More visual readability problems in games (System Shock 1 Remake)

Sigh.  Here we go again.

5 years ago I wrote about visual readability problems in Smash Ultimate.

I'm back at it again, this time looking at the System Shock Remake, which recently released (after ~7 years of development??).

Being a huge fan of System Shock 2 (despite its flaws and shortcomings), I've been both sort of looking forward to this remake, but also kind of skeptical of it.  Before deciding whether I'd purchase it, I decided I'd not only watch some reviews, but also play the demo of it.  I'm glad I did -- I don't think I can stand this game.

Booting the demo up didn't really give me a great first impression, as the UI seems to be cut off on both sides on my monitor:

5:4 aspect ratio users, shunted again.  This is the kind of thing I see all the time in Ludum Dare entries, but come on, really?  Things didn't get that much better, as the resolution settings dialog was a bit finicky, and the key rebinding menu seemed to....just, not apply?  Odd...

Well, those are just minor things, though.  The question is, what does the game itself feel like?  um...well, first impressions weren't great.  The intro is somehow...worse than the one from 1994, and seems to drag on forever, with a weird distorted fisheye lens that isn't particular pleasant to look at.  The cutscene just....goes on and on and isn't particularly interesting.  The one from 1994 is cheesy as hell, sure, but it's only 2 minutes long -- the new one is THREE TIMES as long, and features a ton of first-person "arm/hand" animations, which as I understand are featured very annoyingly prominently in the game...  There's other problems in the first few minutes of the game too -- lots of little key items that aren't really highlighted, the "currently-looking at" text is super obscured at the top of the HUD, melee combat feels AWFUL, etc.

...but anyways, none of that is what I'm here to talk about.  No, we're here to talk about visual readability.  The lack of it.

First thing's first, take at a look at these two screenshots that I took from one of the first areas of the game:

Which one of these screenshots looks better to you?  What do you think the difference is?

The only difference between these two screenshots is that the top one is taken with all graphics settings at "ultra" and the bottom is taken with all of the graphics settings set to "low".  Call me crazy, but I'd say it's very clearly obvious that the bottom one is way more readable.  With the top one you can barely make out the geometry of the level, and everything is just too dark to even appreciate.

Try reading the image again, this time smaller and in grayscale:

Yeah...it's impossible.

But it gets worse.  This game falls prey to some of the same problems I commented on with Smash Ultimate in terms of irrelevant details being highlighted, making the scene composition extremely busy.  Here's another grayscale shot for you to decipher:

Tough, right?  Turns out when you have a very dark environment and you fill it with lots of little bright lights, your attention is drawn to those:

Look, I get it.  You're supposed to be in an abandoned space station.  It's supposed to be all dark and moody.  Hell, the original System Shock 2 had some spaces that were dark, too.  But when was the last time that you walked into a building in real life and had half of the floor hidden in shadow, with certain parts of it lit up by spotlights?  That's not how sensible lighting works, and it doesn't make for good readability.  Your eyes need to be able to parse the level geometry, which means that the silhouette of the level should be the thing that stands out contrast-wise.  Here's a shot from System Shock 2 to illustrate this:

There's still some elements of light and shadow here.  Yes, there are overhead lights, too.  But they're not blinding me.  I can actually see the entire floor, and the walls.  It's very clear to me what the geometry of the space is.

Here's another example from an older game -- it's a screenshot of Quake 3, where effective use of lighting is used to create a cohesive space:

Notice how the lights on the wall are elements of interest without being overbearing.  The shadows cast by the pedestals help you identify them as points of interest, and your eye is also naturally drawn to the big hole in the ceiling.

Just like with 2d artwork, there's room for various styles of lighting and contrast to make things work.  Here's a totally different approach shown off in the interior levels of Serious Sam:

Compared to the low-contrast, high ambient light style of System Shock 2, the shadows here are much more contrasty and dynamic, but the dark areas indicate steps or seams in the level geometry, so it's obvious where the edges all are.

Now let's go back to the System Shock Remake...

Sigh.  Let's do this exercise again.  What elements have the most contrast in this level scene?  Well, at least the big robot's eye is highlighted, so that's something done right (if only I could...you know, see the rest of it...).  But other than that, the brightest visual elements are....the decals and neon lights on the top section of the screen.  The ones that have no bearing on actual gameplay.  Sigh...

Now, I'm not saying you can't have dark and interestingly-lit areas in your game.  That can definitely be an effective way to establish an area as claustrophobic, or to set up anticipation for a scary moment.  The Last Of Us does this regularly, with several areas that have you take out your flashlight as you engage in stealth-combat with zombies with limited visibility.  But those scenes are =contrasted= from the outdoor scenes where you're in broad daylight.

Unfortunately it seems like not only is the System Shock 2 Remake mostly the same lighting style throughout, but the different areas also just....have the same aesthetic.  Blue lights everywhere.  One reviewer puts it this way:

"When every room is the same-colored metal floors and walls with lights on them, how am I supposed to build an image of this place in my head?  You =can=...you can do it, but it takes so long.  And it makes me so bored to be walking around seeing the same stuff for hours.  Finally getting in the elevator and expecting to see something new, just to open the doors and find another floor covered in basically the same aesthetic.  *sigh*"

And it's really sad, because looking at the classic from 1994 and then remake from 2023, I have to say that the game from 1994 is just easier to look at and read.  Sure, it may be all pixelated and at a low resolution, but at least I can tell what is going on and I don't feel like I'm trapped in a laser-tag arena:

It really doesn't have to be this way, but I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with this kind of thing as it seems to become more and more commonplace to throw readability out the window in favor of making things "bright, shiny, and contrasty" everywhere, particularly where your visual attention is NOT supposed to be.

I get that this is a lot harder to do in a 3d environment where making things stand out is not as simple as "make sure your backdrops are less saturated".  It's harder for me to find good screenshot examples of games in the past that are pleasing to look at and easy to read, but they certainly do exist.

When you look at older games, they of course look dated, but there is something incredibly pleasing (comforting?) at being able to look at a 2d image at a glance and build the resulting 3d model in your head.

Now, try doing the same for this screenshot:

You can't, right?  When you can't see walls, floors, or ceilings, you can only really guess at what the space looks like.  All your eyes see is a bunch of red lights everywhere -- where are you supposed to focus your attention?

It's not like we need to go all the way back to the 1990s for this, either.  Here's Portal from 2007:

Anyways...I uninstalled that demo and crossed that game off my wishlist.  Bleh.