Man, how good/better would Mafia III been if it had some iteration of the Nemesis System from Shadow of Mordor? I'm only about 8-10 hours into Mafia, and the biggest bummer to me is with how fantastic the writing, characterization, and voice acting has been, as soon as you take over a territory and "recruit or dispose" of the residing mob boss, their presents from the game is over. There is almost no need for money, and yet, I keep hiring on these dudes to help maintain their old rackets under my ownership because they increase the value of whatever they're doing, but I never hear from them. And why do these guys agree to join me so easily, anyway? If these guys operated under the same loyalty system as your own underbosses, and could favor you or turn on you in the same manner, a Nemesis style system could add so much in creating a personal narrative on top of the overall narrative that the game does so well, not to mention depth to the open world-ness that the game seems to struggle with. I've encountered 1 group of "retaliation hit squads," but that went nowhere. Just a bunch of faceless goons tailing me to the meat packing district. If that band of goons was led by a roughed up lieutenant who I've neglected, I might have been a little more attached to the whole encounter. Definitely easier said than done, but I feel like this was a huge missed opportunity that could have made a pretty alright game way more alright.

*Also, I'm not sure what the copyright situation is on Nemesis and Nemesis-like systems is. Maybe it's impossible for others to copy at the moment, but one can wish.

I believe if anything the nemesis system would introduce even more busy work into a game already rife with too much side activities. Having to worry about an entire chain of command in each district on top of everything else seems like a headache.

That and the nemesis system is honestly nothing special and it never was. The nameless goons you speak of would once in a while have a nameless goon with a repeating name. Oh there is that top hat guy, and WOW he remembers that I killed him with a shotgun.. err.. wait a second.. I'm not sure what astonished people so much about a game making simple database callbacks.

The more I play Mafia 3 the more I think it's an elaborate scheme to get back at all those Mafia 2 reviews. Like a really underhanded way of saying "so you guys wanted more things to do in the open world huh? Well here you go! heh heh heh!" As I keep hammering out these mildly differing time sinks between each story beat I longingly think back on Mafia 2 where I would go from hand-crafted story missions to hand-crafted story mission. At this point I've honestly lost track what it is that Lincoln is trying to accomplish because I've had to dispatch dozens of lieutenants and enforcers that are all somehow integral to the main plot but with all these names, all these vendettas that everyone has against everyone else it's difficult to see the big picture..

@humanity: I guess to be fair, Lincoln Clay is that goon who took a kill shot at point blank range and came back with a scar to prove it. Also, I'm not saying Nemesis is a cure all for any problems open world games have with filling their world with stuff to do, but the added personality is nice.

I'm still playing this very crappy game because it passes the time and the sneaking around can be fun, but my friend, it's really crappy and basic, it's not on Shadow of Mordor's level, not even on the same planet.

Openworld games are giant tickbox playgrounds full of to do lists the Nemesis system created an unending cycle adding more busy work in Mordor that's the reason you haven't seen it in more games.

@howardian: I'd say they are very much on the same level in many regards. One simply compensates in some areas where the other falters. Mordor had much more satisfying minute to minute action and combat system with a much blander, emptier world.

The lack of any game utilizing the nemesis system post shadow of mordor is sad. It wasn't perfect, but refined it can add a lot to certain types of games, including games like mafia. Personally I think a batman, or another superhero, game would be the most obvious choice to see a new and improved take on it, but meh. Nothing.

@howardian: Come on man. This year has been far too good of a year to keep playing games you don't like.

I agree that Mordor had more going mechanically from moment to moment. Some could say that it was GOTY way back in 2014. But that's why I want more games to piggyback ideas from it.

I'm enjoying my time with Mafia 3, something about the open world grind sadly gets me every time, plus I think Mafia 3 is a pretty stylish game aesthetically.

That being said, I think I'd seen the point about Mafia 3 being better with the Nemesis system elsewhere, but yes, I agree - this would be a perfect game to include that type of system. It's interesting that even a few years later after Shadows of Mordor nothing has tried to also implement this system is odd. The idea of Mafia 3 is fundamentally the same "draw out the main boss", a nemesis system would be cool - if you irritated someone enough they might not even come after you themselves, they might just put a 'hit' out on you until you decided to deal with them.

If this game didn't have such horrible repetitive mission structure it would of been my GOTY so far I love characters the soundtrack and the setting. This game could of been something really special the cutscenes and acting sucked me in and the melee combat is fun. Hangar 13 where so close to making a refreshing open world game kinda like what Sleeping Dogs is but the game needs variety so bad it's such a damn shame.

@humanity: I see a lot of people complain about this game having a ton of unnecessary side stuff, but finishing the game last night I had a hard time really finding where those were. I mean, sure, if you didn't necessarily enjoy the combat side of the game and you pick the wrong order in doing the early phases of the district takeovers you might spend a few extra minutes getting it going. But I found myself having several options left most of the time when I was already done and could proceed. However, I actually really enjoyed the combat and such that I did every side dot for every district takeover scenario there was and I still feel like I could have done that a few more times over. I can't put my finger on it but I guess the game just clicked with me in that sense.

Also, personally, this game is so much more enjoyable on every level compared to Mordor I can't even begin to put it into words. But hey, different strokes for different folks and all that jazz. I do think a Mafia/Gangster themed game with a nemesis-esque system could work if it was a less story heavy and more mechanically infused Mafia-Simulator open world game of sorts.

Doesn't the nemesis system only really make sense in the context of a fantasy game like Mordor where there is an in-fiction explanation for character respawns? In a game like Mafia III a character recognizing that hes killed you before would imply Lincoln is being infinitely resurrected, an idea which makes no sense and would take me out of the game.

It's only been 2 years :) I'd be surprised if we don't see it start popping up in games over the next year or two.

Morder 2, I think I'm ready.

@jdizzlefoshizzle: Infinitely respawning goons would probably take me out of it too. I was eluding more to the thugs you let live and work for you. They have no real allegiance to you other than you didn't slit their throat that one time. Also, I guess if the kills in this game weren't so damn gruesome and definitive, you could slap together some conceit that they were just roughed up and got away to fight another day. I don't remember any orcs in Mordor coming back after a good decapitation, but anything short of that, I believe, was fair game.

@carolinafan3515: I had several come back from decapitation, whether that was intended or a glitch is another question.

I assumed OP didn't mean to just lift every aspect of the Nemesis system but to take the parts that make sense. Obviously the same goons wouldn't take over but in a game about taking down a mob structure a Nemesis-like system where you take down a chain of command and they react to you based on what you've done to others makes a ton of sense, and imo the gameplay loop would have been much better. By the last couple of districts I was doing the bare minimum because I wanted to see how the story ended but was done with doing the same objectives over and over.

Yea, I think the argument being missed here is that were the game to focus intently on the structure of the mob, it would be a vastly different game to begin with. I think Mafia III is going to be the first game I attempt to do an actual "review" of (I've posted a few on this site in the past but I'm considering a very comprehensive breakdown of why this game works and why it doesn't) and I have to say that one thing that sticks out most is the artificial nature of everything going on in the mid-game. All these goons with names and backstories and rackets don't actually matter to me, and essentially are just guys I can't kill with bullets and refuse to kill with a knife because I'll earn more money longterm if they live.

Meanwhile, I'm the de facto head of the black mob (a mob we're led to believe definitely existed in this world prior to the end of the prologue) and yet I'm still taking orders from a guy while he cuts carrots in the visitor center of his local boardwalk minutes after I walked into an abandoned house with him and two other people and told them all I'd murder them single handedly if they didn't listen to what I had to say. There's no evidence that I'm representing anyone other than myself, and as such the game often makes me feel no different than a Michael De Santa trying to please everyone around me so they'll just get off my back and let me be at peace with myself. I picture a game with a version of the nemesis system, where I pit my underlings against theirs while I got to the gym, run scams on cars and other seemingly minor activities, only to suddenly be faced with "2/3 of your guys are dead, this guy wants access to your docks and what are you gonna do it about, huh?" and spring into action. But on an even simpler level, why can't I offer rackets to my black friends from back in the day? Am I really playing the one black guy in 1968 "New Bordeaux" that had three black friends and two of them were murdered during my homecoming party?

This is a thing that's actually helped make the storytelling of Vice City standout more over time, because you were given bigger and bigger problems as you became more and more powerful, yet there was also a hint of Tommy Vercetti that felt the job could only be done right if he was the one to do it. Still, in 2004 terms you definitely had the feeling you were a mob boss getting your hands dirty only because you were bored, or felt you had to, not because you were told to. San Andreas backed this power fantasy up further but not only having you call goons in, but actively having them join you off the streets if you pulled over and honked the horn.

Two years after Shadow of Mordor and a decade+ after those two open world crime pinnacles, Mafia III often acts as if it learned nothing.

I think it'd also have to be a different game in terms of the core gameplay/character progression- mechanics wise it's just another painfully typical 3rd person shooter, and there aren't any 'abilities' to speak of that would really make a difference in how you'd approach the underlings. With Mordor, you'd come across some guy you couldn't kill with arrows or who couldn't be stunned, etc, these things all tied into a far more robust set of abilities that changed your approach and made the nemesis lieutenants feel dangerous. In Mafia 3 it barely matters whether you assassinate those enemies before the higher-ranking boss or not, they're just another red blip with slightly more health and the mental faculties of a trepanated worm.

Really good post. I think a lot about that problem you are describing as far as these type of "you are the crime boss" crime games. Even if it was pretty similar, I also think Godfather II even did a better job. And I think the way you describe SA and Vice City is pretty right on, but I think they need to go even further in 2016 with more mechanics to make the "you are the boss" thing work. This goes backward.

Write that review!

Coming back after you with some gator bite marks. I would like to see that.

@artisanbreads: I keep hearing positive things about the Godfather games, in reference to the mechanics of Mafia III, while they were kind of buried under the radar around the time of their release. Unfortunately, I don't think GB has any original video content from those games. It's probably a little too late to go back and try those games out, huh? I doubt they've aged very well.

@carolinafan3515: I am specifically talking Godfather II. It went further than the first game did for sure... honestly I can't remember the first game having much of this at all even. But II had territory control stuff, you rolled around with a posse of dudes you recruited from being the boss that you could outfit, and as you took out territory it was a bit strategic in a very similar way to Crackdown where if you hit one lieutenant type the enemy would no longer have bullet proof vests so the rest of the organization was easier to take down, and if you took down the weapons guy they might lose their heavier firepower against you. I think on your end you got certain boosts for you and your guys too from having certain things under your control(like explosive bullets or something). This is from memory, been a while.

Really that is all it had going for it but I haven't seen any game do that kind of stuff better. When I first heard about Mafia III I was excited thinking it was picking up that torch but seems like it really was not at all. Godfather II was a solid game and one I think could very much be expounded on. It was a really dumb thing in relation to the source material and outside all of this it was not so hot but I do think it was really on to something.

As far as aging.... I can't imagine it has held up at all. But if you checked out some videos might be interesting to you. Or hell if you really want you can grab it for dirt cheap now and fiddle with it for a bit. I think you could imagine the Nemesis type system getting added to that formula. You would have to do tweaking obviously.

EDIT: Actually check the wiki page here for the game. It does a good job laying out stuff. There was some stuff there I wasn't even remembering so much. Like classes of guys you can have along with you and how the enemy could take out certain operations you had.

Still find it pretty weird that the nemesis system never latched on to gaming. As a first try in Shadow of Mordor, it was pretty good. Can only imagine how impressive that would be if iterated upon.

@bojackhorseman: Mordor is recent enough that I wouldn't write off any game not doing it yet; It's been 2 years and assuming that any devs were inspired by the system there's still a chance that a triple A game will have it or something like it.

Plus the game was enough of a success that I would be surprised if Shadow of Mordor 2 wasn't greenlit and in production.

@dystopiax: Yeah, I guess. But it didn't take two years for cover shooters to pop up after Gears, or for loadouts to appear after COD4. Guess this is a deeper mechanic though, tied entirely to the AI. Probably takes some more work.

@carolinafan3515: I do agree that it would've benefited in some way from it, but I feel like the story wouldn't have been as strong.

Why not? The story bits would remain the same, but instead of generic missions where a guy is just surrounded by dudes in a random alley you get more exciting stories centered around taking people out. Then the cutscenes are the same.