Unlike most current games, System Shock 2 frequently spawns enemies in areas that have been cleared. Despite being used as a weapon, it never suffers wear like the other weapons.Īnother issue is spawning. Moreover, many weapons the player finds are in low condition to begin with.Ĭoupled with the relatively low ammunition stores found in the game, it is commonly joked that the number one weapon used by most players is the wrench. Designed to add tension to the game, many feel that the quality of any gun drops far too quickly. Most of the complaints take issue with the gun degradation system. Most of these criticisms are said to be reasons that the game never caught on outside of the devoted fans. "While lauded as excellent by devoted fans, gamers of the more casual persuasion have criticised certain aspects of System Shock 2. Kasreyn 11:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Reply Deleted criticisms section I'll try to find some old reviews and see what has been said, both good and bad. I doubt playing through yet again will help me to understand the criticisms, since every time I only enjoy it more. I will admit that I'm not this hyper-sensitive to NPOV in every single article I view I happen to personally consider SS2 among the five finest computer games ever made, and I own hundreds. The saved section will be useful for attempting to find sources for its criticisms maybe Googling some keywords from the complaints can result in industry reviews addressing the issues. I've pasted the deleted section below, for easy access without history messing.- Drat ( Talk) 10:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Reply Good idea, and one I should have thought of, or might have if I had thought before editing. As for the placement of comments, the two articles used to be one, and I split them at the suggestion of another user.
I'm waiting until after I play through the game again, before I really go to work on this article. As for POV, I had to partially clean up the section some weeks back after someone made some very negative POV changes to it. Hell, I wrote half that section, or thereabouts. Granted, I don't really consider them problems, but I can see where the complainers are coming from. SS2 is one of my favourite games, but I'm not blind to it's problems. Kasreyn 09:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Reply POV or not, there is still valid (and potentially retrievable) info in there. The article will be more NPOV without the section, and that being the case, it is better off blanked. The section is POV in nature and cannot be rewritten until sources are found, and they haven't been found yet. It does not, however, invalidate the appropriateness of my action. The fact that I said "good riddance" as I did so may reflect poorly upon my temper, and for that I apologize, for whatever it's worth. It's inexplicable to me but I swear I posted my comment to *this* talk page, not that one I *thought* that I had given sufficient warning.
Apparently it has somehow been moved to the System Shock article talk page, and so it may appear that I made the change without warning. When I made the edit I was under the impression that my original comment on the flaws in the criticism section had been on the talk page for months. Furthermore, the criticisms are all unsourced and stated in weasel-words, making it clear that they are merely the personal opinions of whoever originally wrote them. It contains only criticisms and no praise, which is a negative bias. Instead of blanking content with the promise of research and balanced critiques, leave the section as is until you are ready to edit to the balanced version. Completely removing the criticisms section along with the comments "good riddance" is a flagrant pov violation. I reverted to the npov version that includes criticisms. When I get a chance I will attempt to research and include a section with balanced critiques of the game, citing sources. In the interests of NPOV I have removed the criticism section.
#Shtup system shock 2 nd full
As I mentioned in my edit summary, the section was full of weasel words, none of the criticisms cited had any sources, and the article lacked any equivalent section for critical praise of the game. My old comments about this section appear to have been moved to the System Shock article's talk page.
0 kommentar(er)
