System Shock 1 vs. System Shock 2

System Shock 2 is derivative as fuck, to be honest.

System Shock 1 is also derivative as fuck, but the difference with SS2 is that it's basically a very smartly created piece of post-modern artistry, while SS2 plays it absolutely straight. SS1 is basically one part "immersive sim manifesto" (and it actually manages to say the final word on its whole ideology - with no other "immersive sims", Deus Ex 1 and Prey included, being able to add anything worthwhile to the concept ideologically), one part an Ultima Underworld deconstruction, and is basically "a game that is much more of a gesture, than an actual game" (see Shadow of the Colossus, The Void, The Witness, etc.). None of its innovations over Ultima Underworld 1 really stuck or anything (rather than audiologs from the enhanced version), and the core mechanics just suck today (Pathways into Darkness, HeXen1 and Cybermage were MUCH more playable FPS/dungeoncrawler mixes of that time) but it's a pretty unique piece of artistry ONCE you manage to get to the subtext of games inside games, and the relationships between "virtual" and "real", which form the main crux of its problematics. The whole concept is ridiculously 4th wall breaking, and I've honestly never seen anything like this game, other than, maybe, to some extent The Witness.

Anyway, that's Doug Church for you, and SS1 is definitely his "le auteur" game. His magnum opus, though, is "Thief: The Dark Project" (which is a modernist piece, not the postmodernist one).

Anyway, two of the LGS games that truly matter, even today, are Ultima Underworld 1 and Thief:TDP. System Shock is a smart spin over UU1, a charismatic "immersive sim manifesto", which says way more about the whole concept, than all of its wannabe followers combined ever managed to, and a great piece of postmodernist artistry if you are into that sort of thing - although it's not a very good game. And SS2 is simply another derivative Levinshit.

parts of this read like a joke but you seem serious. This is the most unique opinion on the game I've heard yet, care to elaborate on how it's a "deconstruction"?

Why don't you check these digits instead?

You've got some balls, I'll give you that.

Very nice.

Those trips are nicer though.

read this and tell me it doesn't sound sarcastic

2 is excellent and perfectly playable by today's standards. A solid 4/5 or even 5/5 game. It has its flaws but they can be overlooked, and it's a masterpiece in most areas.
1 is even better than 2 but the idea of needing to take time to learn basic functional mechanics feels archaic by today's standards. It rewards players willing to learn the game but most people used to modern games will struggle hard to get used to the game.

They're both great games. I wouldn't hold it against anyone who played SS2 but never played SS1 past the first level.

This is also a rare case where I'd suggest someone play the games in reverse chronological order.
SS2, then SS1.

Enough people have wanked over it for pretentious reasons.

I was shitposting, user.

This is complete gibberish. What is "immersive sim manifesto" supposed to mean? How is SS1 postmodern? Postmodern works deconstruct/critique/subvert modernism. How does SS1 break the 4th wall in any way? Quit huffing your own farts and write something comprehensible.

very positive, immersive, dont hold your hand, especially first game.
very hard choice, but i think i would go with first one.
what i like about 2nd game the most are the rpg elements, upgrading yourself, inventory, looting for many diff items, RESEARCH system etc.
but the exploration of the first one, good balance between fight, spook and explore/puzzle, complex but making sense maps, amazing soundtrack, imho good believable voice acting on cd version, even tho from what i heard it was done mostly by people who worked on the game, not pro voice actors. variety of weapons always nice, different ammo types if i remember correctly? i might be wrong on that one, its been few years, but i think 1st ss had it. Just overall experience of SS is amazing and very VERY immersive. I also appreciate many improvements over ultima underworld. if first system shock had some kinda inventory and item hoarding like ud, and psi spells and stats, that would be 10/10 best game of all time for me. but its a solid 9.5

I remember one door in ss i couldnt find a password to, it was a 3 digit password. i spend over 30 minutes bruteforcing starting from 000 and going up, from what i remember code started with 7, 731 or something. and o boy, it felt great. today games just give u code on a platter or dont even bother with any obstacle at all. 3 digit codes are great, able to brute force with reasonable amount of time if u cant find the code.

That's one of the coolest things I've ever seen. Did you make it? If so, can I use it? I made these two for the video to show the degeneration in world design

My general idea is that I like the second one, but it doesn't provide what a good SS sequel should have provided and should probably have been its own IP.

forgot pics. I whipped these up in a few minutes

indiedb.com/games/citadel
i found it here, it actually has alot more pictures you might find very useful.
i think the project is abandoned, but pictures are worth saving

If you were to look at both games as immersive sims, then I believe SS1 is the most immersive out of the bunch.

Whereas SS2 had you upgrading your intangible 'rig' through intangible vague cybermodules which somehow could be found on the floor but also transmitted over the internet, SS1 had you jacking in implants and installing software into your brain as a means of progression whose presence on a space station being home to several research divisions isn't entirely illogical. The existence of cybermodules is never contextualized within SS2's story, they're all scattered over the Von Braun and Rickenbacker, yet their only purpose seems to be to upgrade your illegal military-grade rig, and since nobody else on the VB had one, why are they even there? Games like Bioshock and Deus Ex had valid in-story reasons for why their kind of upgrade points exist, so it's strange that only SS2 doesn't, which ends up feeling immersion-breaking.

SS1 required the usage of stance manipulation much more than SS2 did. Some areas could only be accessible if you went prone, the ridiculous hitscan-heavy combat against enemies facilitated heavy use of leaning around covers, and so on. SS2 doesn't ask a whole lot of the player in this regard beyond crawling in the occasional crawlspace.

Regardless of what one may think of the cyberspace minigame in SS1, you can't deny it was a much more explored and in-universe concept than the RNG hacking minigame of SS2 which mostly facilitated savescumming. Inside cyberspace you found info, triggered objects in meatspace, found new software, and fought security programs, whereas I'm not sure what the hacking in SS2 is supposed to represent. The same goes for repairing things in SS1 which was contextualized as rewiring cables, messing with electricity currents, making it seem like you're actually repairing something. In SS2 repairing just feels like an abstract minigame.

And let's not forget SS2's most immersion-breaking flaw, the fact that weapons degrade faster than they really should.The gameplay reasons for that design decision do not explain why the hell they break so fast when common sense dictates assault rifles don't break after emptying four magazines. There's no in-universe explanation as to why they break so damn fast and why you need to maintain them every 5 minutes. SS2 isn't trying to excuse its abstraction by saying "it's just a videogame", it wants to set up a believable world where the actions you can perform can be explained using the in-universe logic. Yet you're simply supposed to accept guns are made out of glass now.

I'm only arguing from an immersion standpoint and am not saying that the above is the deciding factor in quality, but since both games have the same goal, it's worth examining how they both accomplish it.

1. System shock is probably my 3rd most favorite pc game series.
2. I like 2 mostly because of the added rpg elements making new runs alot more varied

SS1 is a good game, but 1 and 2 are so different its hard to compare.

1 > 2
Mostly because 2 was never properly finished.
Rickenbacker was butchered, the final boss fight halfassed and the previous parts of the game remained unpolished probably for the same reasons.
Not to say the game wasn't enjoyable enough as it is. Its just disappointing thinking back at what could have been, especially when compared to the first game being solid from start to finish.

Where the fuck do you go that, that is the consensus? System Shock 1 is an adventure game, with some sweet electronic in the background and System Shock 2 is basically a survival horror hybrid. And since Bioshock is System Shock 2 but much more linear, whoever played one game first will describe the other game as the one they played.

It's just a game nigger

Impressive

….HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

you have to go back

If there's anyone who doesn't belong here, it's you.

...

why even live…

But that's bestiality user. Arab girls are superior.

Why would anyone save a picture with a nigger in it?

...

That's Richard D. James.

You may have lost your mind.

Well, hot niggers don't exist in the first place.

He's probably a sandnigger himself.

????

System Shock 1 is good. System Shock 2 is garbage.