Comments on: Tip-Toeing Past 2005?

by: Hardflip

Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:19:20 +0000

Pseudo: I know all the games in the Hitman series, I was just mentioning those released in 2004.

by: Unimaginative Pseudonym

Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:55:53 +0000

I'm fairly amused at the fact that you seem to have allowed a stealth game to slip past your own radar - there have already been three Hitman games - Hitman :Codename 47, Hitman 2 : Silent Assassin & Hitman : Contracts, with the upcoming being the 4th. I'm a big fan of stealth games - provided they're done right; the problem being that they are so much more irritating when they're done wrong, because you can end up having to do the same thing over and over again, with no room for variation or mistake... They also require top-notch AI if the game is to be believable; I have yet to see a game where this is the case - look at the MGS guards who are fooled by a walking cardboard box, or the Deus Ex (not a dedicated stealth game by any means, but you can quite effectively stealth your way through it) guards who run around madly while the alarms are triggered, and then calmly walk off - even if bleeding from gunshot wounds - past the dead bodies of their comrades and continue standing around aimlessly. Whereas in a relatively mindless action game, you don't really need - or notice - much about the enemy AI, particularly when idle.

by: Cyrris

Fri, 11 Feb 2005 03:01:49 +0000

In light of these replies, might I ask, Hardflip, as to what it is about these Stealth-style games that you find so appealing? Obviously everyone has different tastes, I guess yours just seem a little more different than usual to the rest of us who have commented.

by: Kelmon

Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:47:54 +0000

I’ve got to be honest here, but stealth games really don’t interest me because I’ve never found them to be fun. The whole genre seems to make much of the need for stealth (odd that, huh?) because if you get into a fire-fight or something then you end up very dead, very quickly. You therefore get this situation where you need to be really careful sneaking around where one cock-up sees you going back to your last save. Personally, I don’t find that fun, just really frustrating. Sure, there’s a sense of achievement when you finally get it right, but I see it more of a relief that you don’t have to go back through that section of the game again.

I have the same problem with action games that incorporate stealth missions as I do stealth games in general. I remember playing Solider of Fortune 2 with that mission where you need to sneak around a railway station. Damn that mission was annoying. This was mostly due to a single room where if anyone saw you the mission was immediately over. That section drove me nuts for ages.

I can see why Metal Gear 3 Solid hasn’t done well. I really didn’t like the second game. The sneaking around was OK as you could quite happily whack all the guards (single dart round to knock them out, single bullet to a sleeping head to make sure they don’t get up again) but the plot and the cut-scenes drove me mad. Utter crap. So, given that disappointment I don’t feel any need to buy the next game.

Stealth…not my thing…

by: Cyrris

Thu, 10 Feb 2005 04:03:11 +0000

Well, to be fair, a big RTS or RPG game still makes it very, very big. StarCraft and Diablo both sold huge numbers of copies, not just as their respective genres, but as games outright. I’m yet to see a stealth game that really makes it big in the same way. Granted, I actually don’t know that many people who are interested in them - I know I’m not.

Stealth games just don’t have a general enough appeal to make it big. It’s like Civilization - that franchise is still well known but it’s not a best seller these days, as most people tend to find the turn-based style unappealing or boring. It’s a thinking game, like these stealth games you’ve mentioned. Most people, as JohnDoe said, just want to be presented with straightforward goals.