I don't think that's really true, a playthrough based on the psi abilities (which I haven't done myself) is probably rather different.
Hacking also makes a difference, especially if you build it up enough to take over turrets.
And for the first third of the game or so it's more of a wrench simulator than a shooter. You simply don't have enough ammo/tools for reparing your weapons to shoot everything.

I was refering to it mostly as a role-playing experience. A true RPG should at least have a good and evil path but really it should let you play a role where your character feels like YOUR character. System Shock 2's story is like a movie's. You are just spectator watching predetermened events unfold.

I've heard the psy elements add more to the game. I built my first character-build on weapons. Only to find out all the weapons suck. I specialised in hacking and tech second time round. Only to find out that its boring and that hacked turets is pointless given how liner the game is. Again. Bioshock made hacking a lot more useful.
Maybe next time I'll go for psi-build. But it will have to have something amazing to change my mind. I do know that telicanisis in SS2 is totally pointless. It's nowhere near as deadly as it is in Bioshock and none of the loot requires Telicanesis to get. So that's one psi I know is infeforor to Bioshock's version.

And yes. It is rather funny how even up to the final third of the game the wrench is still the best weapon. It's just a shame it's not more fun to use. It feels more like you're gently tapping the mutants than fighting them.

One could say the same of Diablo, Titan Quest or any of the other zillions of action-rpgs.

Yes. But I don't think anyone would call SS2 an action RPG Action RPG's are fast and fun. SS2 is slow and grindy. It lacks the depth to be an RPG on any technical level. It's no more an RPG than Blade of Darkness or Race the Sun.
And it totally falls apart on the Role-Playing part of an RPG. It's just a typical late 90s fps with a lot of RPG stuff slowing it down.

I've heard SS2 referred to as a RPG for ages. If you check it's page on Steam the most common tag assigned to the game is "RPG".

Now, if you're specifically talking about moral choices and character interaction? Sure... it fails to deliver that aspect.

In terms of ARPG? It gives you multiple classes to choose from that offer different experiences.

I feel the whole thing about it being called and RPG is just another symptom of it being overrated. Back in 1999 an FPS with RPG elements was a novel idea so people we're keen to overhype it. But if it came out today I don't think anyone would call it an RPG.
It doesn't really have classes. Joining the Marines, Navy, or Psy-Ops gives you some extra perks, but after that how you build your chacter is totally up to you. It's not like Torchlight where picking Alchemist gives you a totally differn't character to Rouge or Warrior. You can take elements from all three "classes". And you might as well as a lot of weapon and tech skills aren't worth anything,

The bigger difference is that in Torchlight or Diablo you fight to build your character. In SS2 you fight to explore the story and when you level is all predetermed and has nothing to do with combat. If it's an ARPG it's an Action RPG where the action doesn't matter.

I agree that it wouldn't be called a RPG today. Disagree about it being overyhyped though.

On the agreement: Strife is an example. At the time of release it was considered a RPG/FPS hybrid. However modern shooters often incorporate just as many if not more RPG elements than Strife did at the time but would not label themselves, nor gamers, as a hybrid.

On the disagreement: It's an 'immersive sim'. They combine numerous genres with one key element being a fully realized world that one can explore. Thief, Arx Fatalis & Bloodlines come to mind. SS2... it's a damn good one.

RPGs often have classless systems that allow you to pick abilities or perks from the different trees.

Also... ROGUE... not ROUGE. Rouge is a color.

That still doesn't disqualify it from the genre. Bloodlines also only gives out points to spend when missions are completed for example.

I agree. When System Shock came out it was like when Crysis came out..
You had to have a beefy PC to run it af full detail and even then a 486 DX2 66MHz would eventually struggle.


From Wikipedia and MobyGames:

The engine can process texture maps, sloped architecture and light-emitting objects, the player can look in any direction, whereas Ultima Underworld's engine was "very limited" in this regard. It also enables the player character to jump, crawl, climb walls and lean.
Physics system governs, among other things, weapon recoil and the arc of thrown objects; the latter behave differently based on their weight and velocity, the character's head "tilts forward when you start to run, and jerks back a bit when you stop", and that, after an impact against a surface or object, its "head is knocked in the direction opposite the hit, with proportion to [the] mass and velocity of the objects involved.
Variable gravity, realistic physics, '2.75d' environments (with limited 'sector-on-sector', but otherwise 3D), functional camera viewscreens.

Those are most of the features the engine can handle, that stuff was mind blowing in 1994 and no other game had them. SS1 basically defined the satdard feature set for the years to come.
It's nice to see that there's people capable to put games in the right context.