So, it seems Irrational (sorry, '2k Boston') have admitted that yes, their plan all along WAS just to make System Shock 2 again. Which is an interesting case of rooting around in one's own bins but not an isolated one (Teen Fartass 2, The Supremes Commander: Stop! In the name of love).http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53272
"Here was our idea: Let's just make System Shock 2. This was easy because we'd already made System Shock 2. We knew it was a critical success, and we thought we knew all the things that kept it from being financially successful."
I KNEW IT. And so did Zero Punctuation
What's more amusing is that they say in the article that the game SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN A SUCCESS and that it was all down to marketing it as an action game, as opposed to a RPG-lite with shooty elements.
An odd thing to say after you've just gotten fantastically rich off over 2 million sales on the back of selling the same game twice, with the second time being arguably not nearly as good.
What say you, bezzies? Perhaps it was grinding through the game twice in short succession (1000/1000, natch), or the fact that the entire internet seemed to be spunking over it in the biggest bukkake bath ever, but I can say, hand on heart and Big Daddy figurine atop TV that as a game, it kinda sucked.
It was all down, in my mind, to the art and sound design, and to our Oirish friend Atlas. The combat got steadily more tedious, the plasmids were with a few exceptions half-baked novelties, and the storyline did exactly what System Shock 2's did and featured an excellent twist followed by a sharp descent into shitness.
Do you reckon that this was all clever marketing, as they managed to sell a game which could never have stood on its own combat, as a combat game? And then trusted the (admittedly incredibly intriguing story and setting) to draw all the screaming elmos in and make them love the game as it was supposed to have been loved instead?