What's the big deal about Dishonored? Everyone given koolaid?

  • 82 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Humanity (10061 posts) -

@Deathstriker: IF you consider combat in Skyrim to be "weighty" and "visceral" then you will probably not agree with anyone that likes the combat from games like Dishonored. If sword fighting in Dishonored felt like swinging a broom for you, then the fighting in Skyrim felt like whacking a mannequin with a bat for me.

#52 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

One of the things I loved the most about the game was the ending or well at least assuming they make the low chaos ending which I got the cannon ending. It shows Emily restoring the land to greatness with Corvo at her side. And eventually shows that Corvo protected her until the day he died. What is great is that there are NO loose ends other than the Outsider stuff which was very intentionaly kept vague. Yet, if they ever want to do a sequel there is that entire period of the time line between the end of Dishonored and when Corvo dies so many stories about Corvo can be told in the future if they so should choose to do that but at the same time unlike some series that over promise sequels from the start they wrapped up the story entirely.

I think the way they handled the different endings felt forced and VERY arbitrary. Really, the same stuff happens no matter what, but if you kill a lot of people and create high chaos during missions the plague won't be cured (which is dumb since both scientists survive either way) and somehow you killing a lot of people makes Emily darker even though she never saw it happen. Neither of those things make sense and don't need to be there; unless the dev/publisher just wants to brag that they have multiple endings. Them punishing you for high chaos basically spits in the face of the idea that you can play the game anyway you want... they can't keep saying that then reprimand you with a lesser ending at the same time.

#53 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@Humanity said:

@Deathstriker: IF you consider combat in Skyrim to be "weighty" and "visceral" then you will probably not agree with anyone that likes the combat from games like Dishonored. If sword fighting in Dishonored felt like swinging a broom for you, then the fighting in Skyrim felt like whacking a mannequin with a bat for me.

I don't think either game has great melee combat... in both cases I relied more on magic and projectiles, but I'd rather sword fight in Skyrim than in Dishnored if I was forced to chose. Skyrim has some interesting kill moves (like in the link below) plus way more if you get some mods, which are kinda cool and easy to pull off once you're leveled up in that area. The blocking felt way better too. It's more that Skyrim is "less worse" than "so great" IMO. No one I personally know enjoyed the sword fighting here and they also avoided it with stealth and/or magic, but I know people who put 40+ hours into Skyrim with sword focused characters, sometimes fist focused, rather than stealth, mages, or archers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZcgpjZzWiA

#54 Posted by Humanity (10061 posts) -

@Deathstriker: I can only go off personal experience but if anything I preferred sword fighting to anything else in Dishonored. It was really quick, easy, and quite showy. Very reminiscent of Assassins Creed in that it's heavily based on simply countering rather than leading the charge. Although a few times when I would straight out attack someone, I could pull off a cool stylish kill when given the upper hand. Both games have very simple combat but what I prefer about Dishonored is that enemies aren't tanks scaled to your level. Every character will go down from a single backstab and every guard will die after a few slashes. What I hate most in first person RPG combat a-la-Skyrim or Borderlands is dealing critical strikes to your foes in the form of sword swings or headshots, only to see barely any health come off due to hidden math and level info running under the hood.

I can with all honesty say I never once used the pistol or any offensive magic, and I can count the amount of times I took out my crossbow on one hand. In part this is due to the fact that I played it much like a proper stealth game and snuck around everywhere without raising any alarms. This approach led me to level up all my non-offensive abilities and as such I never got the rat plaque or the windblast even to level 1. Once you attain the ability to turn stealth killed enemies to dust, sneaking becomes even easier than ever as you hop around "evaporating" everyone around you without having to worry about bodies left lying around. Overall my major criticism would be that the whole game becomes extremely easy past the midpoint when you have unlocked a fair amount of Corvos powers and sneaking isn't even an issue anymore - not even when faced against foes with similar abilities.

#55 Edited by GetEveryone (4458 posts) -

@Deathstriker said:

@mordukai said:

I think the game got the attention It got because of the great art style and the fun gameplay. As a great fan of stealth I have to admit that they they made stealth very acacia lie without making too tacky. Also the powers are so diverse that you really have the option to play the game as you please. If you wanted to play it full stealth to full on action then the option was yours. I will fully agree that the story was rather weak to the point where I was listeninge to podcasts while playing it.

I get what you're saying, but it's not like choosing stealth or action is anything new; between Hitman, Splinter Cell, and MGS after 3, that option has been around since last gen.

What he's saying is that both are totally viable. In Splinter Cell, detection meant a fail-state; Hitman was a pretty poor shooter, and when missions fell apart after a botched hit the game suffered; MGS has infamously poor shooting (Snake Eater remains a pretty awful third-person shooter, even if the game itself is a classic).

In Dishonored, the stealth was great, but the solid gun-play gelled incredibly well with use of powers and the sword meaning that post-detection, the game didn't devolve into "better hide my ass quick-style", but opened up a legitimate, alternate play-style. Great level design (for the most part) meant that actually implementing your chosen style was a joy.

In all, it delivered a really great package, even if the story itself was rote (saying that, the world development was pretty solid between listening in on conversations, liberal use of the heart and reading the various notes and books strewn around the levels).

Edit: This basically became my treatise on why Dishonored is a great game.

#56 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@Deathstriker said:

@haggis said:

The powers here are original in a stealth context, and as I think the quick look pointed out, some of the mechanics (particularly blink) avoid some of the typical problems of stealth gameplay in ways that are new and innovative. As for the melee, I don't find it bad at all. The idea that Skyrim's melee is somehow better than what we get in Dishonored seems ludicrous to me. But to each their own.

I've only played through the first real mission so far, and I'm already very impressed with the openness of the levels, the number of different approaches, the variety of optional objectives, and the obviously carefully designed environments. I'm not quite feeling the story (although I have to say I don't think the choice of having a silent protagonist is "lazy"). But it's still early. I don't have high hopes on that score. Nevertheless, I'm very much enjoying the atmosphere and art design.

I don't see it being my game of the year, but it's definitely looking to be in my top ten, unless everything comes apart later in the game. Having been mildly disappointed with Deus Ex: Human Revolution (mostly because my expectations were so high), I'm finding this game both more open and more accessible. It definitely has that same feel that the original Assassin's Creed had--that is, that not all of the game's systems feel fully matured yet. But as far as being an initial release in a new IP, I think it's definitely on the right track.

How isn't Skyrim's melee combat better? It feels more visceral, has weight, good interaction with who you're fighting, and other positive attributes that at least make it work. Here, all I did with the sword is block when I had to and slit throats. Getting into sword fights felt like I was hitting someone with a broom before they eventually fell down. I don't think the level design is THAT smart, since you can usually just teleport up and can stay hidden. Splinter Cell levels feel more thought out than the ones here.

In general, someone who's played only one level of a game can't really give their opinion on the entire product... that's like someone watching one football game and giving their opinion on the entire NFL. I was optimistic after the game's first level/assassination area, but really, it boils down to the assassination areas being kinda cool (although easy and repetitive) with everything in-between being very bland. With no awesome story, characters, or gameplay, I think it's missing the carrot to put on its stick or anything to make it special. "Choice" isn't that thing, since Hitman does that better.

Skyrim's melee feels wooden and weightless to me, and aside from the blocking there doesn't seem to be any variation at all in it (granted, I haven't put many points into melee stats). Here, at least, there is some reaction by the people you're hitting. All you have to do in Skyrim is block and strike. I'm not seeing any huge difference between the two. I find Dishonored's melee far more visceral than anything I've experienced in Skyrim.

I've played through more of the game now, and my opinion hasn't changed. In fact, I've grown to like the game even more. I've played through the first half of the game, and replayed a few of the initial missions, taking a variety of approaches from full-on violence to stealth. I'm not finding anything in the game bland. And while the story is nothing new or terribly interesting, I'm finding some of the side-characters interesting enough that I'm wishing I'd see more of them.

The game does well what it sets out to do: sets up the AI systems, and then gives you tools to screw around with them. I'm enjoying the game very much at this point. I read your comments and it feels like we're playing two completely different games. I chalk it up to differences in taste and priorities. No kool-aid drinking here, though--clearly some of us genuinely like the game. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing the rest of it. I haven't had this much fun playing a stealth game (and replaying missions) in a very long time.

#57 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

In Dishonored, the stealth was great, but the solid gun-play gelled incredibly well with use of powers and the sword meaning that post-detection, the game didn't devolve into "better hide my ass quick-style", but opened up a legitimate, alternate play-style. Great level design (for the most part) meant that actually implementing your chosen style was a joy.

This is probably what I've liked best about the game. In most stealth games, detection means either reloading or dealing with shitty combat mechanics. There is nothing terribly complicated about the melee in Dishonored, but it's solid and most importantly, fun. I often found myself fighting just mixing up with powers, guns and swords after detection, and then going back and reloading my last save if I wanted to continue stealthily. It's the first time I remember actually enjoying the mix of options I had in such a game. I prefer a stealth approach, but more and more I'm finding that I'm equally enjoying taking every guard down with my abilities and the sword. God forbid, I'm actually thinking about playing through the whole thing again for the high chaos ending, because I know it would be a blast.

#58 Posted by project343 (2838 posts) -

Special powers, stealth, and tons of movement. You feel like a wizard-ninja. That's all I needed to have that in my top 10.

#59 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

I hated Dishonoured. But people like games that I don't. Happens a lot.

#60 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7184 posts) -
@Demoskinos

One of the things I loved the most about the game was the ending or well at least assuming they make the low chaos ending which I got the cannon ending. It shows Emily restoring the land to greatness with Corvo at her side. And eventually shows that Corvo protected her until the day he died. What is great is that there are NO loose ends other than the Outsider stuff which was very intentionaly kept vague. Yet, if they ever want to do a sequel there is that entire period of the time line between the end of Dishonored and when Corvo dies so many stories about Corvo can be told in the future if they so should choose to do that but at the same time unlike some series that over promise sequels from the start they wrapped up the story entirely.

Yep, not to mention there is a whole world of characters they haven't fully explored. Imagine playing as one of Dauds assassins, or having Corvo turn into the next Daud and having to stop him. There are a lot of possibilities here.
#61 Edited by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

Only been playing for a short bit so far (just finished Far Cry 3 beforehand) and I like it a lot so far. The graphics are superb in my opinion, it is the art style that carries them for sure. Far Cry 3 looked good, but I personally prefer an art style that doesn't necessarily aim for full realism. Too early to give a full opinion, but it seems right up my alley so far :)

A lot of people like it, some don't. Just because people don't have the same taste that you do doesn't mean they must be crazy or drinking koolaid ;) We live in a world with different opinions and tastes. Deal with it.

#62 Posted by Miketakon (514 posts) -

Yea ....Skyrim's combat is floaty as heck.

#63 Posted by JZ (2125 posts) -

Silent protagonists are the cancer of videogames and it's about damn time it get cut out.

#64 Posted by sionweeks (656 posts) -

@McGhee said:

@McGhee: From what video is this? I thought I'd seen all of the videos from the original office but I've never seen this one. I can't wait to see this when you reply! :)

#65 Posted by Rafaelfc (1456 posts) -

it is a good game.

#66 Posted by s10129107 (1211 posts) -

I was a teenager when Thief and Deus Ex were fresh and I have a great deal of nostalgia for them. Most of the editors are a little bit older than me, Patrick, I think, is a little younger, but all around my age. In fact the whole game / game coverage industry seems to be growing up with my generation. I suspect they share the a similar perspective and similar biases as I do.

#67 Edited by s10129107 (1211 posts) -

@sionweeks said:

@McGhee said:

@McGhee: From what video is this? I thought I'd seen all of the videos from the original office but I've never seen this one. I can't wait to see this when you reply! :)

Jeff loses a bet and has to drink Gin, which he hates. Search Gin face Jeff on youtube, you'll probably find it.

Also Gin is disgusting.

:::edit::: Its called "A wager fulfilled" and its on the site.

#68 Posted by sionweeks (656 posts) -

@s10129107: Watched it, thank you. You're right, Gin is awful. I also like listening to Dave slur his words constantly :L

#69 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@Humanity said:

@Deathstriker: I can only go off personal experience but if anything I preferred sword fighting to anything else in Dishonored. It was really quick, easy, and quite showy. Very reminiscent of Assassins Creed in that it's heavily based on simply countering rather than leading the charge. Although a few times when I would straight out attack someone, I could pull off a cool stylish kill when given the upper hand. Both games have very simple combat but what I prefer about Dishonored is that enemies aren't tanks scaled to your level. Every character will go down from a single backstab and every guard will die after a few slashes. What I hate most in first person RPG combat a-la-Skyrim or Borderlands is dealing critical strikes to your foes in the form of sword swings or headshots, only to see barely any health come off due to hidden math and level info running under the hood.

I can with all honesty say I never once used the pistol or any offensive magic, and I can count the amount of times I took out my crossbow on one hand. In part this is due to the fact that I played it much like a proper stealth game and snuck around everywhere without raising any alarms. This approach led me to level up all my non-offensive abilities and as such I never got the rat plaque or the windblast even to level 1. Once you attain the ability to turn stealth killed enemies to dust, sneaking becomes even easier than ever as you hop around "evaporating" everyone around you without having to worry about bodies left lying around. Overall my major criticism would be that the whole game becomes extremely easy past the midpoint when you have unlocked a fair amount of Corvos powers and sneaking isn't even an issue anymore - not even when faced against foes with similar abilities.

I doubt very many people played it that way, perhaps people here, since odds are if someone's on a gaming forum they're a very hardcore gamer, but I'd be shocked if over 30% of people played it that way. I really only sneaked around if there were tall-boys or a ton of guards; both of which are pretty rare. I didn't see the point in sneaking past 3 or 4 guys when I could easily take them out one way or another then throw their bodies in the ocean. If you were sneaking around SO much can you really talk about the swordplay anyway? Sounds like were rarely in fights.

#70 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

@Deathstriker said:

@mordukai said:

I think the game got the attention It got because of the great art style and the fun gameplay. As a great fan of stealth I have to admit that they they made stealth very acacia lie without making too tacky. Also the powers are so diverse that you really have the option to play the game as you please. If you wanted to play it full stealth to full on action then the option was yours. I will fully agree that the story was rather weak to the point where I was listeninge to podcasts while playing it.

I get what you're saying, but it's not like choosing stealth or action is anything new; between Hitman, Splinter Cell, and MGS after 3, that option has been around since last gen.

What he's saying is that both are totally viable. In Splinter Cell, detection meant a fail-state; Hitman was a pretty poor shooter, and when missions fell apart after a botched hit the game suffered; MGS has infamously poor shooting (Snake Eater remains a pretty awful third-person shooter, even if the game itself is a classic).

In Dishonored, the stealth was great, but the solid gun-play gelled incredibly well with use of powers and the sword meaning that post-detection, the game didn't devolve into "better hide my ass quick-style", but opened up a legitimate, alternate play-style. Great level design (for the most part) meant that actually implementing your chosen style was a joy.

In all, it delivered a really great package, even if the story itself was rote (saying that, the world development was pretty solid between listening in on conversations, liberal use of the heart and reading the various notes and books strewn around the levels).

Edit: This basically became my treatise on why Dishonored is a great game.

In the earlier Splinter Cell games detection meant start over, but for the most part in the later games you can choose to either shoot your way through or be a ghost. Hitman and MGS having awful gameplay is subjective. I think after MGS3 the gameplay is fine. The shooting in Blood Money is serviceable, much like the gameplay in Dishonored is only serviceable to me. I just started playing Absolution and the gunplay feels much better so far. For me, Hitman isn't about shooting... you can stay undercover the whole time in a disguise, poison your target, stab/choke everyone while hiding their bodies, etc but shooting is a viable option if someone wants to do it. I don't think Dishonored is a bad game at all... just a bit soulless, bland, and borrows too blatantly like the first Darksiders. The "bad" ending for high chaos still seems like a bizarre choice that spits in the face of people who wanted to play it high action rather than stealth... luckily the story doesn't matter at all.

#71 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@Deathstriker said:

I doubt very many people played it that way, perhaps people here, since odds are if someone's on a gaming forum they're a very hardcore gamer, but I'd be shocked if over 30% of people played it that way. I really only sneaked around if there were tall-boys or a ton of guards; both of which are pretty rare. I didn't see the point in sneaking past 3 or 4 guys when I could easily take them out one way or another then throw their bodies in the ocean. If you were sneaking around SO much can you really talk about the swordplay anyway? Sounds like were rarely in fights.

It seems like when someone voices a disagreement with you, you start questioning whether or not they're qualified to offer their opinion based on how much they've played. You're not going to catch much sympathy that way. Just saying. Honestly, it doesn't take long (either sneaking or swordfighting) to get a sense of how the mechanics work and to form an opinion.

#72 Posted by Humanity (10061 posts) -

@Deathstriker: I don't know, it's a stealth game, I think anyone that is into stealth games would play it that way. If asked, I'm sure most stealth-game "enthusiasts" would tell you they load a save whenever they get caught or raise an alarm. But at the same time I'm not going to presume how thousands of people out there played the game.

As for the sword fighting - yes I can talk about it. Despite sneaking through, and having the minimal chaos rating possible in each stage, I would sometimes just let loose and see how many guys I can kill before they get me. I'd of course just do that for kicks and load up a save to keep playing. Although by the end of the game I was a little tired of it and I slaughtered everyone on the last level because I couldn't be bothered to sneak around anymore - even then I only used my sword, combined with blink and stop time.

#73 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@Humanity said:

@Deathstriker: I don't know, it's a stealth game, I think anyone that is into stealth games would play it that way. If asked, I'm sure most stealth-game "enthusiasts" would tell you they load a save whenever they get caught or raise an alarm. But at the same time I'm not going to presume how thousands of people out there played the game.

As for the sword fighting - yes I can talk about it. Despite sneaking through, and having the minimal chaos rating possible in each stage, I would sometimes just let loose and see how many guys I can kill before they get me. I'd of course just do that for kicks and load up a save to keep playing. Although by the end of the game I was a little tired of it and I slaughtered everyone on the last level because I couldn't be bothered to sneak around anymore - even then I only used my sword, combined with blink and stop time.

I was just wondering, since fighting 1 or 2 guys sometimes versus 3 to 5 isn't the same situation. Glad you had fun with the sword... I much preferred magic and projectiles.

#74 Posted by RawknRo11a (568 posts) -

hey! I didn't get any kool aid!

In all seriousness though, from the outside this does seem like just an average game with some kinda neat gameplay mechanics.

For me though, it scratched that itch. You all know the one I'm talking about. That itch that hasn't really been scratched since Deus Ex: HR. I just really enjoyed everything about it, from the Gameplay mechanics, to the art style. Hell, I even felt like the story had some interesting points (albeit, as the GB crew has stated, much of it is hidden in text documents and recordings).

#75 Edited by GetEveryone (4458 posts) -

@Deathstriker said:

@GetEveryone said:

@Deathstriker said:

@mordukai said:

I think the game got the attention It got because of the great art style and the fun gameplay. As a great fan of stealth I have to admit that they they made stealth very acacia lie without making too tacky. Also the powers are so diverse that you really have the option to play the game as you please. If you wanted to play it full stealth to full on action then the option was yours. I will fully agree that the story was rather weak to the point where I was listeninge to podcasts while playing it.

I get what you're saying, but it's not like choosing stealth or action is anything new; between Hitman, Splinter Cell, and MGS after 3, that option has been around since last gen.

What he's saying is that both are totally viable. In Splinter Cell, detection meant a fail-state; Hitman was a pretty poor shooter, and when missions fell apart after a botched hit the game suffered; MGS has infamously poor shooting (Snake Eater remains a pretty awful third-person shooter, even if the game itself is a classic).

In Dishonored, the stealth was great, but the solid gun-play gelled incredibly well with use of powers and the sword meaning that post-detection, the game didn't devolve into "better hide my ass quick-style", but opened up a legitimate, alternate play-style. Great level design (for the most part) meant that actually implementing your chosen style was a joy.

In all, it delivered a really great package, even if the story itself was rote (saying that, the world development was pretty solid between listening in on conversations, liberal use of the heart and reading the various notes and books strewn around the levels).

Edit: This basically became my treatise on why Dishonored is a great game.

In the earlier Splinter Cell games detection meant start over, but for the most part in the later games you can choose to either shoot your way through or be a ghost. Hitman and MGS having awful gameplay is subjective. I think after MGS3 the gameplay is fine. The shooting in Blood Money is serviceable, much like the gameplay in Dishonored is only serviceable to me. I just started playing Absolution and the gunplay feels much better so far. For me, Hitman isn't about shooting... you can stay undercover the whole time in a disguise, poison your target, stab/choke everyone while hiding their bodies, etc but shooting is a viable option if someone wants to do it. I don't think Dishonored is a bad game at all... just a bit soulless, bland, and borrows too blatantly like the first Darksiders. The "bad" ending for high chaos still seems like a bizarre choice that spits in the face of people who wanted to play it high action rather than stealth... luckily the story doesn't matter at all.

I'm going to disagree with everything you've just said above, and I don't think this conversation has anywhere to go. It's near-universally accepted that the alternative to stealth in those games is lackluster, so I don't know what I can say to convince you.

You accused people in the OP of drinking the kool-aid, which I hadn't realised initially. Besides, looking at the other posts, it seems you are totally unwilling to accept that anyone else could enjoy it on the merits of the game alone.

Most everyone disagrees with you on the 'weight' aspect of the combat, which isn't particularly subjective.

If you don't like the game, that is your prerogative; I do, for the reasons listed above.

#76 Posted by Deathstriker (335 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

@Deathstriker said:

@GetEveryone said:

@Deathstriker said:

@mordukai said:

I think the game got the attention It got because of the great art style and the fun gameplay. As a great fan of stealth I have to admit that they they made stealth very acacia lie without making too tacky. Also the powers are so diverse that you really have the option to play the game as you please. If you wanted to play it full stealth to full on action then the option was yours. I will fully agree that the story was rather weak to the point where I was listeninge to podcasts while playing it.

I get what you're saying, but it's not like choosing stealth or action is anything new; between Hitman, Splinter Cell, and MGS after 3, that option has been around since last gen.

What he's saying is that both are totally viable. In Splinter Cell, detection meant a fail-state; Hitman was a pretty poor shooter, and when missions fell apart after a botched hit the game suffered; MGS has infamously poor shooting (Snake Eater remains a pretty awful third-person shooter, even if the game itself is a classic).

In Dishonored, the stealth was great, but the solid gun-play gelled incredibly well with use of powers and the sword meaning that post-detection, the game didn't devolve into "better hide my ass quick-style", but opened up a legitimate, alternate play-style. Great level design (for the most part) meant that actually implementing your chosen style was a joy.

In all, it delivered a really great package, even if the story itself was rote (saying that, the world development was pretty solid between listening in on conversations, liberal use of the heart and reading the various notes and books strewn around the levels).

Edit: This basically became my treatise on why Dishonored is a great game.

In the earlier Splinter Cell games detection meant start over, but for the most part in the later games you can choose to either shoot your way through or be a ghost. Hitman and MGS having awful gameplay is subjective. I think after MGS3 the gameplay is fine. The shooting in Blood Money is serviceable, much like the gameplay in Dishonored is only serviceable to me. I just started playing Absolution and the gunplay feels much better so far. For me, Hitman isn't about shooting... you can stay undercover the whole time in a disguise, poison your target, stab/choke everyone while hiding their bodies, etc but shooting is a viable option if someone wants to do it. I don't think Dishonored is a bad game at all... just a bit soulless, bland, and borrows too blatantly like the first Darksiders. The "bad" ending for high chaos still seems like a bizarre choice that spits in the face of people who wanted to play it high action rather than stealth... luckily the story doesn't matter at all.

I'm going to disagree with everything you've just said above, and I don't think this conversation has anywhere to go. It's near-universally accepted that the alternative to stealth in those games is lackluster, so I don't know what I can say to convince you.

You accused people in the OP of drinking the kool-aid, which I hadn't realised initially. Besides, looking at the other posts, it seems you are totally unwilling to accept that anyone else could enjoy it on the merits of the game alone.

Most everyone disagrees with you on the 'weight' aspect of the combat, which isn't particularly subjective.

If you don't like the game, that is your prerogative; I do, for the reasons listed above.

If they were that lackluster then I think Hitman would be a much lower reviewed series. It's not an AAA title, but it's definitely consistent and been around for awhile for a reason. I didn't really accuse anyone of anything, "kool-aid" was me being facetious. I wouldn't count like 3 people in a forum thread as "everyone disagreeing", I saw several Dishonored reviews that knocked the swordplay.

If I was somehow denying that anyone had fun with this game then I doubt I would've said:"Glad you had fun with the sword... I much preferred magic and projectiles". I made the thread because I was shocked to see this make so many top ten lists, sometimes being number one, so I wanted to see why. To me that's like Ghost Recon or Max Payne being #1 since they're all pretty sub-par to me.

#77 Edited by GetEveryone (4458 posts) -

@Deathstriker said:

I made the thread because I was shocked to see this make so many top ten lists, sometimes being number one, so I wanted to see why. To me that's like Ghost Recon or Max Payne being #1 since they're all pretty sub-par to me.

Ghost Recon and Max Payne are hardly on the same level, but I can see where you're coming from.

When I said lackluster, I meant the alternative to their principal gameplay mechanic. Those titles did their respective thing so well that it isn't a slight against them to say that. The Hitman series has always been fondly regarded, but that was attributable to its tight level design and great stealth mechanics/various ways to kill a target, not at all because it was a joy to run around gunning people down.

Imma say this again, and I know you don't agree, but you specifically asked why people liked it. I don't particularly want to argue these points, so I feel like I have to preface this with the fact that they are just my thoughts:

  • The level-design (for the most part) has been honed to near perfection. Each is its own puzzle, with a number of routes, secrets and levels.
  • The traversal is so good thanks to Corvo's quick movement, a responsive jump mechanic and the blink ability.
  • Melee combat has weight and the spells are varied enough to allow diverse playstyle.
  • The peripheral world is built to a degree where I felt that it seemed living.
  • The art design is gorgeous. It was like a moving oil-painting with bizarrely-proportioned characters.
  • When stealth failed, combat was a legitimate alternative. See: any of the number of youtube videos dedicated to kill-combos.

Unfortunately, the final level does very little to cohesively bring together everything you've learned during your playthrough of everything that came before. The ending is a damp squib, and the story is rote and under-written. They could have done more with The Outsider.

For those downsides, it isn't my favourite game of the year, but the hours I put in I loved and I look forward to the upcoming Daud focused DLC.

Now you know why I like it; you may not understand that and you may disagree, but it ranks up there among the best of the year, as far as I'm concerned.

#78 Posted by mordukai (7185 posts) -

@GetEveryone: @Deathstriker: I think the reason a lot of reviewers put Dishonored so far up their list is because it made them like stealth. There's no secret that most reviewers do not like stealth, especially the guys on this website and more specifically Patrick. If a guy like Patrick who came out and said "Stealth is shit" actually likes the game then Arkane did their job right.

#79 Posted by crowed (14 posts) -

the best mele combat game is zeno clash it´s insane how good it is (and weird), but regarding dishonored, i feel that it´s one of the few games that reward the "inversion" you do in it, if you take your time and listen to what the characters have to say you discover insane amounts of things, and the attention to the detail is amazing too, you can beat it in four five hours easily or, you can spend thirthy hours in your first playthrough, if you enter in a room, shoot/stab your objective it´s fine, if you enter in that same room and listen to the characters, they actually speak to you and explain things, is and amazing game in that regard, and what you do have real consecuences in the game world, but it´s ok if you don´t like it, you don´t have to

#80 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -

Dishonored is basically what older PC games used to be; intelligent and open-ended. That is, before they were replaced by a growing stream of shooters made for the dim-witted and '' use the left mouse button to shoot '' tutorials.

#81 Posted by BaneFireLord (2957 posts) -

How many times do I have to say this...Jim Jones' followers drank poisoned FLAVOR Aid, not KOOL Aid. Y'all stop dragging Kool Aid's good name through the mud.

#82 Posted by Jams (2966 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

How many times do I have to say this...Jim Jones' followers drank poisoned FLAVOR Aid, not KOOL Aid. Y'all stop dragging Kool Aid's good name through the mud.

They're not because the first thing I get when I go to the grocery store later is a crate of kool-aid in the squeeze bottle

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.