Ways SC6 could reconcile Conviction and the old games styles | Forums

[michaelanjello]

LKP is just anither unnecesary feature that was just a binus feature thats comp,etely useless and there to show off the changes they made to the game. Its there to catch the casual players attention.]

[BoBwUzHeRe1138]

I actually posted nearly the exact same thing 5th on another thread a long while back haha

I believe that the game should be built completely around the idea that their are old and hardcore players and new, casual players and simply those that like to do different things. There must always be paths for ghosts to take. For people who like the old style gameplay better but still don't mind breaking a few eggs and killing a guard or interrogating one there should be the ability to play that way. Those that want to sneak in and take out guards quickly, quietly, and efficiently should be able to, and those who want to COD-Rambo it through should have it be possible. That last option would be the definite one to leave out though. It should definitely cater to the other playstyles more than to a style that's practically a shooter. But all the types of stealth? I'd be glad. 'Cause then the player can choose what they feel best suits the siutation, any situation. Would it be safer to quickly take them out, or just a few?

A few other things: On Rookie mode...cameras should have the visible searchlight. That way you spend less time looking at the camera and more time planning how to avoid it.
Veteran mode will also have the light. Splinter Cell mode would not, meaning players will have to keep a closer eye on the camera itself rather than the light it projects. Think of it this way: the "light" isnt really there, it's what Sam sees having been in covert ops for so long, he knows the general area the camera can view. The other way allows the player to try and figure it out. Again, all these options can be turned on or off but each template has it's settings. There would also be purely optional settings that are not activated on ANY of the difficulties. For instance "No Weapons" would give the player...well, no weapons. Not even the Splinter Cell option has this.

The D-Ops mode could easily reflect this:
Hunter - Intended primarily for fans of pure aggro-stealth. Kill a number of enemies in each section of a map. Leaderboards for fastest times, least reinforcement calls, etc. could challenge players v. players to get the highest times and least screw ups. You can of course play this with all "Rookie" settings turned off and play on the "Splinter Cell" setting but it wouldn't be entirely geared toward this.
Infiltration - Intended primarily for ghosting and/or minimal player/AI interaction. It'd be possible to aggro-stealth some parts and take out everyone but it's dangerous. You can set how many alarms can be sounded before you revert back to the last checkpoint. 1, 2, 3, or 4. An objective can be placed as well: Basic - get to the end with as little disturbance as possible; Download - get in, find the computer and hack it, get out; Assassination - get in, find and assassinate the specified target, get out; etc.,etc.
Co-op Story - self-explanatory.
Last Stand: a mode inspired by a few different moments throughout the SC franchise such as the end of the Kalinatek, Abattoir, and Presidential Palace missions as well as many other occasions. This mode pits you alone (or with a partner) against wave after wave of enemies. Unlike the SCC version, the enemies are solely coming after you and not some EMP thing.

[The_5_Freedoms]

@ michaelanjello

I think it was necessary for some people to begin with but once you've played through the game you begin to understand how the AI reacts and learn to plan accordingly without LKP.

The first time I saw it I thought it was cool and I still did until I got my hands on the game and played it for an hour... then after that I just thought it was annoying. I don't think it should have been a "Core gameplay feature™".

@ BoB

Oh really I must have seen it then and agreed with it so much my subconscious told me to post it again... this place is like a gold mine there's always something valuable in every topic.

[hastings84]

@ michaelanjello
I think it was necessary for some people to begin with but once you've played through the game you begin to understand how the AI reacts and learn to plan accordingly without LKP.

I think that's a problem though. I'd like to see more variation and unpredictability in how the AI would react. I hate when you can watch NPCs and know exactly what they're going to do, and can prepare for it. SC should be about thinking on your feet, and adapting to an evolving situation. Not "being detected, running and jumping into a shadow so the NPCs pay attention to my LKP". Take that a step further - Make the NPCs think about a logical path that I may take.

Guard 1: "We last saw him here - He might try to loop around through the main hallway and come at us from that door over there!"
Guard 2: "I'll cover this entrance!"

This would mean being detected would REALLY be a bad thing, and not so much of an "oops".

[SolidSage]

AI improvements would count as a massive upgrade. No matter what game I play though, after a while they all seem somewhat predictable. The better ones are the ones that respond fast, so you don't have tim to think about it. Hard for SC cos a lot of the observation is done while hidden, the AI REALLY has to entertain us almost. Then variety and randomization for multiple play throughs makes it a real challenge for the Devs.

If you go FULL AGGRO in C, the AI is actually pretty impressive. Using a loud weapon so they always know where you are highlights how responsive they are. Really capable of exciting suppressive shootouts. M&E is essential in that approach, and it's a lot harder to get those tokens. But of course, the goal is to never experience that coding. Sooo, I guess there just needs to be a larger database of AI patterns, responses and actions and dialogue.

[BoBwUzHeRe1138]

Hastings....maybe or maybe great minds think alike? haha

OMG. If the AI thought of logical paths I'd take, I'd crap my pants. They could literally think of what you're going to do and screw you up, making you reevaluate...YES! hahaha. Actually...I think it'd be great if enemies in SP were set with different personalities. Remember in the legacy games how you could overhear funny, relevant, informational, etc. conversations between people? The way they talk, act, etc. should also give an indication on what they might do. Is the guy already scared of ghosts in the old mansion? or of ninjas? Then he may become immediately suspicious on the slightest thing while someone else may go "nah, it was nothing." Everyone is different right? Maybe some will go "HE WAS OVER THERE!" and run straight to where you are while one of his friends is like "I'll see if's trying to flank us!" etc. Meanwhile, D-Ops has randomly generated guard patterns as well as personalities so that every playthrough is different. Maybe each map can have a default that you can play with or you can turn on the random factor.

i still believe LKP should be activated or deactivated. I'd like to figure out where they think I may be. Also. Can some guards, again based on the personality, be louder or quieter? In the old games they weren't so vocal. But every once in awhile, if a guard is scared crapless, maybe an expletive shouted off by him while his friend is like "dude, calm down...you yelling is not helping us..." would be cool..

[hastings84]

Having different types of NPCs within the "thug" class. A guy who is scared, an aggro guy, and an intellect. Scared guy takes cover and shakes, aggro guy zips around like rambo trying to find you, and intellect thinks about your possible intent, and attempts to gather others to cut you off in a logical spot.

I really think that's something deep there, in terms of AI. What an impact that would have on gameplay though! You get detected, plan an escape route, and the AI calculates your possible backtrack paths, and takes a position at 1 or 2 of them.

Take note, devs. That's for SC7.