Nepenthe Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 Nah, I think that it should be balance between the two. Otherwise the amount of ventilation ducts and stuff becomes just ridiculous. Sometimes the use of (non-lethal) force should be necessary. Have you played Blood Money? Yes. It's already been a couple of weeks, so I can't remember much. All jokes aside, I did think it was somewhat forgettable, even if it was better than the third one. Good points about not necessarily needing air ducts, but I think that if you repeatedly hit high-security targets, you occasionally need to take out a guy or two rather than magically find a way to circumvent all of them You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
lasthearth Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 I don't expect it be to magical. It should be hard. A challenge. You have to really puzzle your way around how to go about it without killing people. And I'd have no problem with certain objectives where it is impossible. Where if you want to not kill people you have to skip it. That's what choices should be about.
213374U Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) Yes. It's already been a couple of weeks, so I can't remember much. All jokes aside, I did think it was somewhat forgettable, even if it was better than the third one. Good points about not necessarily needing air ducts, but I think that if you repeatedly hit high-security targets, you occasionally need to take out a guy or two rather than magically find a way to circumvent all of them My point was that BM shows that it's possible to design an infiltration-focused gameplay where not killing anyone is not only possible, but can actually be more rewarding than going in guns blazing. No vent ducts whatsoever. And no magic either, aside from insta-changing clothes and enemies not being suspicious that some bald dude with a barcode in the back of his skull, that they've never seen before, is now the latest member of their security outfit. I have no idea how real world ops are conducted, but I'm inclined to believe that producing corpses is very messy and risky, and therefore, to be avoided whenever possible. Edited August 17, 2009 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
alanschu Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 some bald dude with a barcode in the back of his skull, that they've never seen before, is now the latest member of their security outfit. I always did enjoy that
mingoran Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 Good points about not necessarily needing air ducts, but I think that if you repeatedly hit high-security targets, you occasionally need to take out a guy or two rather than magically find a way to circumvent all of them If you are the best stealth/hacker dude, there is always a way to avoid combat. One or two guys who need to be disabled shouldn't be an issue, but my mind will always wonder if it wouldn't be possible to give the player a clever puzzle to avoid going into combat, for the ultimate XBOX achievement.
Nepenthe Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 Yes. It's already been a couple of weeks, so I can't remember much. All jokes aside, I did think it was somewhat forgettable, even if it was better than the third one. Good points about not necessarily needing air ducts, but I think that if you repeatedly hit high-security targets, you occasionally need to take out a guy or two rather than magically find a way to circumvent all of them My point was that BM shows that it's possible to design an infiltration-focused gameplay where not killing anyone is not only possible, but can actually be more rewarding than going in guns blazing. No vent ducts whatsoever. And no magic either, aside from insta-changing clothes and enemies not being suspicious that some bald dude with a barcode in the back of his skull, that they've never seen before, is now the latest member of their security outfit. I have no idea how real world ops are conducted, but I'm inclined to believe that producing corpses is very messy and risky, and therefore, to be avoided whenever possible. I'm fairly sure that even Blood Money requires you to knock out one of those guards every now and then to get access to his uniform. There isn't one conveniently lying around in EVERY mission. Not really disagreeing with you, mind, just bringing out some different viewpoints (occupational hazard) You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
Humodour Posted August 19, 2009 Posted August 19, 2009 You can kill almost anyone in the game, really, including pretty much every major character. It's interesting how Obsidian managed to take this path and Bioware will go great lenghts to make most of the characters immortal. Writers, like David Gaider, probably want to keep most of the characters alive as killing 'em would make his job harder. I liked how BG2 allowed most of the characters to be killed but Mr.Gaider thinks it's not worth the extra work. This issue would probably make a great discussion panel at the Game Developers Conference. Kudos for taking the different path Obsidian! **** yes it's worth the extra work. Glad Obsidian didn't cop out on this like Bioware often does.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now