Easy to learn, Hard to Master - M&E | KIM | Forums

[shobhit7777777]

How could you? They put Sam (you) into the tank.

Ummmm...No. I'm talking about optional gameplay. As long as I can play as a Panther or a Ghost....I won't give a **** if Sam can drive a tank or smash through walls. Would you?
You could go all out in Conviction...mines, sticky cam explosives, frags, shotguns...the works...but did YOU?

No, you chose a playstyle - stealth

Now, would it make sense for you to actively campaign for the removal of anything which is remotely rambo INSPITE of it not being forced on you and you being able to play your way?

The problems with Conviction weren't with the mechanics (not saying they are without fault) but it was the level and mission design in the SP. D-Ops is a good example of how it should've worked in the SP.

Instead of neutering the mechanics....I feel that level/misison design should be the focus (as well as the AI ofcourse)

What you said is basically setting up the difficulty for yourself. We are just not able to change it ourselves that's what the devs should do in my opinion. Search for the right balance for the right difficulty. Being able to change these parameters yourself is basically choosing your difficulty but it might also make the game unbalanced and unplayable.

Nope. I'm talking about customizing the M&E to YOUR liking so that it better fits into YOUR fantasy as to how a mechanic like that would work.
People have been complaining since Conviction that they would love the option to toggle certain mechanics and features.

Did you ever play Conviction and limit yourself to 2 marks and only executing when NOT under fire?
Well, what if you could make the restriction "legit" by going into the options menu and customize the M&E to limit the number of marks to 2 and ticking the box which says "Interruptible Executes".

How is this messing up your balance when you did the same thing without the "Official" options?

It's like the option to turn off gadgets....redundant. Don't use them - Same as.

M&E has so many people divided that it is better to leave it as a customizable option (or maybe keep it as part of the levelling up system so that players who use it a lot can choose to spend some points on it or whatever), without affecting the difficulty.

So regardless of Easy, Normal, Hard, Realistic - you can customize your M&E package. Too easy? toggle everything off....want to have some mindless fun? Toggle everything on.

M&E is an ingame feature!!!!! Not just a HUD.

Way off the mark

1. A HUD IS an in-game feature. Mechanics and systems are intrinsically tied to it.

2. In a FIRST person shooter...the HUD is an extremely important gameplay mechanic...try playing without the crosshairs or the minimap (add to that the ability to customize health levels and whatnot)

3. You mess with the HUD and you can adversely affect the gameplay.
Eg: Try EMP'ing an enemy in Ghost Recon Future Soldier Multiplayer. The HUD goes off.

[Andre202]

Ummmm...No. I'm talking about optional gameplay. As long as I can play as a Panther or a Ghost....I won't give a **** if Sam can drive a tank or smash through walls. Would you?
You could go all out in Conviction...mines, sticky cam explosives, frags, shotguns...the works...but did YOU?

No, you chose a playstyle - stealth

Now, would it make sense for you to actively campaign for the removal of anything which is remotely rambo INSPITE of it not being forced on you and you being able to play your way?

The problems with Conviction weren't with the mechanics (not saying they are without fault) but it was the level and mission design in the SP. D-Ops is a good example of how it should've worked in the SP.

Instead of neutering the mechanics....I feel that level/misison design should be the focus (as well as the AI ofcourse)

Of course it would make sense for everybody to campaign against the removal of certain mechanics because the games has a specific core. It would make complete sense campaigning against Tank Sam and Smash through Walls Sam. If you don't care at all about expanding the core mechanics (since that's the price you have to pay for when not minding such things) but instead getting anything into the game which doesn't add anything to the core mechanics (to the Ghost or Panther), well I am fine with that, but I care about those things because that's not how you will improve and innovate the Splinter Cell franchise. Yes, I don't care if somebody is using all the things you mentioned for Conviction, I didn't care for that in previous games too but if it gets ridicolous out of control and you got features where you might as well ask why they don't take their time to improve the core instead of implementing a questionable feature... I am all for options, but they should be reasonable and not like Sam being able to play pocker with his enemy. Might be fun but actually it doesn't add anything to the core of the game... You make it sound like it takes the team no time to implement those ridiculous features and balance them with the mission/level design... and it's not like you don't have to compromise for any of those core mechanics, do you?

Nope. I'm talking about customizing the M&E to YOUR liking so that it better fits into YOUR fantasy as to how a mechanic like that would work.
People have been complaining since Conviction that they would love the option to toggle certain mechanics and features.

Yes, people talked about toggling on and off gameplay mechanics, I thought it was something which shouldn't be applied to actual gameplay features though. That's just again getting past the real problem and not being able to compromise. You said yourself all the way long don't use it, if you don't want it. I say that's fine if the narrative and the level design allows for that but I want to be able to use that feature to get some satisfaction too (especially for those who were put off by the overpoweredness of that feature) which I see is achievable through giving that feature a learning curve so it's Hard to Master and it's use is satisfying. A customizeable M&E which is even able to be turned off completely is suggesting that the learning curve ends through playing without the M&E. It actually doesn't really have a learning curve this way in my opinion, because people will stick with their own M&E instead of a version which fits to the specific difficulty.

M&E is a great tool for newcomers to come in and it could be also a great tool to make these people into Hardcore Stealth players with a learning curve. M&E may make people enjoy Stealth more and have an easy entrance but it shouldn't be an easy entrance for every difficulty the game is offering. I think that defeats the whole purpose of accessibility and being able to get casuals into hardcore gamers with a manageable learning curve. Mario is doing that perfectly for years. There needs to be the right balancing. The first two games SC1 and SC2 were to hard for the newcomers. CT was spot on with the balancing (you can always improve) and with C I feel they have overdone on the other side (too easy). That's why I opened up this thread to have a M&E and KIM (which we really didn't discuss that much about) which is balanced in every difficulty it is set in. Get some suggestions together how it could look like.

Did you ever play Conviction and limit yourself to 2 marks and only executing when NOT under fire?
Well, what if you could make the restriction "legit" by going into the options menu and customize the M&E to limit the number of marks to 2 and ticking the box which says "Interruptible Executes".

How is this messing up your balance when you did the same thing without the "Official" options?

It's messing up the balance just as it did in Conviction, just as the balance was messed up in the first two games. I don't see the customizable M&E coming but let's take an example. You toggle on everything which would fit completely to the Easy difficulty since the limitations the game set through it's difficulty system is balanced with the usage of the M&E feature there. You have unlimited ammo for example which you don't have on higher difficulties. That's where you have a cranked up M&E which doesn't fit to the higher limitations set up through the difficulty settings. The Difficulty is there for the player who wants to have that Hard to Master part, who wants to have the challenge, who wants to dive in much deeper in those gameplay mechanics. How do you do that? Through restricting at the right places. Restrictions makes the game harder, the "flexibility" makes it easier.

Also as above mentioned it beats the whole purpose to make the community fanbase bigger, to make the Stealth franchise more appealing to more people to make the franchise and the genre accessible. I welcome newcomers and the biggest shame for me would be if they aren't able to get to the deep experience the game has to offer, to know why people love it, maybe even to get themself the best perfectionist ever. Not having a learning curve will result into them having only learned of only a very small part of what Stealth is all about and appreciate only that part, that's not really accessible (at least not what it does mean to me). Otherwise the right learning curve will suck them into that franchise and will never spill them out if the game continues to offer what it's loved for. It happened to me immediately in Hitman's Sniper Challenge and that even doesn't have a difficulty setting included. I feel the full game will suck me in as Blood Money did. But back to topic.

It's like the option to turn off gadgets....redundant. Don't use them - Same as.

M&E has so many people divided that it is better to leave it as a customizable option (or maybe keep it as part of the levelling up system so that players who use it a lot can choose to spend some points on it or whatever), without affecting the difficulty.

So regardless of Easy, Normal, Hard, Realistic - you can customize your M&E package. Too easy? toggle everything off....want to have some mindless fun? Toggle everything on.

You are saying "Nope" at the beginning, although what you just said here is pretty much what I said. Which is setting up the difficulty for yourself, for that specific feature I might add.

Too easy? Toggle everything off... = Hard M&E difficulty
Mindless Fun? Toggle everything on... = Easy M&E difficulty

I have a feeling that people have a very strong problem about fun being the easy difficulty. What is the problem? I don't go into GTA use cheats and then afterwards I limit myself. It doesn't make any sense because I already cheated I already made the game much more easier for me. I also won't go in and restrict my ammunition if I have an unlimited amount of them. Counting the magazines would distract from the actual experience.

Want to have mindless fun? Play the easy difficulty and you get the rightly balanced M&E feature in that mode. You get your original M&E, it won't run away from you. Want to play as it's meant to be played? Play the normal difficulty and you get the rightly balanced M&E feature in that mode which considers all the limitations and balance the game set up for that difficulty. And so on...

The feature should be adjusted with the difficulty, to have the right balance and to have a learning curve.

Way off the mark

1. A HUD IS an in-game feature. Mechanics and systems are intrinsically tied to it.

2. In a FIRST person shooter...the HUD is an extremely important gameplay mechanic...try playing without the crosshairs or the minimap (add to that the ability to customize health levels and whatnot)

3. You mess with the HUD and you can adversely affect the gameplay.
Eg: Try EMP'ing an enemy in Ghost Recon Future Soldier Multiplayer. The HUD goes off.

My bad, I meant gameplay feature, because well... ingame feature as the name suggests means everything what's ingame and setting up the sensitivity is also an important feature to the FPS player.

[shobhit7777777]

Of course it would make sense for everybody to campaign against the removal of certain mechanics because the games has a specific core. It would make complete sense campaigning against Tank Sam and Smash through Walls Sam. If you don't care at all about expanding the core mechanics (since that's the price you have to pay for when not minding such things) but instead getting anything into the game which doesn't add anything to the core mechanics (to the Ghost or Panther), well I am fine with that, but I care about those things because that's not how you will improve and innovate the Splinter Cell franchise. Yes, I don't care if somebody is using all the things you mentioned for Conviction, I didn't care for that in previous games too but if it gets ridicolous out of control and you got features where you might as well ask why they don't take their time to improve the core instead of implementing a questionable feature... I am all for options, but they should be reasonable and not like Sam being able to play pocker with his enemy. Might be fun but actually it doesn't add anything to the core of the game... You make it sound like it takes the team no time to implement those ridiculous features and balance them with the mission/level design... and it's not like you don't have to compromise for any of those core mechanics, do you?

Again, comprehend what I'm saying:

If you can play Ghost and Panther to the fullest....would you give a **** if Sam has the option to become a Mecha and destroy the moon?
if those mechanics take nothing away from your stealth experience would you actively campaign for their removal....at the cost of some other player's enjoyment?

Anyway you are veering way off topic and taking a rhetorical example literally.

BTW, Action is a CORE pillar now in SCB.

Yes, people talked about toggling on and off gameplay mechanics, I thought it was something which shouldn't be applied to actual gameplay features though. That's just again getting past the real problem and not being able to compromise. You said yourself all the way long don't use it, if you don't want it. I say that's fine if the narrative and the level design allows for that but I want to be able to use that feature to get some satisfaction too (especially for those who were put off by the overpoweredness of that feature) which I see is achievable through giving that feature a learning curve so it's Hard to Master and it's use is satisfying. A customizeable M&E which is even able to be turned off completely is suggesting that the learning curve ends through playing without the M&E. It actually doesn't really have a learning curve this way in my opinion, because people will stick with their own M&E instead of a version which fits to the specific difficulty.

Which is precisely why the answer is a customizable M&E.

You WANT to use it but don't want an OP feature right? Well, what makes it OP in your opinion? The fact that you can execute from impossible angles, that it can't be interrupted or that it can be earned with a non-stealthy takedown? Well, customize it to your liking so that when you do use it in the SP then it feels right.
Another player would enable them and go for a different experience.

The learning curve:

Glad you brought that up. The issue is non-existent in the form you bring it up. M&E is supposed to be a mechanic in which the challenge, and therefore the learning curve lies in the WAY that it is used. NOT in how you earn, mark or limit yourself. That restriction is the fake difficulty we talk about.
Anyone should be able to pick up the mechanic and execute 4 guys....but the to master it you need to do be smarter about use them. I'll use your own example here:

It happened to me immediately in Hitman's Sniper Challenge and that even doesn't have a difficulty setting included. I feel the full game will suck me in as Blood Money did.

The sniping in the challenge doesn't require you to be an expert marksman...doesn't factor in wind, distance or bullet drop..the core mechanic is simple enough..but the way you use it is what makes the challenge fun and engaging...where the "Learning Curve" comes in.


Accessibility:

The Customizable M&E actually aids newcomers because it is a more natural way of exploring the mechanic than choosing a difficulty and getting stuck with the parameters.
newcomers need a gradual learning curve right? Well, the perfect way to do this is to let them get comfortable with the M&E as they see fit. After their initial playthroughs they will toggle some of the options off to decrease the M&E's power.

You toggle on everything which would fit completely to the Easy difficulty since the limitations the game set through it's difficulty system is balanced with the usage of the M&E feature there. You have unlimited ammo for example which you don't have on higher difficulties. That's where you have a cranked up M&E which doesn't fit to the higher limitations set up through the difficulty settings. The Difficulty is there for the player who wants to have that Hard to Master part, who wants to have the challenge, who wants to dive in much deeper in those gameplay mechanics. How do you do that? Through restricting at the right places. Restrictions makes the game harder, the "flexibility" makes it easier.

Setting up limitations doesn't make it hard to master bro..it just imposes restrictions which make you feel comfortable with the mechanic....nothing else. See above as to why I feel so. A customizable M&E would complement your chosen playstyle and the game difficulties.

What makes the use of M&E harder (apart from the tweaks we discussed) is Level design and the AI systems.

Not having a learning curve will result into them having only learned of only a very small part of what Stealth is all about and appreciate only that part, that's not really accessible (at least not what it does mean to me). Otherwise the right learning curve will suck them into that franchise and will never spill them out if the game

And that is why M&E needs to be a seperately customizable option. M&E doesn't affect the learning curve....it allows players to experiment with different playstyles and hopefully at other difficulty levels.

I don't think that SC (SCC and SCB) fans and newcomers would be as stupid or myopic as to restrict themselves to one playthrough. That is why I feel that the option to use.abuse the M&E should be given to them...it's their choice. No need to include patronizing or condescending difficulties where we try to "teach" them the "deeper" stealth gameplay.
thats the kind of attitude we want to avoid.

You are saying "Nope" at the beginning, although what you just said here is pretty much what I said. Which is setting up the difficulty for yourself, for that specific feature I might add.

Too easy? Toggle everything off... = Hard M&E difficulty
Mindless Fun? Toggle everything on... = Easy M&E difficulty

Difficulty should affect parameters like AI detection, character health, AI density and routines, ammo count, alarm limit etc. M&E should be a separate tool open for customization...IMO at least.

I have a feeling that people have a very strong problem about fun being the easy difficulty. What is the problem? I don't go into GTA use cheats and then afterwards I limit myself. It doesn't make any sense because I already cheated I already made the game much more easier for me. I also won't go in and restrict my ammunition if I have an unlimited amount of them. Counting the magazines would distract from the actual experience.

Want to have mindless fun? Play the easy difficulty and you get the rightly balanced M&E feature in that mode. You get your original M&E, it won't run away from you. Want to play as it's meant to be played? Play the normal difficulty and you get the rightly balanced M&E feature in that mode which considers all the limitations and balance the game set up for that difficulty. And so on...

And lose AI reaction times in the process?
What if I want to play with a powered M&E against a fully capable AI team? What if I want to play with a limited M&E against noob AI on fun CQC only run?

See, Andre the balance you're worried about hinges not on the mechanic itself....but on the situations in game...Missions design, scripted events, AI routines etc. THAT is what should be affected by the difficulty to provide a proper challenging experience.

[Dieinthedark]

It's simple..actually pretty tricky to pull off..but simple in theory.

M&E hinges on AI placement and routine. The simpler the patterns and placement...the easier it is to pull off executes. Complex placements, requiring timing and proper target prioritization will bring an element of strategy to the mechanic.

Instead of the old 3 man cluster here and a lone free-kill there.....the patterns can be made more complex. Have the routines be modular so that an algorithm can mix and match those patterns to produce a complex aggro stealth scenario.

Players would have to observe, mark the lone guy and then figure out how to execute the rest with minimal drama.

I believe Sameer said that you can priority mark targets now....that is certainly a step in the right direction. But I have my reservations about that.

This was exactly the last thing I talked about in Modern Stealth. The AI clusters made it clearly evident that you were supposed to use M&E. It didn't matter how many times you go back and watch the videos of oh you play how you want to, no, you were supposed to use it the whole way through. So I say randomize it. Give us the tools, scatter the groups, and that will take a lot of the "gamey" feel away imo.

[Andre202]

Again, comprehend what I'm saying:

If you can play Ghost and Panther to the fullest....would you give a **** if Sam has the option to become a Mecha and destroy the moon?
if those mechanics take nothing away from your stealth experience would you actively campaign for their removal....at the cost of some other player's enjoyment?

Anyway you are veering way off topic and taking a rhetorical example literally.

Yes, I did take it literally because I don't think the "Ghost and Panther to the fullest" will ever happen and that you are always able to expand there. That's the same mistake the original Splinter Cell developer team did after thinking that SCCT is perfect. Ridiculous features on the other side which doesn't fit to the idea/concept of the game happen all the time.

BTW, Action is a CORE pillar now in SCB.

Yes I know, but as said, I won't care that much if the additions are reasonable. Action is a broad word. Personally I think it shouldn't end in Rambo Action but in tactical Action. Just adding Action as a pillar doesn't mean you can put in everything which other Action games offer though.

Which is precisely why the answer is a customizable M&E.

You WANT to use it but don't want an OP feature right? Well, what makes it OP in your opinion? The fact that you can execute from impossible angles, that it can't be interrupted or that it can be earned with a non-stealthy takedown? Well, customize it to your liking so that when you do use it in the SP then it feels right.
Another player would enable them and go for a different experience.

How will you be able to get that system to work in Coop? You want everybody to have their own M&E which quite frankly would split the community apart even more and not unite them.

The learning curve:

Glad you brought that up. The issue is non-existent in the form you bring it up. M&E is supposed to be a mechanic in which the challenge, and therefore the learning curve lies in the WAY that it is used. NOT in how you earn, mark or limit yourself. That restriction is the fake difficulty we talk about.
Anyone should be able to pick up the mechanic and execute 4 guys....but the to master it you need to do be smarter about use them. I'll use your own example here:

Yes it's up to how you use that mechanic, but there are several things you don't have any control over or won't be able to do yourself. Above that I suggest a consistent system so it doesn't split up the community again. What you might add is three difficulties for M&E. Easy M&E, Normal M&E, Expert M&E and Default. Default will apply the M&E to the right difficulty setting of the game. What it does, is allowing you to use the restricted M&E which would be actually only available on Expert being able to use it on the Easy difficulty of the game too. There are challenges for M&E you cannot get if you do not restrict, because you won't keep up with all the restrictions in mind. The game should do that for you, so you can experience it without being distracted through the restrictions you set yourself. These restrictions do add a learning curve. It's not fake at all, this is what difficulty settings do all the time with your health, ammunition, AI reactions etc.

For example we could take the restrictions ShadowFox suggested. You would need to keep in mind then that moving targets would result in Sam shooting more bullets as usual which could result into a detection by other enemies surrounding you. The ability that your execution phase can be abrupted will make you more aware of doing plans which takes these conditions in mind. You will find completely new ways to use that feature which you couldn't before, because you didn't have that downside. There are great examples in games, I cannot go into specifics because I really don't know of any specific example now. But let us imagine you learn a new feature in a game. The game then encourages you to use that feature more often to get used to it. You learn that the feature is always working in a specific way but then the game throws you into the situation where you need to execute the same feature differently, so you know: Ohh there is also a downside. The further you get the more you know about the features advantages and disadvantages and what you need to keep in my mind.

After thinking a bit I got an example. Portal. You learn to use your Portal Gun. Now if every level would have these walls and gorunds where you can shoot portals the puzzles wouldn't be as fun to solve. So you begin to add restrictions to that established feature. The first you got to know is that you cannot shoot portals on every kind of surface which make you think different in those situations. You cannot go about those puzzles in the same way as you did before where the surfaces allowed you to do so.
The same goes for the M&E feature. If it does require you to do a real Stealth Takedown to be able to use the M&E token, you have to tackle the situation completely differently then before where you were able to activate M&E just by grabbing them and weren't even required to be stealthy at that.

The sniping in the challenge doesn't require you to be an expert marksman...doesn't factor in wind, distance or bullet drop..the core mechanic is simple enough..but the way you use it is what makes the challenge fun and engaging...where the "Learning Curve" comes in.

If the difficulty settings would be available there I am sure such kind of things you suggested would be there. It sucked me in because the game challenged me to get a higher and higher rating, to get a perfect playthrough. The game encouraged me to do so with it's rating system, it encouraged me to play a certain style. I imagine that Absolution with difficulty settings will be sucking me in even more.

Accessibility:

The Customizable M&E actually aids newcomers because it is a more natural way of exploring the mechanic than choosing a difficulty and getting stuck with the parameters.
newcomers need a gradual learning curve right? Well, the perfect way to do this is to let them get comfortable with the M&E as they see fit. After their initial playthroughs they will toggle some of the options off to decrease the M&E's power.

For one, everyone would have his own M&E. It does sound great at the first moment, but at the end I don't like the idea of customizable M&E because it splits up the community even more. Also it doesn't encourage the player to get to know other uses for the M&E or to get to know other playstyles. You make a game accessible to get new gamers into the franchise who are turned off by Stealth games or who doesn't know about that at all. The exercise I would see as a developer would be to encourage the player to get to know this world and to show them why it's so exciting to experience that world like a Ghost would or a Panther. It shouldn't be that just a certain playstyle is accessible to the player, but that the gamer gets to know the whole range and if he just sticks to his own version won't know of this gameplay range and depth the game is offering.

Setting up limitations doesn't make it hard to master bro..it just imposes restrictions which make you feel comfortable with the mechanic....nothing else. See above as to why I feel so. A customizable M&E would complement your chosen playstyle and the game difficulties.

Of course it makes it harder to master because you cannot solve that "puzzle" like before. The planning phase will get a whole different meaning you will need to think much further then before. If you add the suggestion from Jazz for example which let the M&E expires in a certain amount of time, you will need to think much more further. Yes I know the downsides of that suggestion but it was just an example.

What makes the use of M&E harder (apart from the tweaks we discussed) is Level design and the AI systems.

That's right. Above that restricting the range might make the M&E also harder, doesn't it? Considering that the first shot won't hit the head of the enemy because he is moving and others might detect you therefore makes also the use of M&E harder, doesn't it?

I don't think that SC (SCC and SCB) fans and newcomers would be as stupid or myopic as to restrict themselves to one playthrough. That is why I feel that the option to use.abuse the M&E should be given to them...it's their choice. No need to include patronizing or condescending difficulties where we try to "teach" them the "deeper" stealth gameplay.
thats the kind of attitude we want to avoid.

People who are not able to restrict themself are not stupid especially the ones who are new to the franchise. If they don't know what the game has all to offer, they are not able to restrict themself to a specific playstyle and how do they know that something doesn't appeal to them if they have never tried out?

Difficulty should affect parameters like AI detection, character health, AI density and routines, ammo count, alarm limit etc. M&E should be a separate tool open for customization...IMO at least.

As said I don't think that M&E open to customization is a good thing and it's not written into a stone what the difficulty setting should affect or not. I agree with all the things you are counting here but if you begin to do features that are supposed to make the entrance into the game more easier and accessible they need to be affected with them too in my opinion.

And lose AI reaction times in the process?
What if I want to play with a powered M&E against a fully capable AI team? What if I want to play with a limited M&E against noob AI on fun CQC only run?

I suggested the system above. Easy M&E will look like the Conviction M&E, Normal M&E might have the tweaks we were suggesting like being able to be abrupted in the Execution phase and Expert M&E adds another layer upon that. How they will look like exactly could be discussed further.

See, Andre the balance you're worried about hinges not on the mechanic itself....but on the situations in game...Missions design, scripted events, AI routines etc. THAT is what should be affected by the difficulty to provide a proper challenging experience.

I do think it also hinges on the mechanic, not just the mechanic, that's right, but it's not just Mission/Level Design etc. either. Because playing on the big awesome DLC maps makes some things actually even easier. That's why I think the mechanic needs also some tweaks.

[shobhit7777777]

Yes it's up to how you use that mechanic, but there are several things you don't have any control over or won't be able to do yourself. Above that I suggest a consistent system so it doesn't split up the community again.

For one, everyone would have his own M&E. It does sound great at the first moment, but at the end I don't like the idea of customizable M&E because it splits up the community even more. Also it doesn't encourage the player to get to know other uses for the M&E or to get to know other playstyles. You make a game accessible to get new gamers into the franchise who are turned off by Stealth games or who doesn't know about that at all. The exercise I would see as a developer would be to encourage the player to get to know this world and to show them why it's so exciting to experience that world like a Ghost would or a Panther. It shouldn't be that just a certain playstyle is accessible to the player, but that the gamer gets to know the whole range and if he just sticks to his own version won't know of this gameplay range and depth the game is offering.

How would the community be divided? In terms of playstyles based on M&E preference? Are we divided? because I'm sure we have different variations of "our" M&E.

A customizable M&E is a counter to this "comfort zone" phenomena where players restrict themselves to a single playstyle as customization often encoruages experimentation. A forced fed version simply turns people off certain mechanics.

What if Codenameeric could turn off more than 2 executes? what if He could turn it off entirely? what if Jazz could have the option to disable the ability to execute while detected? That would've made for a better experience for them (not sure for codenameeric since SCC would've needed to do a lot more)

Allowing the player to go through the game experimenting with M&E is the best way to encourage playstyle exploration.

If the difficulty settings would be available there I am sure such kind of things you suggested would be there. It sucked me in because the game challenged me to get a higher and higher rating, to get a perfect playthrough. The game encouraged me to do so with it's rating system, it encouraged me to play a certain style. I imagine that Absolution with difficulty settings will be sucking me in even more.

Precisely! and that challenge would be achieved through smart stealthy gameplay!!
Being devious, clever and sneaky in the challenge rewards the player. The learning curve comes in when the player explores the AI routines, the environment and different ways to hide the bodies....the player learns how to effectively kill a bodyguard without leaving a trace.
This learning curve is an intrinsic, natural one....not imposed by mechanic restriction

Similarly, in case of M&E, the learning curve comes into play when the player is encouraged to use it in situations which require planning and observation.

GRFS is a good example of how the M&E learning curve should progress. In the initial missions the Sync Shots are easy to pull off..but as you progress you get more enemies, complex patrols, varied geometry etc. It's a great way to show that M&E can be an extremely tactical tool with a great learning curve IF the mission design and AI cater for it.

Another thing which I have against pre-packaged M&E diificulty is the fact that it eliminates certain hybrid playstyles and stomps out gameplay experimentation.
I'd like to try an aggro-ghosting experience, combining M&E into the classic stealth approach. I would use it to move around and silently eliminate key enemy personnel all the while making sure that nothing is traceable. A quick silent attack followed by hiding the evidence.

If we were to go the standard difficulty route you suggest, it might not be possible to do so...given that a Ghosting experience would require the AI to be super sharp hence the hardest difficulty...where in the M&E would be severely limited. I would not enjoy going through this hard as nails loop.

That's right. Above that restricting the range might make the M&E also harder, doesn't it? Considering that the first shot won't hit the head of the enemy because he is moving and others might detect you therefore makes also the use of M&E harder, doesn't it?

It does...but what is harder...a standard SCC patrol routine and map with a limited M&E or a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and an M&E tailored to your liking.

That's why I think the mechanic needs also some tweaks

I couldn't agree more...but not at the cost of limiting other people's options. Hence the customization.


Also regarding Coop: different M&E parameters would still apply and function. The same way you have one person with an Mk.23 and another with an FN in Coop...different number of marks and different range.

In fact it would be great to see how people share their M&E options....which brings us to the point of exploration and accessibility.

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

I guess somebody didn't watch The Dark Knight. I'm not saying thinking of a Submarine is wrong, I'm saying it's not the 'only' way to think of it. And the visual information can be generated however you like, Echolocation, Sonar, it really doesn't matter what the name is, or how you need to rationalize the tech. Audibly generated data can still be translated to visual imagery. In fact there is work being done on generating digital imagery for blind people with a component and translating that data into a form that can be sent past the eyes to the brain. I don't know a lot about it and I'm probably off a bit but I saw it on the tube a while back.

Quoting the Dark Knight isn't really helping the Tom Clancy case.

I don't care that we can see through objects, I just care that the excuse is believable.

Yes, sound can be translated into rough visual imagery. It can't, however, let you see through objects.

NVG 'goggles' were not in use in the real world when Sam first made his appearance.

Ah.....what?

[oO_ShadowFox_Oo]

Can I still play stealthily? Yeah? Ok..I don't give a **** then.

It's about the context of the game. You may not give a ****, but I"m asking "Why are the devs wasting valuable dev time creating this, when the game is supposed to be about sneaking?"

Where do you draw the line.

How about the mission where Sam has to strategically nuke each rogue nation and you have to fly each missile?

Not difficulty...M&E.
You can customize it so that it appeals to you.
OR
You can max it out...go rambo on your "Ninja" playthroughs and complain it's OP.

It's not the same as tuning the controller sensitivity. A COD equivalent would be turning the hitmarkers off, the crosshairs off and getting rid of the Map. Heck they even have a customizable hardcore mode.

That's exactly what I'm talking about - the difficulty of M&E.

And no, those are not equivalents, because these are all in Conviction also.

Giving granular control over each element of M&E is exactly the same as sensitivity and control, because it dictates how hard it is to kill multiple people around you in a single motion. Maybe the "sticky-aim" from COD would also be included.

You have to play with sensitivity, find out which suits you best. It takes a while and it is only one option.

Giving this sort of granular control to M&E would be a terrible idea. You'd have to have maybe 7-8 controls and it would go completely counter to everything this team is trying to accomplish with these new Splinter Cells - which is simplified, basic, intuitive and low on "fatal-errors" .

You would need to go through a ton of playthroughs, experimenting with the controls to even find any noticeable differences between slight adjustments. Or else you'd have to change things at random to get a difference experience.

People haven't got that much patience, which is why professionals would need to design and test different versions/combinations that work, and then assign them to each difficulty.

Sure, include a hack if you want - but that's what PCs mods are for - not mainstream XBox games.

[Andre202]

How would the community be divided? In terms of playstyles based on M&E preference? Are we divided? because I'm sure we have different variations of "our" M&E.

A customizable M&E is a counter to this "comfort zone" phenomena where players restrict themselves to a single playstyle as customization often encoruages experimentation. A forced fed version simply turns people off certain mechanics.

What if Codenameeric could turn off more than 2 executes? what if He could turn it off entirely? what if Jazz could have the option to disable the ability to execute while detected? That would've made for a better experience for them (not sure for codenameeric since SCC would've needed to do a lot more)

Allowing the player to go through the game experimenting with M&E is the best way to encourage playstyle exploration.

I don't think that small adjustments would be really noticeable for the player anyway. How does it divide the community? You pointed it out yourself. We have already difficulties to come to a result in this discussion. Yet we are still able to discuss and don't get over board, when you begin to give the player to have that much control over M&E, he will always expect to have that much control over M&E and he will have his own version which he will defend to his death in those discussions.

I don't think that Jazz or Eric would really care about these small adjustments because I do think they trust the Dev Team when it comes to adjusting this specific feature to the difficulty of the game. I am not here to say what they think about this issue though. It's just that I think M&E is not about giving the player that much control over that feature and it was always defended as such a feature so I do think adjusting the feature with the right difficulty would be the way to go.

While you might give the players the M&E they want you may damage the easy way to use that feature too. It's Easy to Learn and (should get through this thread) Hard to Master. They shouldn't go through the game and have to look how they need to adjust the feature to get it perfect for their own playstyle. That's going against the principical of Easy to Learn.

Precisely! and that challenge would be achieved through smart stealthy gameplay!!
Being devious, clever and sneaky in the challenge rewards the player. The learning curve comes in when the player explores the AI routines, the environment and different ways to hide the bodies....the player learns how to effectively kill a bodyguard without leaving a trace.
This learning curve is an intrinsic, natural one....not imposed by mechanic restriction

Similarly, in case of M&E, the learning curve comes into play when the player is encouraged to use it in situations which require planning and observation.

GRFS is a good example of how the M&E learning curve should progress. In the initial missions the Sync Shots are easy to pull off..but as you progress you get more enemies, complex patrols, varied geometry etc. It's a great way to show that M&E can be an extremely tactical tool with a great learning curve IF the mission design and AI cater for it.

Another thing which I have against pre-packaged M&E diificulty is the fact that it eliminates certain hybrid playstyles and stomps out gameplay experimentation.
I'd like to try an aggro-ghosting experience, combining M&E into the classic stealth approach. I would use it to move around and silently eliminate key enemy personnel all the while making sure that nothing is traceable. A quick silent attack followed by hiding the evidence.

If we were to go the standard difficulty route you suggest, it might not be possible to do so...given that a Ghosting experience would require the AI to be super sharp hence the hardest difficulty...where in the M&E would be severely limited. I would not enjoy going through this hard as nails loop.

You might not be able to choose from hybrid versions of M&E but you have already the flexible version of Conviction. Through the suggestion I made you can choose to use that flexible M&E in every difficulty of the game. Or you use a more restricted one and impose a few restrictions yourself if it's not to your liking. But the flexible M&E is there and people can choose to use it and how to use it.

It does...but what is harder...a standard SCC patrol routine and map with a limited M&E or a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and an M&E tailored to your liking.

It's unfair to use SCC as a reference here since I haven't mentioned that and I do think that you know it doesn't have the best patrol routine.
We would need to decide between,
a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and a limited M&E or
a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and an M&E tailored to your liking.
What do you think is harder? The same with M&E you like or with a M&E you need to get used to?

I couldn't agree more...but not at the cost of limiting other people's options. Hence the customization.

I am not sure if it was clear what I suggested. The Dev team will adjust the feature to every difficulty with the right balance. They know how to do that.
Now when you choose the difficulty of the game: Easy, Normal, Expert, (Realistic). You will also have the option to choose from the M&Es which are all cattered to these difficulties. So you will be also able to decide between: Easy M&E (like Conviction, flexible), Normal M&E, Expert M&E, (Realistic M&E) and Default. Default will apply the right M&E to the right difficulty.

Also regarding Coop: different M&E parameters would still apply and function. The same way you have one person with an Mk.23 and another with an FN in Coop...different number of marks and different range.

In fact it would be great to see how people share their M&E options....which brings us to the point of exploration and accessibility.

You are just seeing the good side but the bad side about this or rather the problem is already available in Conviction. In Coop it's about teamplay and not about someone who needs to tailor to the playstyle of the other one. If you get a customizable M&E into that, it could take years to find the right partner. One is rather using M&E in a specific situation and the other one in an other specific situation because it depends on their playstyle. And so is one person forced to catter with the playstyle of the other person instead of playing really together. That's something I discussed with SolidSage already and he sees that point. So in Matchmaking you would have the options to decide between the three archetypes (who you want play with) and with your customization it might take some time to get the other one to have the exact same M&E or a similar version. With my suggestion you would be able to find others a lot faster and better. Of course the positive side might be the exploration but I think that a lot of other people would have already made up their mind about which M&E they want to have and they may not be ready to play like the other one does.

[shobhit7777777]

It's about the context of the game. You may not give a ****, but I"m asking "Why are the devs wasting valuable dev time creating this, when the game is supposed to be about sneaking?"
Where do you draw the line.
How about the mission where Sam has to strategically nuke each rogue nation and you have to fly each missile?

But ARE they wasting time?

Are they making Sam into a tank crushing walls? Nope. They are keeping the action loop present in Conviction intact, adding a few scripted sequences to fortify that and at the same time beefing up the stealth gameplay.

I draw the line for MYSELF. I will not like to go on a rampage while playing Blacklist and my playstyle will reflect this. However I understand that the game has a potentially fun action loop and a louder element to it which has a broader appeal....how does this bother me if I am satisfied with the current mechanics.

The dev time is a moot argument since the focus of Splinter Cell is and always will be 'Stealth'. Blacklist has confirmed that three out of the two archetype playstyles are hardcore stealth sub-genres. It is evident that the focus has been on providing a comprehensive stealth experience.
What do we have for the Action side? NOTHING
Seriously, Look at whats been added to buff the Rambo players.....NO NEW MECHANICS.
The action loop is the same as in Conviction.
Dropping Predator missiles? Scripted event triggered by player input
Blowing stuff up? Player input - no new mechanics

You can argue that Killing in Motion and Active Sprint are the new "action" mechanics...but it can be just as easily be pointed that the two mechanics are also viable aggro-stealth mechanics. So where is the dev time being wasted? Where is Stealth Gameplay sacrificed?

So my question to you is...if you can Ghost and Sneak...would you be bothered by another player wrecking through the game? Would you actively campaign for it's removal...at the cost of other people's enjoyment of that gameplay loop?

How would you like the devs to beef up stealth? I'd like to hear your ideas.


@Andre

I don't think that small adjustments would be really noticeable for the player anyway. How does it divide the community? You pointed it out yourself. We have already difficulties to come to a result in this discussion. Yet we are still able to discuss and don't get over board, when you begin to give the player to have that much control over M&E, he will always expect to have that much control over M&E and he will have his own version which he will defend to his death in those discussions.

I simply disagree on this.

In GRFS, in the Gunsmith mode...people have hundreds of different versions of the same rifle...the exact same rifle. The community enjoys discussing the pros and cons, the intricacies of each variation and sharing ideas.

Differences lead to a varied experience. SCB's objective is to cater to different playstyles...and a crucial mechanic like M&E should reflect it.

I don't think that Jazz or Eric would really care about these small adjustments because I do think they trust the Dev Team when it comes to adjusting this specific feature to the difficulty of the game. I am not here to say what they think about this issue though. It's just that I think M&E is not about giving the player that much control over that feature and it was always defended as such a feature so I do think adjusting the feature with the right difficulty would be the way to go.

You'd be surprised, Andre.

I clearly remember Codename requesting toggleable features in SEVERAL threads and posts. Jazz and I had M&E discussions and it always lead back to the same thing....that the game would've been better with the M&E realistically limited.

The reason why M&E and the Difficulty should not overlap is that I see difficulty related to larger systems like the AI and level design. M&E is a tool....it should be treated like the SC-20K or the FN.
I want to craft my own gameplay experiences.
I want to be able to play with a fully powered M&E BUT with the harder AI on the 'Splinter Cell' difficulty.
I want to be able to play with minimal 2 token Executes on the lower difficulties.

This requires a flexible M&E options.

While you might give the players the M&E they want you may damage the easy way to use that feature too. It's Easy to Learn and (should get through this thread) Hard to Master. They shouldn't go through the game and have to look how they need to adjust the feature to get it perfect for their own playstyle. That's going against the principical of Easy to Learn.

Not in the slightest

The standard M&E would work like Conviction's M&E.....the player would be informed that the M&E can be customized. Leave it at that! Let the player decide whether he/she wants to tweak the M&E package.

It should be and is easy to learn...the basic mechanic is the same...the difference lies in the limits to it's use. A player can adjust these the same way you adjust your other controls and HUD options.

Let the player experiment with different options. I have a question...did you find the dev version of M&E perfect? No, right? Would you not have wanted the ability, while playing D-ops, to tweak the M&E to suit a version that YOU find acceptable?
Would you not like to discover what it feels like to operate the M&E with a range limitation of 20 meters and finite ammo?

You might not be able to choose from hybrid versions of M&E but you have already the flexible version of Conviction. Through the suggestion I made you can choose to use that flexible M&E in every difficulty of the game. Or you use a more restricted one and impose a few restrictions yourself if it's not to your liking. But the flexible M&E is there and people can choose to use it and how to use it.

I'll be honest here Andre

The current version of M&E seems absolutely perfect to ME. Why? because I simply slap on restrictions and don't give it a second thought...I don't see it as a design failure.
HOWEVER
There are other players out there, SC fans like me, who feel that the M&E is OP and TBH they are right. Even if the choice is there...the mechanic IS flawed...this is WHY I am campaigning fr a customizable M&E

What I did with self imposed restrictions...you should be able to do via an ingame menu...it is the "legit" way to do it and in a way it shows that the game UNDERSTANDS the flaws of M&E and has rectified them...it's that message that is important.

It's unfair to use SCC as a reference here since I haven't mentioned that and I do think that you know it doesn't have the best patrol routine.
We would need to decide between,
a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and a limited M&E or
a proper massive sandbox, with complex AI routines, a changing environment and an M&E tailored to your liking.
What do you think is harder? The same with M&E you like or with a M&E you need to get used to?

Definitely the latter.
This re-enforces my point in a way. You can tweak and customize your challenges on the fly WITHOUT restricting your playstyle

You can match different M&E settings with different difficulty levels not only for a variety of challenge levels...BUT..also varied playstyles.
Hardcore M&E with Realistic mission conditions - Uber Aggro-Stealth
Hardcore M&E with Easy mission conditions - light Ghosting
Easy M&E with Realistic Mission conditions - Hardcore Predator
Medium M&E with Realistic mission conditions - Aggro Stealth

I am not sure if it was clear what I suggested. The Dev team will adjust the feature to every difficulty with the right balance. They know how to do that.
Now when you choose the difficulty of the game: Easy, Normal, Expert, (Realistic). You will also have the option to choose from the M&Es which are all cattered to these difficulties. So you will be also able to decide between: Easy M&E (like Conviction, flexible), Normal M&E, Expert M&E, (Realistic M&E) and Default. Default will apply the right M&E to the right difficulty.

*Sigh

Basically what I've been saying.....except that I want the option to be more indepth...that the customization goes deeper into the packages...so you can either select the correct M&E package OR go and tweak those packages further to get your desired setting
Like create a class
Class 1 - Easy (YOUR easy M&E package)
Class 2 - Medium (Your medium M&E package)
Class 3 - Realistic (Your realistic M&E package)

With a default option for all.

Andre...we have been after the same thing after all...

You are just seeing the good side but the bad side about this or rather the problem is already available in Conviction. In Coop it's about teamplay and not about someone who needs to tailor to the playstyle of the other one. If you get a customizable M&E into that, it could take years to find the right partner. One is rather using M&E in a specific situation and the other one in an other specific situation because it depends on their playstyle. And so is one person forced to catter with the playstyle of the other person instead of playing really together. That's something I discussed with SolidSage already and he sees that point. So in Matchmaking you would have the options to decide between the three archetypes (who you want play with) and with your customization it might take some time to get the other one to have the exact same M&E or a similar version. With my suggestion you would be able to find others a lot faster and better. Of course the positive side might be the exploration but I think that a lot of other people would have already made up their mind about which M&E they want to have and they may not be ready to play like the other one does.

It may well be hard....but not impossible and certainly feasible.
Its the same as playing with a Gung-Ho friend....he'll be M&E ing all over the place with an FN...meanwhile I'll be sneakier and going for the 2 man executes with the Mk.23
Playstyle differences are unavoidable.
However, if you can classify your M&E package into the categories you mentioned above...problems will be solved.

it'd be great to check out a player's playstyle depending on their M&E package.