The lockpicking mini-game: what to do, and what not to do

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Well, odd as it sounds that twenty years from now mechanical locks should be phased out, and then twenty years after that be phased back in again, we know that this is Eidos's intention. Moreover, we know that unlike the old multitool fire-and-forget, we now have to undergo a certain "minigame" to hack past locked doors.

Minigames vary vastly in both complexity, boringness, and relevance. The lockpicking in "Thief" (Deadly Shadows in particular) felt like actually picking a lock, even if it could become mind-numbingly tedious by the end. Oblivion's lockpicking on the other hand, whilst it still used the concept of pins, was an absolute aberration, by common consensus.

Hacking mini-games are more difficult. Hacking in real life is difficult, and requires a great deal of know-how that developers simply cannot expect the average Joe gamer (or even the above-average Joe gamer) to possess. Thus, some abstraction is always required. In my opinion, Mass Effect's numerous hacking minigames are a good example of how not to do it. Shallow, arbitrary, and with no obvious relevance to the real world. Oh, and horrendously tedious.

Bioshock, on the same note, also had a poorly-conceived hacking system (at least in my view). In a botched attempt to make what was increasingly turning into a basic FPS into something more closely resembling SS2, it tried to make hacking something viable. Sadly, it was clearly a thrown-in feature, and could just get tear-inducingly boring by the end. Moreover, there was a serious disparity between PC and console versions in terms of how the minigame scaled with difficulty.

They needn't really have bothered, since SS2 itself had an excellent hacking minigame. I'm not saying it didn't get tedious by the end (it did), but it was both challenging and felt realistic.

Now, what ground is EM going to tread here? Well, let's outline what we know already. First off, no resource management. To better fit the "augs reign supreme" credo that EM is clearly working to, hacking resource management is determined more by whether you choose to pour money and skill points into hacking augs rather than whether you were able to find multitools. Even though I do disapprove of the removal of lockpicking, I have to say that the new treatment of hacking sounds very plausible indeed. It always seemed odd that multitools were disposable, and Deus Ex could turn into a bit of a treasure hunt, not conducive to being a super spy.

Overall, not such a bad thing, then, provided resource management of skills and augs still comes in (which it will). But that doesn't address how the minigame works. Well, from what we know, there is going to be an I/O (Input/Output) system, in which you have to transfer (I assume) data packets from I to O, and remain undetected. The systems run constant detection loops around the device you are trying to penetrate, and you have to get from I to O by taking over nodes and forming an unbroken chain. That's actually fairly impressive, as it is a decent approximation of how hardware hacking works. Even though it's not 100% brilliant, it sure as hell beats Mass Effect 2's ridiculous "match the node pairs up" rubbish, that has nothing to do with any hardware at all.

Will the game become tedious? Well, hopefully not. It seems that augmentations can assist in the process, so hopefully by the end of the game, if you are a hacking character, your sheer l33tness should make hacking a short process.

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? Sweets?

[xsamitt]

Though I have both Bioshock and ME1 and 2 here I yet to play them,waiting for DX3 to come out to make that new build.Now I know a little of what I'm in for lol.
I really dislike not having lock picking or multitools,it's going to feel really strange since even IW at least gave us more freedom than what we will get this time.But who knows,maybe it will all work out just fine,and these are just the ranting of another old man.LOL

[Delever]

In my opinion original Deus Ex way is very good, because it captures essentials of the need to bypass something: you need ability, resources, and time.

- Ability can be determined by you character's skills or augmentations
- Resources can be items to be consumed to bypass a system
- Time adds risk factor to the process

Hacking process can be improved by displaying a console that you character is typing in, making it more "realistic". All you should care is that your character understands the process. Additional game on top of that is fine, as long as it is simple: the most important thing is time that need to be spent hacking.

I would like to leave this stuff for the character that I control, because I trust him to do the job. Better animation of him doing it would be a plus. Sometimes I suspect that implementing those minigames (where all your screen is innards of the lock) is the way to avoid making complex animations of character hands picking a particular lock type.

[Blade_hunter]

This game won't have lockpicking, the developers wants to make the hacking minigame more prevalent, the only things you can hack are electronic padlocks, computers and terminals with the same minigame
The only details I know it's the fact that's a strategy minigame and most importantly it keeps you in the world.
As for the minigame itself it seems to be a sort of fighting against the CPU where you have to conquest nodes and of course defend your owns to win against the CPU.

I have a average idea of what it could be, but really I have a too low amount of info to estimate how exactly it will work ...

[IOOI]

Originally Posted by Delever

In my opinion original Deus Ex way is very good, because it captures essentials of the need to bypass something: you need ability, resources, and time.

- Ability can be determined by you character's skills or augmentations
- Resources can be items to be consumed to bypass a system
- Time adds risk factor to the process

Hacking process can be improved by displaying a console that you character is typing in, making it more "realistic". All you should care is that your character understands the process. Additional game on top of that is fine, as long as it is simple: the most important thing is time that need to be spent hacking.

I would like to leave this stuff for the character that I control, because I trust him to do the job. Better animation of him doing it would be a plus. Sometimes I suspect that implementing those minigames (where all your screen is innards of the lock) is the way to avoid making complex animations of character hands picking a particular lock type.

EM could've made lockpicking similar to Fallout's mechanics. It would've been good enough, I think.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Lock
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Lock_picking

[Pinky_Powers]

Originally Posted by Delever

In my opinion original Deus Ex way is very good, because it captures essentials of the need to bypass something: you need ability, resources, and time.

- Ability can be determined by you character's skills or augmentations
- Resources can be items to be consumed to bypass a system
- Time adds risk factor to the process

Hacking process can be improved by displaying a console that you character is typing in, making it more "realistic". All you should care is that your character understands the process. Additional game on top of that is fine, as long as it is simple: the most important thing is time that need to be spent hacking.

I would like to leave this stuff for the character that I control, because I trust him to do the job. Better animation of him doing it would be a plus. Sometimes I suspect that implementing those minigames (where all your screen is innards of the lock) is the way to avoid making complex animations of character hands picking a particular lock type.

So instead of actually doing something yourself, as the player, you prefer your avatar to do it all for you? Does this extend into conversations and shooting as well?

I'm all for more complexity. Human Revolution has stripped a little of it out. It felt good to see some balance return with the Hacking mini-game and the Conversational Combat. Only actually getting my hands on the game and playing it for myself will determine if these systems are good or not. But they do seem rather promising.

[hem dazon 90]

I like how uplink does it's hacking

[Fluffis]

Originally Posted by Blade_hunter

The only details I know it's the fact that's a strategy minigame and most importantly it keeps you in the world.
As for the minigame itself it seems to be a sort of fighting against the CPU where you have to conquest nodes and of course defend your owns to win against the CPU.

Why do I get this ugly feeling of "Checkers", or something similar?

[Irate Iguana]

Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers

So instead of actually doing something yourself, as the player, you prefer your avatar to do it all for you?

When it comes to playing minigames that most likely will bore me after the first attempt, yes. I've never seen a minigame, apart from Pazaak, that kept me interested for more than two times. They are either boringly easy or frustrating thanks to randomisation.

[Fluffis]

Originally Posted by Irate Iguana

When it comes to playing minigames that most likely will bore me after the first attempt, yes. I've never seen a minigame, apart from Pazaak,

Even that one annoyed me something fierce, after a while - but, granted, that had more to do with the sound than actual gameplay.

[Pinky_Powers]

Originally Posted by Irate Iguana

When it comes to playing minigames that most likely will bore me after the first attempt, yes. I've never seen a minigame, apart from Pazaak, that kept me interested for more than two times. They are either boringly easy or frustrating thanks to randomisation.

This is kinda the point though. It's something you have to do, if you choose to do it. It's part of the consequence. You don't always have to hack in System Shock 2 or Arkham Asylum, but if you do this tedious thing, you are rewarded in some way; direct entry, mostly.

The industry in general already sides with you on this. Most games have removed all things that make for the slightest challenge.

[Mindmute]

Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers

You don't always have to hack in System Shock 2 or Arkham Asylum, but if you do this tedious thing, you are rewarded in some way; direct entry, mostly.

The point of a game isn't to bore you, though. It shouldn't challenge you and then reward for beating that challenge, not numb your mind and then reward you to try to make up for it.

Originally Posted by Irate Iguana

I've never seen a minigame, apart from Pazaak, that kept me interested for more than two times.

I liked it too, but always got the idea the npc were cheating...

[Fluffis]

Originally Posted by Mindmute

I liked it too, but always got the idea the npc were cheating...

The only thing I've read about it, from an official source, is that "officially" the NPCs don't cheat... I'd say that leaves it wide open for them actually cheating. It may not just be imagination. I've certainly felt the same way on many occasions.

[PizzaNo1]

Wow, thats how ive been feeling also! Damm cheating npc's!

[Blade_hunter]

I don't think it will be like checkers, I think that's closer to a mini RTS where you have to capture nodes (or flags) to expand your territory until you beat the CPU

[Pinky_Powers]

Originally Posted by Mindmute

The point of a game isn't to bore you, though. It shouldn't challenge you and then reward for beating that challenge, not numb your mind and then reward you to try to make up for it.

Ideally, that is very correct. But in reality, there's not single mini-game in existence that isn't its own form of tedious.

The answer to this is hard to say, but surely it is not to remove all mini-games and simply make the avatar do the work for you.

Is the villainy of this path not apparent to everyone?

[Fluffis]

Originally Posted by Blade_hunter

I don't think it will be like checkers, I think that's closer to a mini RTS where you have to capture nodes (or flags) to expand your territory until you beat the CPU

No, I know... It was just a chilling thought I had. Actually, it was more along the lines of that game (don't know the English name), where you start with two pieces each, in the middle of the board, and "capture" (switch) any pieces that are between one of yours already on the board and a new one you put down.

[FrankCSIS]

The problem with mini games is that a player which opts for a hacking-stealth-lockpicking path will be confronted with the same game to repeat a hundred times or more. There aren't thirty solutions for this. Variety in types of puzzles is one, dynamic games is another, and finding other obstacles than locked doors to challenge the player's progress would be the third. There is also the possibility of auto-unlock once the game considers you've mastered the skill or unlocked enough of them manually.

Plenty of mini games I feel would not really solve the main issue of how tedious the whole principle is. I'd say a good mix of dynamic games well incorporated with the rest of the mechanics, coupled with new innovative ideas of how to limit or challenge the stealth player would work best. I seriously doubt any mini-game can be designed well enough not to become a pain in the arse after ten times. The reason being that once you've mastered it as the player, it becomes this unnecessary constraint which slows you down ever slightly for no good reason. If it's not challenging anymore, it shouldn't be there, because it doesn't serve the actual purpose of the mini-game anymore.

[Blade_hunter]

Originally Posted by Fluffis

No, I know... It was just a chilling thought I had. Actually, it was more along the lines of that game (don't know the English name), where you start with two pieces each, in the middle of the board, and "capture" (switch) any pieces that are between one of yours already on the board and a new one you put down.

You meant the Othello/Reversi game ?

[Fluffis]

Originally Posted by Blade_hunter

You meant the Othello/Reversi game ?

Oh. It's called Reversi in English as well? Yes, that's it.

[Blade_hunter]

I don't know, only an English guy can tell. I'm a foreigner as you might be

[pringlepower]

Originally Posted by Fluffis

The only thing I've read about it, from an official source, is that "officially" the NPCs don't cheat... I'd say that leaves it wide open for them actually cheating. It may not just be imagination. I've certainly felt the same way on many occasions.

In KOTOR 1 the NPC had the advantage since you always drew first... I think. I forget, but the order of turns was in their favour, which they fixed in KOTOR 2.

Edit: yeah first. If you went second, the NPC had more turns, and thus opportunity to bust. That always pissed me off. But with quicksave/load, whatever.

Anyways the hacking minigame's described as "RTS-like" and "inspired by Uplink" which I see as good things.

[Irate Iguana]

Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers

This is kinda the point though. It's something you have to do, if you choose to do it. It's part of the consequence. You don't always have to hack in System Shock 2 or Arkham Asylum, but if you do this tedious thing, you are rewarded in some way; direct entry, mostly.

Why include them? Most minigames don't cost you resources. They require very little effort and often even less investment in terms of skill and equipment. You yourself say that they are tedious. Often they break the flow of the game and there are no consequences for it. Is it just to give the player something to do so he won't get bored while his character does something?

RPGs with dicerolls just have the success of the player depend on a roll of the dice. Not enough skill points? Tough. Hitman just has an animation for lockpicking. Timing in that game is everything. Hoping that Mr. 47 picks the lock before the guard rounds the corner is very exiting even though you don't do anything yourself. In DX you had to spend resources (too plentiful IMO, made the skills useless) or you were on a timer. All these ways provide for excitement in a way without depending on a cheap game to involve the player.

Originally Posted by Mindmute

I liked it too, but always got the idea the npc were cheating...

They get a suspicious amount of natural twenties. In part one the round system was setup so that the PC was always put at a disadvantage. They fixed that with alternating turn in part two.

[Delever]

Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers

So instead of actually doing something yourself, as the player, you prefer your avatar to do it all for you? Does this extend into conversations and shooting as well?

Are you misunderstanding on purpose?

Originally Posted by Pinky_Powers

I'm all for more complexity. Human Revolution has stripped a little of it out. It felt good to see some balance return with the Hacking mini-game and the Conversational Combat. Only actually getting my hands on the game and playing it for myself will determine if these systems are good or not. But they do seem rather promising.

I am for environment related complexity. Games should not contain puzzles, they should contain problems that you can solve by taking knowledge from real world (basically I agree with this guy here). For example: there is a bot, you need to get through. Different thoughts could occur for differnet players how to solve this problem. Like, "I wonder if I can destroy a bot by dropping TNT on top of it?" or "I wonder if it will be destroed if I lower the platform when bot walks underneath it?" or "Hacking this computer might do something". In case of mini game, what you have is unrelated obstacle between forming a hypothesis for overcomming problem and testing it.

[Pinky_Powers]

Originally Posted by Irate Iguana

Why include them? Most minigames don't cost you resources. They require very little effort and often even less investment in terms of skill and equipment. You yourself say that they are tedious. Often they break the flow of the game and there are no consequences for it. Is it just to give the player something to do so he won't get bored while his character does something?

RPGs with dicerolls just have the success of the player depend on a roll of the dice. Not enough skill points? Tough. Hitman just has an animation for lockpicking. Timing in that game is everything. Hoping that Mr. 47 picks the lock before the guard rounds the corner is very exiting even though you don't do anything yourself. In DX you had to spend resources (too plentiful IMO, made the skills useless) or you were on a timer. All these ways provide for excitement in a way without depending on a cheap game to involve the player.

Tediousness is a consequence.

You walk by a locked door, you could round the corner and find the front entrance. Or, engage in the mini-game and hack your way in. You think it wouldn't be tedious if you were doing it in real life? But it's a game. So they make it less difficult and less tedious. But it's still a chore.