Scratching the Surface of “Binary Domain”
Binary Domain (Sega, 2012) is often referred to as “Japanese Gears of War”. This is perhaps unfair to PlatinumGames’ Vanquish (2010), which also often bears this title, as well as to the progenitor of the genre, Resident Evil 4 (Capcom, 2005). BD can nonetheless be reductively described as a “cover-based shooter with a twist.”
The twist in this case, story aside, is the trust and dialogue system. Like in Gears, you play as a member of a ragtag squad of soldiers with diverse personalities and backgrounds. The characterization in BD is heightened by the addition of an RPG-like dialogue choice system, reminiscent of Alpha Protocol (Obsidian, 2010) and the Dragon Age series.
BD’s dialogue system differs from those in a couple of ways, most strikingly in that it is not modal–that is to say, the speech menu can be brought up at most times during normal gameplay, and the action is not stopped when you are speaking or being spoken to. In fact, dialogue often comes in the form of mid-combat orders or suggestions from your squadmates, which you can confirm, deny, or simply ignore. When it works well, it conveys the feeling of an action movie in constant motion, placing you not only in charge of the action, but also of tossing off pithy remarks and one-liners.
And then there are the times when it doesn’t work well. The comparison to Alpha Protocol may paint BD in an unfavorable light, as BD’s dialogue system lacks the complexity and nuance of Alpha Protocol’s. Although the squadmates of the Rust Crew are fairly distinct, nothing protagonist Dan says will ever affect your reputation positively with one squadmate and negatively with another, and there is no reason not to maximize your reputation with all squadmates. At one point, two squadmates are arguing with one another, and one asks you for permission to shoot the other. The “correct” answer here is to grant permission, which increases your friend’s trust (he was “just kidding” after all) while having no effect on the morale of the prospective victim.
Which leads to another shortcoming of the dialogue system: picking the best answer often feels like a guessing game. In another instance, behaving recklessly in combat will prompt a squadmate to reprimand you for your carelessness. If you apologize, his trust in you drops, and he explains that you should never apologize for your actions. Dan’s self-centeredness and over-confidence are established as character flaws early in the game, so this sort of interaction would seem to impede his character arc. Possibly this tension was intentional, but it felt incongruous with the game’s overall theme.
BD also suffers from the classic problem of dialogue options being presented in an abridged form, without tone, making picking your words feel that much more random. It’s not uncommon for a squadmate to tell you “good job out there,” and to be presented with the responses: “Thanks”, “No way”, and “God damn”.
Ultimately, the trust system and dialogue options are kind of a shame. Even if they were tweaked for clarity (and, perhaps, relevance), one glaring issue remains: a dialogue system where there is always a best answer adds little to a game. Answers that squadmates like increase their trust, you never have to balance the trust of conflicting squadmates, and higher trust is always better. In Binary Domain, your ability to choose the right line of dialogue is much like your ability to shoot the robots with your gun: there’s one way to do it and the outcome is always the same.
The outcomes aren’t quite as immediate, however. Much like in Mass Effect 2 (BioWare, 2010), your squadmates’ trust levels are linked (dubiously) to the ending, and higher trust in more squadmates means fewer characters dead by the time the credits roll. It also theoretically affects how willing they are to listen to your commands in combat, although this was not a feature I used frequently enough to matter.
It’s worth mentioning that the game features a voice recognition system, presumably intended to be a major differentiator. The dialogue system appears to have been built around this, with the button commands designed as a fallback. In my experience, however, the microphone system was far too unreliable to use, and this seems to be the prevailing experience among players. I don’t mind ignoring this system, aside from the fact that the awkwardness of the dialogue options probably comes from being optimized for voice recognition.
For all its flaws, the dialogue system in Binary Domain is not to its detriment. While not up to the levels of many RPGs, it was certainly an innovation in the third-person shooter genre. And although the choices are never particularly deep, there may be some merit in simply pushing the right button. I certainly found myself connecting with the Rust Crew more than I might have otherwise. Further, it only goes to support the cyberpunk Tokyo setting and classic rogue AI (with a twist) story, both of which were, at the very least, better than average, and certainly more unique than “Japanese Gears of War” implies.
The action (which comprises most of the game) is also generally satisfying. Bits of armor and limbs are blown from robot troopers as you shoot them. Disabling a robot’s leg will cause it to fall and crawl towards you with its arms, and knocking off its head will remove its ability to differentiate friend from foe. It looks great, and once you get used to the initially clunky controls, it feels pretty good too. Unfortunately, it’s a little slow in the beginning, and the fact that it was designed primarily as a corridor shooter becomes very apparent in its numerous arena boss battles. That said, the action is at its height in the late-game, blasting through through waves of patrol bots with an upgraded assault rifle and your favorite squadmates in tow.
Binary Domain could have easily been, as it was perceived by many, another generic science-fiction third-person shooter. While maybe not as subversive as something like Spec Ops: The Line, it has a depth, identity, and character that belies its generic trappings. Its character relationships and dialogue choices may not have set the world on fire, but it was an experiment with the genre that was more successful than unsuccessful. If you like action games and explorations of artificial intelligence and humanity, I recommend checking it out, or finding a Let’s Play if you don’t have the 8–10 hours to play it. Much like BD’s artificial antagonists, you may be surprised by what you find under its surface.
