The Stealth Genre

[Pete for President]

Way back when, the MGS and Tenchu series for example were labeled as 'stealth' games. It became sort of genre with games as Hitman and Thief joined the club. Assassins Creed got the same label at first, but soon enough the stealth part was left out of what most people described this game. Action it was. So here's the big question:

Does the 'stealth' genre still exist, or did it get swallowed up by the overlapping 'action' description?

Discuss.

[Bunny]

"Stealth" as a standalone genre never really existed, in my mind anyway. It has always, and will always, be a subset of the action genre.

[G13]

Yeah, I would say it's not really a genre in itself. Splinter Cell and Thief are the only games I can think of that requires a lot of stealth. Assassin's Creed has optional stealth. :p

[Proxy]

I agree with Bunny.

[Shiny]

On the cover of Splinter Cell, they actually label it stealth-action, so I agree with Bunny as well. for Sometimes there are counterparts of stealth games that aren't action oriented and primarily focus on the stealth. I think a game entirely based around stealth would end up being inevitably boring. Even games like Metal Gear Solid throw in some heavy action in there otherwise why would people want to keep playing something where you just tip toe around everything without any conflict?

[Proxy]

why would people want to keep playing something where you just tip toe around everything without any conflict?

I would love that. I love in ACI, II, III that you can do that. It's so much fun, just to see how stealthly you can be.

[Bunny]

Sure, it can be fun to avoid groups of bad guys and set up personal challenges to see how long you can avoid conflict, but there is still the action element to games like Assassin's Creed, which is the core of the gameplay. I'm incredible skeptical of a game that has the entire concept of avoiding any and all conflict in order to save the world. That just sounds boring and, well, not very challenging.

[Skyblade]

It sounds boring because it is rarely well executed. Proper stealth can be extremely exciting, as you attempt to work out routes through, and hold your breath as you move around knowing one wrong move could spell your demise.

It's just that stealth games simply aren't made. Action games are made, with stealth shunted is as another gameplay mechanic, but there are few, if any, games built around the core concept of stealth and sneaking. Because of that, there is no stealth genre.

[Wolf Kanno]

I would argue that there have been several games whose core elements were stealth but I would agree that there really hasn't been a "pure" stealth game. The early MGS/Splinter cell games were based more around stealth than their later entries. I don't know too many people who could simply "muscle " their way through MGS1 or the first Splinter Cell like it was a typical action game. You can actually get through MGS by simply only killing the bosses and about 10 guards and we're talking about an entry that doesn't have the tranquilizer gun which made stealth much easier in the later entries.

I still would consider MGS1/2, hell the original MG, the early splinter cell games, Thief, and the Sly Cooper series to be stealth titles. They certainly have action game elements when you have to deal with bosses or scripted events but for the most part you can't play them like action games and hope to win easily cause the game mechanics are stacked against the player. The difference between Altair and say... Raiden in MGS2 is that if Altair gets caught, he can sword fight his way through combat and abuse the games counter system to murder whole battalions of soldiers, this is ignoring how much more agile and platform friendly he is compared to the A.I. whereas Raiden would quickly be surrounded by soldiers coming through every entry way with machine guns. Ignoring the games faulty combat mechanics and auto-targeting (though they do play a very large role in all this) Raiden could certainly kill a few guards but eventually he'll either be outgunned or he'll run out of ammo, then it's death. The only way to survive getting caught is to take out who you need so you can make the fastest escape but overall, the game just swarms an army on top of your ass so there are serious consequences for not using stealth.

Stealth is only fun if the game has real consequences, today's big named "stealth" games have forgotten that principle for the most part and are fine letting you be an 80's action movie star through a game and only give the lightest slap on the wrist for getting caught. There are also action style games that incorporate stealth like Fallout 3, hell most WRPGs and even titles like Resident Evil will have sections of the game built around being stealthy even though they always end in firefights and make you question why you bothered in the first place.

There have been a few attempts in the horror game genre to remove combat and make running your only option, so stealth may make a comeback. For now, players want to be empowered.

[Madame Adequate]

The problem with the stealth genre, both germane to this topic and in a broader "it could stand to be improved" sense is that it's pretty rare that stealth is actually required, and for failing at stealth to have consequences worth worrying about. As WK says pretty much all of them give you the option to blast through like Dook and subtlety be damned. Sometimes that's fine, for instance in a game where stealth is merely one option rather than the central conceit (For example, Deus Ex or Morrowind). Sometimes it hurts a game quite a bit. Occasionally it's done well, I would cite Hitman as the best example of that. You can blast through if you want but it's pretty hard to do and you're not going to get a very impressive outcome by doing it.

[kotora]

At the moment most big games are all about action and stupid context sensitive buttons that take all the challenge out of a game, like in Assassins Creed. Stealth games are pretty challenging when done right.

[Jiro]

I loved Hitman because you got fucking punished if you screwed up stealth-wise. I remember playing Blood Money and being trapped in an elevator as guard after guard just kept running in to check. By the end of it I had about 20 bodies up the top and it wasn't fun. The stealth aspect in that game is really rewarding.

[blackmage_nuke]

I always thought alpha protocol was optional stealth but I tried a playthrough guns blazing once and got trounced pretty quickly. I was later told it's almost impossible to beat Alpha Protocol without stealth.

[Vyk]

Velvet Assassin recently tried it. But that game only got luke warm reviews at best. So again, it wasn't done well. But there are a few companies still willing to try it. Unfortunately, when they don't make a good game, then it doesn't sell well, and then they think they shouldn't try that again and go for what does sell: action

[Madame Adequate]

I always thought alpha protocol was optional stealth but I tried a playthrough guns blazing once and got trounced pretty quickly. I was later told it's almost impossible to beat Alpha Protocol without stealth.

You can do it if you play it like Gears of War and use cover all the time, but trying to run-and-gun is pretty much a death sentence, unless you're high level, well equipped, and playing on Easy.

[Proxy]

Sure, it can be fun to avoid groups of bad guys and set up personal challenges to see how long you can avoid conflict, but there is still the action element to games like Assassin's Creed, which is the core of the gameplay. I'm incredible skeptical of a game that has the entire concept of avoiding any and all conflict in order to save the world. That just sounds boring and, well, not very challenging.

I completely agree. Though that is why they threw the action element into it.
Well either way. Off topic, but I still agree with your sub-genre, Bunny =]

[Rase]

Thief 4 is coming out sometime. This is all I need to believe the genre/sub-genre is alive enough, assuming they don't ruin it like they apparently tried to with Deadly Shadows. Needs more Metal Age and I will be extremely happy.

Also, in my own little world and based on the games I've played, I only really think of Thief and the older Splinter Cells as "stealth" games.

[DMKA]

Even in MGS I would always end up dying because I wanted to just bust on in and kill everyone. Luckily in 4 this wasn't a problem. :p

I don't think stealth games ever existed as a genre and they certainly don't now. I can't think of a single game since MGS3 that required you to successfully sneak around to progress.

[Iceglow]

Playing MGS on European Extreme certainly required stealth mainly because in 2 (the only one I completed on this setting) you either instantly die or get game over if you're so much as seen/raise an alert at any other time other than scripted story points.

[Pete for President]

Playing MGS on European Extreme certainly required stealth mainly because in 2 (the only one I completed on this setting) you either instantly die or get game over if you're so much as seen/raise an alert at any other time other than scripted story points.

MGS3 has the same setting. Kinda takes the fun out of it though, since all you'll ever do is lay on your tummy and crawl like a snail.

[ljkkjlcm9]

AC brotherhood had sections that if you got caught you failed, or at the very least you would lose the 100% synchronized. So it wasn't necessary, but i would restart the mission everytime if that happened.

Hitman was.my personal favorite which leaned highly on being stealthy.

THE JACKEL

[Bolivar]

I don't think stealth games ever existed as a genre and they certainly don't now. I can't think of a single game since MGS3 that required you to successfully sneak around to progress.

Contradictory sentences.

[Del Murder]

I love the MGS series but mostly for the story and characters. I did think the stealth stuff was cool but I just prefer to snipe the guard in the head and move on. The later games looked to go away from the stealth aspect in favor for action and that's probably the direction this 'genre' will head in general.