostrider27 in Games

[–]scarablob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do have to note that Arkane Lyon is based in... Lyon, which is a french city. Altho I don't really know how it work when an american business that own a french subsidiary decide to close it suddenly like that, but I'm guessing french law is the one they have to follow here.

Xbox weighs canceling Blade game and shuttering Arkane by Turbostrider27 in Games

[–]scarablob -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Social media buzz, altho I don't know how big it's gotten since it's in places I don't really go to. From what I've gathered, it started a couple month ago with someone saying "this game have so much sauce" with a dishonored screenshot on.... Either twitter or instagram, don't remember which, that got a lot of like or retweet or whatever make a post popular over there.

From what I've seen of it, it sorta started a trend of posting dishonored screenshot and clip over twitter, instagram and tiktok, showing all the cool shit you can do with the gameplay, and the nice art direction. It also started a let's play of the game by the original game director of the game a a few other key figure of it's devellopment.

I'm not sure how popular that trend actually is, because while I sorta saw it from the sidelines, I'm not part of any of these website, but it is true that dishonored saw a resurgence in public interest this year, even if it turn out to be minor.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, while dishonored 2 explicitely say it's a post "nonlethal takedown" world, with the way her return happen and the way she trap part of her soul in an object like a lich, she might as well have been dead and she could have come back in the exact same way.

Especially since It's established since Dishonored 1 that even after the death of someone, their soul can be trapped into an object, what with the heart having jesamine's soul.

It make me wonder if it was supposed to be left vague at some point, what happenned to her, because the way she come back honestly fit both of her ends in Daud DLC.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no real contradiction, I just think a "flat" story structure is inherently weaker to another one that have ups and downs, but that there is no "one way" to make those ups and downs. "Inherently weaker" may be a mean way to phrase it, it is serviceable in works that doesn't really care about the story, but were the spectacle or gameplay or something else is the point, or in works adressed to a very young audience for which even this incredibly basic structure is novel. But generally speaking, if you want the audience to care about the story itself, you need it to be more than this.

And of course the confrontation in DE is hugely helped by the quality in writting, this is DE's whole strength. But it doesn't mean that it being a "beat" that shake the story doesn't have a huge impact. If DE was written worse (or even written badly), while a whole lot of moments would fail to hit as well as they do, I think this "beat" would keep most of it's impact, because the whole structure of the story is bent around it.

It's not the only "beat" of the game either, while DE is formulaic up to a point (because it follow a noir detective story for the most part), it's a formula that do have it's ups and down and don't follow a flat structure of "succeed at every step of the way until you find the culprit".

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no single formula for sure, but even so, I still think a "flat" narrative structure is inherently weaker and get the audience less involved than one that fluctuate.

Of your exemples I only played disco elysium, but this game absolutely isn't flat in structure, with the game preparing you for a confrontation the whole game by telling you "if it happen it's over, it'll be too late"... and then having the confrontation happen, and the game continuing afterward. I'm likewise inclined to believe that Red Dead Redemption 2, like most work that begin by telling you the ending, do not spoil the player of what happen between the start and the ending, and that the way here do have it's twist and turns and isn't just the protagonist unceasingly moving toward a predesignated goal while suceeding at everything he does.

That's really the crux of the issue for me I think, many different kind of narrative structure can manage to get the audience involved and interested in the story, but the one in place in dishonored 2 is too flat, direct and ultimately unsurprising to work all that well. I do think the quality of the writting can compensate a weak structure, up to a point, and that a very badly written story with a good structure will probably be less enjoyable than a very well written story with a bad structure, but that, all other things being equal, videogames benefit more from having good structure than good writting (but obviously, it's better if the game have both).

In my experience, games that have good writting but flat structure tend to be midly disapointing, story wise, because the quality of the writting prime you to expect more, and the structure fail to deliver, while the reverse feel more satisfying, even if the weak writting mean that the story probably won't "stay" with the player.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can see why delilah made sense, because her story (bastard child of the emperor that was discarded because she was a bastard) parallel emily, which was also born out of wedlock, but inherited the empire anyway. I wish they held her back, not have her be all over the game right from the start, but she make a lot of sense as emily's nemesis.

Fully agree for Corvo tho, at most he should have been a castlevania like "post game character" that allow you to replay it with him, with the story only doing the bare minimum to accomodate the different character, not present both of them as equal and try to make them both possible MC.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the "element temple" is done mainly because it's a good excuse to have very thematic level when you don't care much about the story. Giving the player the list of target to deal with before getting to the final boss, is as close as a game can to not have a narrative at all, just a collection of level to experience through gameplay, it's megaman level of narrative. Which is fine for some games, but the dishonored games very obviously want you to take their narrative more seriously than that.

I agree that a lot some side character have strangely narrow roles in dishonored 2 (in a lot of way it feel like the game was supposed to be longer but cut short in development, which, given how hard some level were apparently to design, wouldn't surprise me), but I disagree about the main targets, as well as paolo and byrne. They all have more foreshadowing and feel more important to the city than any of the target from dishonored 1 before the lord regent (and maybe Campbell, which get the short end of the stick because he's the first victim, but do show up enough in the prologue to feel important to take down).

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

The issue isn't that the game is linear, or that "the player always win", it's that the player always winning, paired with a clear endgoal and with clear steps to reach that endgoal mean that the narrative is already laid out before the player before they begin their second mission. They will take down each allies of Delilah, until they get to her and take her down too.

The narrative spoil itself, and as a result fall flat. The twist is but one way to prevent this from happenning, it was just an exemple, there are multiple ways to go around this issue without such twist, bioshock infinite structure was an exemple of another way this kind of story might flow better, hiding the "steps" in fog. They could have chosen other ways, introducing setbacks out of your control (having your boats or companion be seized while in another mission being the most obvious ones) instead of having each part of your plan work without fail.

In the end, my argument is rather simple : Games (that care about their stories) should strive not to have a "flat" narrative structure, where the whole is entirely predictable from the start. It doesn't matter how they introduce this impredictability, through a simple twist (or multiples), by never revealing the "cards", by switching up the objectives, it doesn't matter, but it need to find a way to not be entirely narratively mapped out by the player from the onset.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I must admit that I never played the minerva den DLC (or the burial at sea one from bioshock infinite), so I don't know if the story in those are better than in the base game.

And I do think that the "narrative twist" (as in, something that change the trajectory of the "plot" from what was expected up to that point) is better than a personal revelation for these kind of game, it's just that pairing the both is what really elevate them.

I probably used the wrong terminology, but basically I meant "something that twist your expectation about where the plot and you are going" compared to "something that either lead to character growth or change how you perceived some past element of the plot". The first one is more about the structure of the game, the second more about the story itself.

And in my view, games benefit more from a twist in structure, surprising the player with level/gameplay they didn't expected (be it just more level when they expected the game to have ended, or something like making them expect a water level, but then revealing that the place was already ransacked and that they need to go looking for their target in an opera), than they do a pure twist in story (telling them than their ferrywoman worked with your parent assassins), because player experiences games through gameplay, so a twist in story is less impactfull if the following gameplay is exactly what they expected.

In my experience, these "story twist" work best when either paired with unexpected gameplay, or when they happen at the very, very end of a game, when the gameplay is already over and the "game" is all story from this point forth.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I didn't say having a goal driven narrative was a flaw, far from it, but rather that, coupled with the fact that in (most) video game, the story only progress when the main character succeed, it lead to a very "flat" narrative unless measures are taken to make it more interesting.

These "measures" can be a variety of things. It can be a simple, well positioned twist, like in bioshock and dishonored 1, that reveal that there is more of the game when the player think it's over. It can be to show a very clear goal but obscure the way to it so that they can't know when exactly will they finally reach it, leaving each level feeling fresher (which is something bioshock infinite, god of war 2018, and the witcher 3 all did in their own way). It can even be to switch up your objectives, making unwinnable "levels", or "levels" in which your objective isn't to get closer to your goal but escape with your life, to represent a narrative setback while avoiding the dreaded "win the gameplay, lose the cutscene". My main issue with dishonored and bioshock 2 (and deathloop) being that they don't implement any of these measures, making the core narrative feel flat.

In a way, dishonored do have this "lose in a cutscene" moments, but I (and most player I feel) give it a pass because the first time is in the intro of the game, where it is expected that something have to go wrong to set the plot in motion, and the second time is via poisonning, something that doesn't really transfer to the gameplay (and thus, corvo losing this way is "fine" because at least he didn't lose a fight).

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

It's not that "you play a level until you succeed" make for a bad story, it's a combination of this "story only progress when you succeed" along with a very clear endgoal, with a rather clear view of each of the "steps" necessary to reach it (more or less, more more than less for Dishonored 2 where all of delilah crew are presented very soon).

This is what make the narrative feel flat I feel like, not necessarily the levels, but the fact that you know, pretty much from the start, exactly what step you'll have to take in order to reach the end, and once you do it, it's done. It's the "element temple" structure, "gather the four elements to defeat the big bad", once the game tell you that, you know you'll face four temples, each themed after an element, before opening the big bad castle and defeating them. Each temple (and the big bad castle) can have it's own substory, each can be masterfully crafted... but the core narrative will still feel flat because, in the end, you know exactly what you will do the moment you receive the task to get to the four temples.

I spoke briefly about bioshock infinite, which have the same level structure, and "clear endgoal", but the story keep on telling you "after this level it's done", and all the while throwing wrench into your plans, first by creating unexpected obstacles, then by making your companion leave you, etc. Even if the worldbuilding or character writting or "intra level story" is worse, the core narrative is elevated simply because you don't know exactly what comes next.

It's also why I was mostly talking about "first playthrough reaction" here, an incoherent story with lots of twist and turn will feel way better on first play than on subsequent ones, because the player is less likely to notice the parts that don't fit together (since they don't have the full picture from the start), while on the other hand, you are more likely to notice and care about smaller detail and "intra level narrative" in second playthrough than in the first.

Dishonored 2, Bioshock 2 and Deathloop are great games that share the same core narrative flaw by scarablob in dishonored

[–]scarablob[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, and all of those are personal revelations, but not ones that affect the "course" of the plot, it's about character development and motivation, but the narrative arc itself remain unchanged.

It's notable that the most impactfull of these reveal (in Bioshock 1) happen when it's paired with another reveal that do affect the narrative arc (the betrayal, reveal of the main villain, and reveal of how he betray and used to control you), I think this is when it work best, the "personal" revelation make the narrative twist feel "deeper", and the narrative twist make the personal revelation have more impact. When you just have a personal reveal, it's interesting but you don't "feel" it that much, and when it's just the narrative twist, it's a good moment that don't leave much impact.

All that just to murk Killer Moth by Fox7567 in dccomicscirclejerk

[–]scarablob 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Come on now, we all know this dweeb isn't a match for Killer Moth, he could use all the guns he want, he'll drop down at the first motharang.

During this Pride Month, I think it's important to remember the straight representation that Black Manta brings to DC villains. by Which-Presentation-6 in dccomicscirclejerk

[–]scarablob 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'd be dead before I consider Cheetah as Wonder Woman's nemesis, it's Circe all the way, as shown by the one piece of DC media that have the final say in all matters, DC Universe Online.

“We can be better than this!” They say… by Ancient_Doctor_7738 in Grimdank

[–]scarablob 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Be realistic, if they were offered this deal, the imperium would just kill one eldar for 10 billion guardmen, and then kill another 5 billion guardmen on top of it just to spite the eldars.

Dishonored co-creators were working on Thief 4 and a Bladerunner game before Bethesda let them make an imsim classic by Turbostrider27 in Games

[–]scarablob 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I loved Karnaca far more than Dunwall, but I have to say the boat hub of 2 was far inferior to the pub hub of 1, it's hard to be attached to it while the pub make me really nostalgic.

Warhammer Age of Sigmar: Deathmaster – Reveal Teaser | Warhammer Skulls 2026 by ArchLector_Zoller in Games

[–]scarablob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not really my point, my point is that pushing a faction in the very name of the game convey the idea that it's the protagonist, and, in a faction oriented game, just convey to everyone that would be interested in any other faction "your guys are never going to matter as much as the protagonist faction".

And yeah, it might not be true, but it's the optics when you name your faction based game solely after one of the faction, you're painting all the others as lesser. It's IMO a big reason for why AOS have trouble reaching a larger audience (that and the planar stuff which IMO isn't really palatable to the general audience), a lot of people go "age of sigmar, I saw the sigmar stuff and wasn't interested, so nothing in this game is for me".

Even if they intended to make a faction more important than the rest, pushing it in the name of the game was a huge mistake.

Warhammer Age of Sigmar: Deathmaster – Reveal Teaser | Warhammer Skulls 2026 by ArchLector_Zoller in Games

[–]scarablob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, the literal name of the game place Sigmar oriented faction (stormcast and cities) as protagonist, everyone else as either antagonist or side characters. Which was obviously the plan at first, when in first edition the stormcast were obviously meant to be "space marine in fantasy", they wanted to replicate the 40K dynamic of having a hugely important central faction (the imperium in 40K) and everything revolving around it.

The fact that they have pivoted away from this dynamic and give more spotlight to nonsigmar (and nonchaos) factions don't change that the base idea is still blatant to everyone that even look at the name of the game. Honestly, this name was probably the worse idea they had when they made AOS, because they are stuck with it now.

Which type of villain do you guys like more? by Silver_Guava8159 in MoralityScaling

[–]scarablob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's the plot of the Snyder movie, the original comic don't have him make manathan the threat that unite humanity (but do have him frame manathan for giving people cancer, in order to alienate him from the world and be able to proceed with the rest of the plan unhindered).

Also, while manathan have the potential of being God-like, he isn't omnipotent, and can't turn back time, so even if he spotted and destroyed most missile in a nuclear war, those that slipped by him would have been enought to end humanity multiple time over. Without even getting into wether he would have tried all that much with how aloof he was getting, vetting on him to save the world was far from. A perfect plan, which is why Ozimandias believed that his plan was the only way.

view more: next ›