|
Wikipedia posted:
 Official site (does anyone even go to these anymore?): https://dishonored.bethesda.net/en  Announcement Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnsDyv-TtJg PCGamer posted:Corvo and Emily both travel to Karnaca in Serkonos, a sun-soaked southern colony of the Empire, to dismantle the conspiracy brought against the throne. Both characters are now voiced (Emily by Erica Luttrell, Corvo—brilliantly—by Thief's Stephen Russell) and each brings a different perspective to this new city. "Emily is Dunwall," Smith says. "Empress, assassin. Corvo is a foreigner—he's from Serkonos. In Dishonored 2 he's a man going home." (http://www.pcgamer.com/dishonored-2-preview/) quote:PC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Gameplay trailer with a (very fantastic) remix of Gold Dust Woman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYh9ZmocnGI Capn Beeb posted:Someone posted that cover of Gold Dust Woman without the game sound effects from the trailer I don't think there's anyone reading this thread who doesn't know about Dishonored's relationship to Thief, and there's probably no one here who doesn't know that the latest Thief was a joke. Having Stephen Russell voice Corvo...well, there's literally no one more perfect. Anyway yeah so this thread's a little early but whatever, series owns, Arkane owns, Bethesda dropping the game on a AAA date owns, Stephen Russell owns, let's talk about it. 11/10 Update: Seems like there's a few performance issues on release (and likely to be solved with a patch or two). But in the meantime check this out if you need to: http://www.gamepur.com/guide/24937-dishonored-2-pc-error-fix-low-fps-nvidia-and-amd-cards-disable-mouse.html If you're on the fence: general consensus is it's more Dishonored and is a good proper sequel to the first game. Bad news is that the controls are a little buggy and the performance can suck on PC right now. Asbury fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Nov 13, 2016 |
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
3Romeo posted:Gameplay trailer with a (very fantastic) remix of Gold Dust Woman:
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Having Stephen Russel as a voice actor is awesome, however I would have preferred Arkane kept Corvo as a silent protagonist. But still, this is the first time we're going to have a first person game with Russel since Thief 2. Dishonored is an amazing game, I don't see how this isn't going to be a day one purchase for me. Also, it's being released five years to the day after Skyrim. So that obviously means Dishonored 2 is going to be like Skyrim with... whales?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
I'm excited for this, I loved Dishonored.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Dishonored is what the new Thief should have been. I just bought all the Dishonored DLC during the Steam summer sale, I will have to try it out before this releases.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:Dishonored is what the new Thief should have been. I just bought all the Dishonored DLC during the Steam summer sale, I will have to try it out before this releases. The original had some faults, but there was a lot of good fun to be had in it. The one thing I'm excited but trepidatious about is the point that Corvo and Elizabeth are apparently going to have different power sets from each other, and I'm wondering how they'll be balanced against each other. I understand wanting both characters to feel distinct from each other, but I think I'd prefer all the new powers be available to both characters and let the player decide what suits their playstyle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
There was definitely a lot of Corvo's powers I used as a crutch, so adding some diversity via Emily is going to be good for the experience. No more blinking out of, towards and above obstacles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
You can also tell the outsider NO and have no powers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
Hoo boy. I don't think I'm man or woman enough to handle that. I definitely leaned on Blink hard in the first game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
i think that this game will be good
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
Arkane creates exactly the kinds of story driven games that I like. Create an interesting and well designed world and give the player the tools and means to interact with it in a meaningful way. The only issues I had with the original were the rushed endgame and the overall lack of difficulty. They've already confirmed harder, customizable difficulty settings so one of those issues should be gone. One of my most anticipated games this year. Hopefully the new Prey will also look good when they show it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 12:21
|
|
|
I hope the game doesn't give you lots and lots of tools and skills to kill people with, only to then punish me for killing people. I want more non-lethal tools and skills. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
you could kill like 25% of the dudes in the game and still get the low chaos ending. pure no kill runs were only for achievements. they did not do a very good job of conveying this fact, though!
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
Serious Frolicking posted:you could kill like 25% of the dudes in the game and still get the low chaos ending. pure no kill runs were only for achievements. they did not do a very good job of conveying this fact, though! I usually try to put them into a trashcan, thinking they'd be safe there. But those containers can only take so many dudes, before physics happen and kill everbody inside. Wipfmetz fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 12:46
|
|
|
I never felt like the chaos system was too punishing. You could kill a dozen guys in each mission and still get away with a low chaos rating. I think a lot of people saw the chaos tooltip and went "welp, time to never kill anyone". They've also added nonlethal options to the game (stun mines, combat choke and such) and added non-human enemies so that no-kill play style should be a bit more interesting if you opt for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
Imo the chaos system would have been way better if it was not "low chaos = good ending, high chaos = bad ending" and instead presented the two as different blends of good and bad. The low chaos ending is the least fitting ending ever, it completely runs against the tone of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
I remember buying the first game as a sort of "sure I got the money why not try it" sort of thing. Ended up being one of my all time favorites. This one looks dope as F.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
I didn't really like the story and character elements of the first game. Too much stuff felt stale, robotic and stilted, which is a real shame since the setting is cool and the gameplay is good (though it takes a while before you have enough tools to fully make use of the systems the game offers). Here's hoping they improve on their voice direction and writing here. Also I've said this before but I will never not find it funny that they've decided to just make Dishonored a straight up Thief game even more blatantly this time to the point they got Stephen Russell to voice the main character. I put that down to thifourf crashing and burning horribly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
In a lot of ways the game rewards you for high chaos with extra content and more interesting scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
High Chaos feels like the way the game was meant to be played, I remember hearing somewhere that Low Chaos wasn't even an option originally and was a quite late addition in development.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Games have been trying to do the "make choices in game and it affects endings/gameplay" for decades, and I don't think any game really got it 100% right. Dishonored's take was interesting because high chaos really changes gameplay at an interesting level. But their flaw was, high-low chaos was such a binary thing. There wasn't any good feedback along the lines of "Hey, this is the moment when I really got high chaos". All that being said, did it make the game better and more interesting overall? Sure. Lotish posted:The original had some faults, but there was a lot of good fun to be had in it. The one thing I'm excited but trepidatious about is the point that Corvo and Elizabeth are apparently going to have different power sets from each other, and I'm wondering how they'll be balanced against each other. I understand wanting both characters to feel distinct from each other, but I think I'd prefer all the new powers be available to both characters and let the player decide what suits their playstyle. chaos rhames posted:There was definitely a lot of Corvo's powers I used as a crutch, so adding some diversity via Emily is going to be good for the experience. No more blinking out of, towards and above obstacles. It's interesting, a lot of levels in the first game felt like "BLINK & BACKSTAB: The Game". Now, that made for fun gameplay, but you just didn't get the satisfaction of using all your powers in a robust way. And when you played the DLC, it didn't feel as fun with Daud not having that smoother blink. I got to admit I'm nervous too because designing levels for two different powersets might make the challenges less diverse. And nothing would be less satisfying than completing the game as Corvo, then playing as Emily and just thinking "Man, I wish I had blink instead of tether here". Actually, I think they're going to make the levels different for each character, but I'm not sure yet. And this ultimately seems like nitpicking. Because if Dishonored 2 does those things 100% right for a better experience than the first game I might consider it the best action game of all time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
I adored the original 3 Thief games and I adored Dishonored, to hear that Stephen Russell is becoming the voice of Corvo is just magical. They just tie together so well those 2 games, the steam punk style asthetic, the very down-trodden miserable state of society, the reliance on vaugely paranormal abilities. It's one of those "would you two just gently caress and get over it" ones where they should just straight up acknowledge this as a soft-reboot/continuation of the Thief games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
is it a choice of who you play as, or do you alternate between the two as you go through the story?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Serious Frolicking posted:is it a choice of who you play as, or do you alternate between the two as you go through the story?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Imo the chaos system would have been way better if it was not "low chaos = good ending, high chaos = bad ending" and instead presented the two as different blends of good and bad. The low chaos ending is the least fitting ending ever, it completely runs against the tone of the game. this. i thought high chaos sorta worked better. Dunwall is bigger nest of vipers then kings landing. every rich lord/lady is some crazy incestuous nut who is constantly climbing and killing up the social ladder. also they are apperently re working the chaos system and endings in the new one. khwarezm posted:High Chaos feels like the way the game was meant to be played, I remember hearing somewhere that Low Chaos wasn't even an option originally and was a quite late addition in development. ehh. I was able to do stuff pretty well on low chaos, the problem was it was rarely rewarding. apart from the first level. Lotish posted:The original had some faults, but there was a lot of good fun to be had in it. The one thing I'm excited but trepidatious about is the point that Corvo and Elizabeth are apparently going to have different power sets from each other, and I'm wondering how they'll be balanced against each other. I understand wanting both characters to feel distinct from each other, but I think I'd prefer all the new powers be available to both characters and let the player decide what suits their playstyle. yeah. corvo has basicaly upgraded and enhanced powers from 1 and emily has the loving darkness with weird animal tentical poo poo, ripping dudes apart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
I really liked the Low Chaos/High Chaos system. Do you like killing dudes? Well, now there will be more dudes to kill in levels. Do you like to stealth past people? Ok, we'll keep the amount of enemies fairly constant to help with stealth. Real elegant way to tailor the game to the player in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Imo the chaos system would have been way better if it was not "low chaos = good ending, high chaos = bad ending" and instead presented the two as different blends of good and bad. The low chaos ending is the least fitting ending ever, it completely runs against the tone of the game. it's kind of silly to arbitrarily call the high chaos ending the bad ending. it's a darker ending sure, but have you seen dunwall recently? poetic justice and poo poo. that said, i don't really agree that the low chaos ending was unfitting. the Outsider hints that corvo's actions are going to have a great effect on the city when they have their initial chat, and the chaos of the city essentially depends upon how lawful or lawless he's been. if you prefer to spare innocents, treat people like people, and generally let the stories of people continue rather than end them abruptly because they're in your way, that's how the city ends up turning out. dunwall's still a pack of jerks, but like Samuel says in the low chaos ending, there's just too many good people left in Dunwall to let it fester and die. ostensibly those good people have won out because the city hasn't gotten THAT brutal. in high chaos, you kill a bunch of people if for no other reason than they're in your way or you thought they might sort of potentially get in your way. dunwall unconsciously follows your example, slips further into barbarism, and there's no good people left to do the reconstruction. it's a pretty cool way of giving agency to the player in a way that's supported in the game. schmitty9800 posted:Games have been trying to do the "make choices in game and it affects endings/gameplay" for decades, and I don't think any game really got it 100% right. Dishonored's take was interesting because high chaos really changes gameplay at an interesting level. But their flaw was, high-low chaos was such a binary thing. There wasn't any good feedback along the lines of "Hey, this is the moment when I really got high chaos". there actually is a 'medium' chaos thing that is mostly, but not entirely, the same as high chaos. they took it out for the DLCs because they realized that basically people were killing almost everyone or practically no one so the whole gradient thing wasn't even remotely needed. you know if you're high chaos by the time you shank your 43rd dude. Coolguye fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:In a lot of ways the game rewards you for high chaos with extra content and more interesting scenarios. Yeah, the chaos system isn't punishing because high chaos is a reward. Hopefully in the second game low chaos will be at all worthwhile, but I expect high chaos will still be the canonical way to play. You just can't beat creative guard murder. HMS Boromir fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
As long as it doesn't have settlement building
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Yeah, the chaos system isn't punishing because high chaos is a reward. Hopefully in the second game low chaos will be at all worthwhile, but I expect high chaos will still be the canonical way to play. You just can't beat creative guard murder. they gave daud some cool non-lethal toys in the Knife of Dunwall DLC, so i suspect you'll have a lot of ways to clown on fools without stopping their hearts. my biggest wish is that they add a few extra stats like in Alpha Protocol. i'd like to play non-lethal, but rack up hundreds of thousands of coins in hospital bills for the random fools i don't kill.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:it's kind of silly to arbitrarily call the high chaos ending the bad ending. it's a darker ending sure, but have you seen dunwall recently? poetic justice and poo poo. I often see people take issue with equating the high and low chaos system in Dishonored with the usual videogame good/bad ending trope, but I don't really get that. The high chaos ending is pretty darn bad, you've basically taught Emily to be a brutal, or dead, tyrant, almost all of the other major players are dead, the city is guaranteed to fall into ruin thanks to the plague and Corvo has left a sea of corpses behind him. Low Chaos on the other hand means that a lot of your targets are still alive (though you could reasonably argue most of them are suffering a faith as good as death), NPCs like Callista and her uncle are alive, Emily turns out to be a great empress and the city looks to a bright and prosperous future as the plague recedes and there aren't hundreds of extra corpses in the streets with sword wounds and razor wire hanging off of them. It might have a better justification than something like Bioshock but the end result doesn't seem that different. khwarezm fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
I always believed that the chaos system and the values should have been completely hidden from the players. It was very visible both in marketing and in the game and the low chaos ending was somewhat wrongly portrayed as the "good" ending that you wanted to have. I think a lot of people altered their playstyles towards one extreme (either completely nonlethal or turbo murder train) instead of playing more reactively because they were aware of chaos and it's effects. Also I don't give a poo poo about Bethesda and their games anymore but I'm glad they're giving Arkane the chance to restart the Thief/Systems Shock/Deus Ex style immersive sim genre with Dishonored and not-System Shock
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
even without the mystical justification you can just say that kill-crazy corvo was not a very good parent which led to emily becoming a lovely ruler.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
I think the mistake was having the plague being cured in the Low Chaos ending. It would fit the game, that even though Corvo was a good guy that only killed when he needed to, even he couldn't stop the plague. I mean 2 seems to be going with that idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:I often see people take issue with equating the high and low chaos system in Dishonored with the usual videogame good/bad ending trope, but I don't really get that. the high chaos take effectively says "no, it doesn't. it's a huge 'civilization' where you get ahead by being uncivilized. even as an empress, emily can't change that, because it's what these people have grown accustomed to. it's better to burn it all down - and more than that, the city deserves it for everything it's done to its own people." low chaos says "yes, it does. every place has dark parts to its history, but the reality of the situation is that dunwall is the vanguard of progress and prosperity, and with good leadership, it will continue to be." both are 'good' endings depending on your point of view. it sounds like you just actually agreed with the low chaos ending, which is good and legit. what you're actually annoyed probably was that the low chaos version forced you to give up a bunch of good and fun tools because they were lethal and you didn't get good and fun non-lethal replacements for them, which is also good and legit. Accordion Man posted:I think the mistake was having the plague being cured in the Low Chaos ending. nah, there were a ton of hints in the game that piero and sokolov had enough understanding to cure the plague, but they were too goddamn pigheaded to actually work together. they're completing each others sentences in the mission The Loyalists. it's also worth noting that both flavors of their elixir worked as a short-lived vaccine (or suppressant, that part actually isn't entirely clear), so a cure was definitely in the cards the whole game. again, the question just becomes whether or not the city remains calm enough for them to actually do their work or not. Coolguye fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
kikkelivelho posted:I always believed that the chaos system and the values should have been completely hidden from the players. It was very visible both in marketing and in the game and the low chaos ending was somewhat wrongly portrayed as the "good" ending that you wanted to have. I think a lot of people altered their playstyles towards one extreme (either completely nonlethal or turbo murder train) instead of playing more reactively because they were aware of chaos and it's effects. While I think many will always boil things down to "good" and "bad", certainly the messaging surrounding the game served to feed that dichotomous view. Any game that has competent stealth and non-lethal options, I'm going to lean hard into that stuff just because I *like* being stealthy and non-lethal. What really worked for me in Dishonored, and what I'm hoping to see expanded in the next game, is that you always had good options. When I gently caress things up, I've got the tools to help untangle things. *That* always felt rewarding to me - I'd live with the gently caress-up, and do what I could about the aftermath. Hell, like many others I did another playthrough of the game when the big info-dump landed at E3. 167 hours on the steam-clock, and it wasn't at all old or boring to go back to it. Edit: My preference for non-lethal (or truth be told, less lethal  ) play worked out for me, because I really liked how the low-chaos version of things panned out. Just a big softy I guess. I did do a high chaos run, just to see what it was like. I felt a bit weird about it, though my gimmick of 'killing literally everyone' played a part. I will acknowledge that the high chaos version of Kingsparrow Island was a lot more dramatic.
magimix fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:it basically boils down to a judgement call: considering all the horrible poo poo dunwall has done as an empire, and all the horrible poo poo it inflicts upon its own people every day as a matter of course (listen to the maids' chatter sometime), does it, in fact, deserve to go on? Obviously this is subjective but I just don't really see how allowing the empire to crumble can truly end up being any kind of moral option, the plague will continue and likely get much worse for the inhabitants of Dunwall if its political establishment and the city's institutions continue to collapse. It sounds like a destroy the village to save it situation. Even then its less of Corvo allowing dunwall's own flaws to catch up with itself as he stands back and more of Corvo (and by extension the player) taking an active, contributory part in all of the things that make the city so miserable, murder, intrigue, betrayal, terrorism and the ruthless pursuit of power. The only way I can perceive the High chaos ending to be good in any sense, is looking at Dunwall from the point of view of the Whales, considering that the city is built off of an incredibly destructive whaling industry. Even then though I thought the game indicated that at the point in time it starts they are reaching the maximum possible level of exploitation of the whales and very soon the entire industry is just going to collapse as they get driven to extinction. But the low chaos ending basically says that everything gets turned around and Dunwall enters a proper golden age under Emily, so that would imply to me that they avoided the incoming peak whale oil somehow, I assume by finding a more sustainable resource or methods. Anyway, I just think you could apply similar logic that's being used here to so many games that also have a good/bad ending, particularly the first 3 Fallout games and Bioshock 1 and 2. But I see a lot less controversy when people talk about the good or bad ending in those games even though its similarly simplistic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Obviously this is subjective but I just don't really see how allowing the empire to crumble can truly end up being any kind of moral option, the plague will continue and likely get much worse for the inhabitants of Dunwall if its political establishment and the city's institutions continue to collapse. It sounds like a destroy the village to save it situation. Even then its less of Corvo allowing dunwall's own flaws to catch up with itself as he stands back and more of Corvo (and by extension the player) taking an active, contributory part in all of the things that make the city so miserable, murder, intrigue, betrayal, terrorism and the ruthless pursuit of power. in bioboner you are literally killing prepubescent girls whose only crime is being abducted for a brutal scientific experiment, and what are you talking about with fallout 1 and 2? they had vignette endings, so there was no one good or bad ending as such. FO3 isn't controversial because everyone just agrees all the endings were bad and unsatisfying so none of those last comparisons hold any water at all. beyond that you're basically just saying 'i don't see how anarchy can be moral' which i'm not gonna touch because this isn't D&D. the salient point is that after seeing a city where nobles gently caress over entire families to make themselves marginally richer and fire-breathing thugs and masked, teleporting boogymen constitute the closest thing to a legitimate police force in half the city, a lot of folks could be forgiven for thinking that it's time to just burn the motherfucker down and start with something else. replay lady boyle's last party and the flooded district while taking it slow and listening to jessamine's heart; it's not hard to see how people could figure it's unsalvagable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:in bioboner you are literally killing prepubescent girls whose only crime is being abducted for a brutal scientific experiment, and what are you talking about with fallout 1 and 2? they had vignette endings, so there was no one good or bad ending as such. FO3 isn't controversial because everyone just agrees all the endings were bad and unsatisfying so none of those last comparisons hold any water at all. In Fallout 1 you can get this ending: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_y4Ao5L6G8. Even leaving that aside both of the first two Fallout games have pretty obvious 'bad' and 'Good' outcomes for almost all of their ending slides without much in between. In the first game it even got to the point that a player with sufficiently bad karma would murder the Vault Overseer at the end of the game. I'd only say its around the time of New Vegas that things got more nuanced. In Bioshock 2 you're also working with a separate Karma system from the little sisters one based on your treatment of certain NPCs that has pretty major repercussions on the ending and is a lot less black and white. Regarding your other paragraph, the fact remains allowing Dunwall to get destroyed is helping absolutely nobody that are presumably being victimized by all the nobles and such. You are allowing the city to get ruined by a plague(and its clearly established that it killing a whole lot more lower class people than nobles), you are killing your way through throngs of people whose worst crime is taking a security job for Sokolov or whatever, you are creating a situation where almost totally blameless innocents like Calista and her uncle are getting bullets through the forehead. Crazy assholes like granny rags reap dividends from a high chaos situation, as do street sharks like Slackjaw's gang. You literally increase the amount of fly puking, blood crying zombies wandering around the city if you go for high chaos. There is not the slightest indication that High chaos Corvo is fighting for anybody's benefit apart from himself, Emily and the Outsider, who is just getting a kick out of the whole mess. This logic of killing everyone and saying it was a good option because frankly they deserved it tends not to lead to great outcomes in real life, but then that's just my opinion. khwarezm fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
You can kill alot of people and still be low Chaos. I got the low chaos ending and I tried to be non lethal when it was convenient but I would not reload saves over and over again to stay a pacifist. Especially in the later missions it was just alot easier to ice fools and more fun to boot. Most of the flooded district I didn't even bother with stealth and decided to put all those pistol bullets to use shooting the assassins in the face. I was however strictly non-lethal against the major mission targets though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 21:37
|
|