PDA

View Full Version : 3rd person Take



PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 14:57
Edit: the title shoud have said 3rd person takedown

I was just reading another IGN game play story and came acoross this:

"You don't actually have control during takedowns like this – they're meant to be a sort of reward for those who spend the time to sneak up behind enemies undetected. Though the lethal or nonlethal takedown is automated, there's still risk. If an enemy sees the takedown they'll start shooting, and Jensen has an energy gauge that must recharge, preventing him from spamming takedowns in rapid succession."
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/109/1096081p3.html

The articles been out for a few days already but I wanted to see what you all thought of this? I guess after reading it I don't feel so down on all the third person views now - still not sure about the whole "looking around corners" thing, but I guess I can live with it.

What do you guys think? Win or fail?

ZakKa89
18th Jun 2010, 15:02
Depends how it looks. If it is animated really well I'm all in.

Deus_Ex_Machina
18th Jun 2010, 15:07
I myself have posted biased polls in the past, but you've crossed the line.

/end thread

ArcR
18th Jun 2010, 15:07
To add to your presentation the snap to cover system is akin to Rainbow 6. The energy system consists of pips. Only the first pip will recharge. All other pips are acquired via Limb Clinic or items in the game.

To answer your question I feel slightly better. Less of a God of War vibe. I'm still undecided. I'm fine with the health regen system. My concerns are with dialogue, 3rd person, and general gameplay. "Blackmail Aug" sounds down right silly... a demo would help.

EDIT: the wording of your poll options suck.

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:18
I myself have posted biased polls in the past, but you've crossed the line.

/end thread

Biased? Dude, easy up on the rethoric OK? I was dead set against it until I just read this article this morning - now I'm thinking it could actualy work out OK.



EDIT: the wording of your poll options suck.

Kind of aggressive, no? Maybe you need to... "chillax" a little

mad_red
18th Jun 2010, 15:20
Check out this let's play of Max Payne by Jef with one F. It's brilliant, as always!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EekofS2PknM#t=02m05s

I like how he serendipitously notices his benefactor: "the Voice of the Angels, Choir Communications"

Ashpolt
18th Jun 2010, 15:22
Your poll is horrendously biased because you make the 3rd option sound completely unreasonable. It's like this:

Poll: Do you like bananas?

-Yes, they're a good source of iron
-I'm indifferent to bananas
-No, what the hell are you talking about? Bananas are tools of the lizard aliens controlling the world! Condemn all fruit! Join me in the underground bunker where we will makes plans for Helter Skelter!

I still voted the third option anyway, choosing to ignore the bias. The quote you posted doesn't make me feel any better about third person takedowns, it just confirms my fears - they're essentially mini-cutscenes.

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:24
Check out this let's play of Max Payne by Jef with one F. It's brilliant, as always!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EekofS2PknM#t=02m05s

I like how he serendipitously notices his benefactor: "the Voice of the Angels, Choir Communications"

Well, again, I'm not a fan of "looking around corners" - I prefer the lean option. But the poll is about third person takedowns though, eh.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 15:27
Wait, wait, wait... (I can't believe I missed this...) So not only do we have to watch a "cutscene" of Adam killing someone, instead of actually killing them ourselves, but we also have to wait for some damn energy gauge before we can do another one?

VectorM
18th Jun 2010, 15:27
-No, what the hell are you talking about? Bananas are tools of the lizard aliens controlling the world! Condemn all fruit! Join me in the underground bunker where we will makes plans for Helter Skelter!


That' not even close to what's actually in the poll.

And you obviously still don't like what they are doing with your beloved franchise, don't you?


Wait, wait, wait... (I can't believe I missed this...) So not only do we have to watch a "cutscene" of Adam killing someone, instead of actually killing them ourselves, but we also have to wait for some damn energy gauge before we can do another one?

You never did anything in Deus Ex "yourself" anyway :nut: And Augumentations cost energy, wtf???? :nut:

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:27
Your poll is horrendously biased because you make the 3rd option sound completely unreasonable. It's like this:

Poll: Do you like bananas?

-Yes, they're a good source of iron
-I'm indifferent to bananas
-No, what the hell are you talking about? Bananas are tools of the lizard aliens controlling the world! Condemn all fruit! Join me in the underground bunker where we will makes plans for Helter Skelter!

I still voted the third option anyway, choosing to ignore the bias. The quote you posted doesn't make me feel any better about third person takedowns, it just confirms my fears - they're essentially mini-cutscenes.

Like I said in an earlier post in a different thread, Ashpolt, you are always negative whenever you post - it's almost as if saying anything in a positive or even friendly manner would kill you.

To respond to your comments on being biased, I just don't see it. What exactly did i say that put the stick up your as$? Was it the option to say that I'm drunk? 'Cause frankly that's kind of what I would have thought of anyone else for even suggesting that third person takedowns could ever work. It wasn't until I read the article that I even thought it could work.



Wait, wait, wait... (I can't believe I missed this...) So not only do we have to watch a "cutscene" of Adam killing someone, instead of actually killing them ourselves, but we also have to wait for some damn energy gauge before we can do another one?

OK, well, when you put it like that... although, maybe we could think back to the days when we needed to restore bio energy to use an aug with JC...? Nope, it still doesn't work :(

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 15:29
poll is to bias so I skip that.


as for the whole 3rd person thing, well as others have said as long as the animation is good, at least it be better then the hit or miss gamble that takedowns where in Deus Ex 1

VectorM
18th Jun 2010, 15:33
poll is too biased so I skip that.


There is NOTHING wrong with the poll. If you seriously have a problem with the "Are you on drugs" line (the only line I could see being problematic, but even that's a bit of a stretch), that's your problem.


Like I said in an earlier post in a different thread, Ashpolt, you are always negative whenever you post - it's almost as if saying anything in a positive or even friendly manner would kill you.

He wouldn't be a hipster if he wasn't always negative :rasp:

68_pie
18th Jun 2010, 15:34
It comes across as biased to me. The first option is written to sound reasonable whilst the third option (is it meant to sound funny?) is written to sound crazed and fanboyish (fanboy always has negative connotations for me). You could have just written:

1. I like the sound of TP takedowns.
2. I'm still not sure.
3. I do not like the sound of TP takedowns.

I still voted for option 3.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 15:41
You never did anything in Deus Ex "yourself" anyway :nut: And Augumentations cost energy, wtf???? :nut:

You didn't get anything of what I wrote, that much is clear.

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 15:41
There is NOTHING wrong with the poll. If you seriously have a problem with the "Are you on drugs" line (the only line I could see being problematic, but even that's a bit of a stretch), that's your problem.


option 1 shoves a opinion down your throat indicting that everyone that votes yes do so because it´s rational

and option 3 paints out anyone who disagree as rabid fanboys.


so yes it´s bias.

Ashpolt
18th Jun 2010, 15:41
That' not even close to what's actually in the poll.

Exaggeration to highlight a point. The point itself still stands.


Like I said in an earlier post in a different thread, Ashpolt, you are always negative whenever you post - it's almost as if saying anything in a positive or even friendly manner would kill you.

1) Yes, I'm always negative, I've certainly never commented positively on things like the art style, the quality of the trailer itself, the fact that you're kept "in world" while hacking, or anything. Every single thing I say is negative. Correct. :rolleyes:

2) Even if that was true, what bearing would that have on the point that I was making? Or was it just pointless ad-hominem thrown in to disguise a lack of actual point?


To respond to your comments on being biased, I just don't see it.

Well 4 people other than me have commented on it as well, so I'm not making it up. 68_pie shows how a poll should be done.

Malah
18th Jun 2010, 15:42
So... stealth kills are a "feature" in this game?
Can I still knife someone from behind without the cinematic bullcrap or do I have to use an Eidos Montreal Non-Backtrack-Inducing PipCharge-Pack (TM) every time I backstab someone?

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:42
It comes across as biased to me. The first option is written to sound reasonable whilst the third option (is it meant to sound funny?) is written to sound crazed and fanboyish (fanboy always has negative connotations for me). You could have just written:

1. I like the sound of TP takedowns.
2. I'm still not sure.
3. I do not like the sound of TP takedowns.

I still voted for option 3.

Yes, it was meant to be funny - I mean, I've always been very quick to judge others for considering the idea of thrid person anything, let alone takedowns - so I guess I was trying to acknowledge how I've changed based on the article.

I guess if the majority of folks think it sounds biased then I failed to convey that - but calling me a "fanboi" means you clearly have not read any of my earlier posts (and hey, that's OK with me - it's not like I'm Mr.K. that you should know who I am) :)



So... stealth kills are a "feature" ?
Can I still knife someone from behind or do I have to use an Eidos Montréal Non-Backtrack-Inducing Pip-Pack every time I backstab someone?

Now this is an EXCELLENT question! I was wondering the same thing about this myself (like using a tazer). If they map the takedown to a non "shoot/attack" button then the anwser is "yes," you can still knife someone without entering thirdperson "Eidos Montréal Non-Backtrack-Inducing Pip-Pack" mode, if they don't...

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 15:44
that... although, maybe we could think back to the days when we needed to restore bio energy to use an aug with JC...? Nope, it still doesn't work :(

We never needed bio energy to execute a stealth kill in DX. Actually, I'm starting to become completely disgusted by the whole takedown system. At first I was just slightly negative about it, but this...

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 15:45
So... stealth kills are a "feature" ?
Can I still knife someone from behind without the cinematic bullcrap or do I have to use an Eidos Montréal Non-Backtrack-Inducing PipCharge-Pack (TM) every time I backstab someone?

I guess you can but it class as a normal attack, not a insta kill sneak attacks, for that you need to hit the stealthkill button.

that´s my guess how it work, and that makes it 2 times more acurate then backstabing in Deus Ex 1

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:48
We never needed bio energy to execute a stealth kill in DX. Actually, I'm starting to become completely disgusted by the whole takedown system. At first I was just slightly negative about it, but this...

No, I know we didn't, but for some of the other featuers (bullet proof, silent run etc) you did. I guess I was just trying to think of silent takedowns as a special skill that justifys using the energy bars... but as you pointed out, it doesn't really make sense.

Still, maybe a dev will read what you posted and find a way to adjust this to make more sense before relase?

Malah
18th Jun 2010, 15:52
Now this is an EXCELLENT question! I was wondering the same thing about this myself (like using a tazer). If they map the takedown to a non "shoot/attack" button then the anwser is "yes," you can still knife someone without entering thirdperson "Eidos Montréal Non-Backtrack-Inducing Pip-Pack" mode, if they don't...

That's not an excellent question, I should not have to ask something so basic.

VectorM
18th Jun 2010, 15:53
We never needed bio energy to execute a stealth kill in DX. Actually, I'm starting to become completely disgusted by the whole takedown system. At first I was just slightly negative about it, but this...

Holy ****, things are...DIFFERNET! THE HORROR!

68_pie
18th Jun 2010, 15:54
but calling me a "fanboi" means you clearly have not read any of my earlier posts (and hey, that's OK with me - it's not like I'm Mr.K. that you should know who I am) :)

apologies if i wasn't clear - i wasn't calling you a fanboy (especially as many people would denote me as such). I was saying that the option 3 sounded like it had been written such that it made anyone who chose it appear to be a fanboy (and using fanboy in a perjorative sense).

Also, I can only see the takedowns having to use BE if either: the takedowns use the wristblades (which doesn't really make sense); or if they use some super-damage-inducing-melee aug (which doesn't make sense for non-lethal takedowns).

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 15:56
Holy ****, things are...DIFFERNET! THE HORROR!

same though here, it´s sad to see so many still cling on to Deus Ex 1 like it´s the masterpiece that should just be copy/pasted

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 15:58
apologies if i wasn't clear - i wasn't calling you a fanboy (especially as many people would denote me as such). I was saying that the option 3 sounded like it had been written such that it made anyone who chose it appear to be a fanboy (and using fanboy in a perjorative sense).

Not a worry - like I said, I hadn't mean't it to sound at all biased, it was a (failed) attempt to poke fun at myself and acknowledge my side switching at the same time. :)

Not sure about the pip energy use though anymore, unless it's a special aug...?



That's not an excellent question, I should not have to ask something so basic.

OK - sorry you see it that way, maybe you should take it up with Rene' then.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 16:03
No, I know we didn't, but for some of the other featuers (bullet proof, silent run etc) you did. I guess I was just trying to think of silent takedowns as a special skill that justifys using the energy bars... but as you pointed out, it doesn't really make sense.


Don't get me wrong: I'm all for sitting around, planning my next move, but it has to be my choice to do it. I just don't like to be forced into doing it, by some gameplay-technical idiocy. Anything in a game that forces you into breaking your stride is that kind of idiocy.



Still, maybe a dev will read what you posted and find a way to adjust this to make more sense before relase?

Yeah... fat chance, I'd say. ;)

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 16:05
Don't get me wrong: I'm all for sitting around, planning my next move, but it has to be my choice to do it. I just don't like to be forced into doing it, by some gameplay-technical idiocy. Anything in a game that forces you into breaking your stride is that kind of idiocy.



Yeah... fat chance, I'd say. ;)

Yeah - after playing the origional Deus Ex I was ruined for other games - I've always been like - "I have to always go down this path and turn this wheel just to do xyz - that sucks - where's a vent for me to crawl through!"

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 16:06
Holy ****, things are...DIFFERNET! THE HORROR!


same though here, it´s sad to see so many still cling on to Deus Ex 1 like it´s the masterpiece that should just be copy/pasted

You guys are really good at avoiding what is actually being said.

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 16:11
Don't get me wrong: I'm all for sitting around, planning my next move, but it has to be my choice to do it. I just don't like to be forced into doing it, by some gameplay-technical idiocy. Anything in a game that forces you into breaking your stride is that kind of idiocy.


I don´t see how that´s not fulfilled, it´s your choice to sneak up behind the guard, it´s your choice to hit the stealth takedown button.

the only difference between this and Deus Ex 1 is that it´s a extended, skill showing cutscene instead of just a dull whack to the back of the head that may or may not knock them out.

Sotsiak
18th Jun 2010, 16:18
I don´t see how that´s not fulfilled, it´s your choice to sneak up behind the guard, it´s your choice to hit the stealth takedown button.

the only difference between this and Deus Ex 1 is that it´s a extended, skill showing cutscene instead of just a dull whack to the back of the head that may or may not knock them out.

That is exactly the problem. Things are getting simplified. And when we collect a good amount of simplified things we have a dumb-down.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 16:21
the only difference between this and Deus Ex 1 is that it´s a extended, skill showing cutscene


... and a waiting-period before you can do it again.




instead of just a dull whack to the back of the head that may or may not knock them out.


Hate to break it to you, but the most effective way of dispatching someone silently (with melee) is a slit throat, stab in the back or a "dull whack to the back of the head". Nothing showy. Anything showy always has a risk of failing, and blowing the whole thing.

Ilves
18th Jun 2010, 16:25
it´s sad to see so many still cling on to Deus Ex 1 like it´s the masterpiece that should just be copy/pasted

You're grossly misinterpreting the camp critical of HR, dear remmus. But I still like your avatar.


You could have just written:

1. I like the sound of TP takedowns.
2. I'm still not sure.
3. I do not like the sound of TP takedowns.



This is how I read the poll. :thumb:

Oddness
18th Jun 2010, 16:30
It's completely stupid, but hey, what do the fans know.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 16:35
It's completely stupid, but hey, what do the fans know.

Exactly! I mean, the devs have to spend what... four years with this game. The fans have just spent a decade with the franchise, and only have to put up with this game until the next DX game is made, which... may... be... erm... never... damn.

But what do we know? :D

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 16:39
... and a waiting-period before you can do it again.

well we don´t know how long the wait is.




Hate to break it to you, but the most effective way of dispatching someone silently (with melee) is a slit throat, stab in the back or a "dull whack to the back of the head". Nothing showy. Anything showy always has a risk of failing, and blowing the whole thing.

it´s a game, plus we don´t know how the animation looks so we don´t know how realistic the takedown is.



That is exactly the problem. Things are getting simplified. And when we collect a good amount of simplified things we have a dumb-down.

I don´t see how it´s simplified, there are just as many action being done, the only difference being the last one is longer.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 16:53
well we don´t know how long the wait is.


Well, it's not like it's going to be very short, since it was stated that it is not going to be spammable.





it´s a game, plus we don´t know how the animation looks so we don´t know how realistic the takedown is.


Well, my comment was about your use of the word "dull" about knocking someone out. But the first part of your comment is what scares me about the takedowns themselves: "it's a game"... The typical takedown in a game is Cool™. You'll forgive me if I'm not overly convinced that they will forego that in this particular instance. Cool™, also known as Sweet Move™, is something that draws in a lot of console gamers.



I don´t see how it´s simplified, there are just as many action being done, the only difference being the last one is longer.

But you are not the one performing the action. You're only initiating it. Then the game takes over for you, and shows you what happens. That is simplification.

remmus
18th Jun 2010, 16:58
But you are not the one performing the action. You're only initiating it. Then the game takes over for you, and shows you what happens. That is simplification.

well then Deus Ex 1 was also simple since you only initiated the weapon swing and then the game took over, it´s the same thing in the end.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 17:05
well then Deus Ex 1 was also simple since you only initiated the weapon swing and then the game took over, it´s the same thing in the end.

No, it is not. One press of a button in Deus Ex did one action. One press of a button for a takedown pulls you out of the character and letting him perform (probably) more than one action. DX: Button -> swing (the logical progression). HR: Button -> third person -> initiating takedown (sidling up to the person, since that animation will have to be in there) -> performing takedown (no telling how many moves may be included in a takedown but, in keeping with Cool™, probably 3-4) -> exiting takedown/TP (probably with gently lowering the body, to reduce noise).

I'd say the difference is pretty big. And what's more: in DX you could do it again, and again, and again... as long as you weren't detected. Of course that inevitably draws us into a discussion about the AI in DX, and I don't think anyone wants to go down that road. :nut:

Lady_Of_The_Vine
18th Jun 2010, 17:08
I voted for the first option. Not a problem for me.

Jerion
18th Jun 2010, 17:19
9-5-9 split. Interesting.


(and hey, that's OK with me - it's not like I'm Mr.K. that you should know who I am)

Uh, thanks? I think?

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 17:30
^lol


One press of a button for a takedown pulls you out of the character and letting him perform (probably) more than one action. DX: Button -> swing (the logical progression). HR: Button -> third person -> initiating takedown (sidling up to the person, since that animation will have to be in there) -> performing takedown (no telling how many moves may be included in a takedown but, in keeping with Cool™, probably 3-4) -> exiting takedown/TP (probably with gently lowering the body, to reduce noise).

Actualy - that does sound kinda cool! I wanna play your version of the game!

mad_red
18th Jun 2010, 17:37
Well, again, I'm not a fan of "looking around corners" - I prefer the lean option. But the poll is about third person takedowns though, eh.

Whoops my bad. Not so serendipitous on my part eh? But then the reason why I voted against is because the poll doesn't include a "player decides" option.

3rd person take-downs are fine, but the only reward for performing them should be a visual reward.

It doesn't make sense that a 3rd person take-down should be more deadly and effective than a quick kill. I shouldn't have to play Adam as some kind of psychopath who has to show off his killer moves, when he can just silently slash a throat and be done with it. It doesn't add gameplay value either if Adam performs a series of scripted moves at the push of a button. It should just be a visual treat for the peeps who enjoy cool moves.

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 17:45
Actualy - that does sound kinda cool! I wanna play your version of the game!

Yeah, it does sound Cool™ doesn't it? Another thing that scares me about having a timer for how often you can perform takedowns, is that it gives them license to have the takedowns take a long time. Long takedowns when you can do them in quick succession, will break up gameplay and quickly become annoying. Long takedowns that are on a cooldown, however, makes it less game-breaking. Hooray! More room for Cool™ and Sweet Move™! Because we all know that that is what Deus Ex is all about!

PenguinsFriend
18th Jun 2010, 17:54
Yeah, it does sound Cool™ doesn't it? Another thing that scares me about having a timer for how often you can perform takedowns, is that it gives them license to have the takedowns take a long time. Long takedowns when you can do them in quick succession, will break up gameplay and quickly become annoying. Long takedowns that are on a cooldown, however, makes it less game-breaking. Hooray! More room for Cool™ and Sweet Move™! Because we all know that that is what Deus Ex is all about!

Absolutely - and then all we need to do is add some bullet time and ala-sweet-fantastic-Matrix-dodge-bullets-without-my-sunglasses-falling-off and we will have a sweet game! :nut:

Edit: Oh - and I forgot to add, when the npcs die, they should have tiny jewles pop out of their chests and float about a foot above the corpse so that Adam can collect them, earn points, and buy augs :eek:

68_pie
18th Jun 2010, 18:04
Oh - and I forgot to add, when the npcs die, they should have tiny jewles pop out of their chests and float about a foot above the corpse so that Adam can collect them, earn points, and buy augs :eek:

heh heh I completely forgot about that guy.

Kodaemon
18th Jun 2010, 18:21
First person for me. Not in the wording of the last poll option though :rolleyes:. I don't care whether it's Deus Ex or not. No first-person game should switch into tpp for something like that, primarily because doing it in first person is just that much more intense.

Do an experiment, play Thief: Deadly Shadows. For all the pros and cons of the game, it's a perfect testing ground for this, as it's a stealth game that can be played both in first and third person, and features a lethal takedown. Sneak up on someone in tpp and backstab them with the dagger. Now, do the same in first person. Which makes you *gulp* more?

Fluffis
18th Jun 2010, 18:49
Absolutely - and then all we need to do is add some bullet time and ala-sweet-fantastic-Matrix-dodge-bullets-without-my-sunglasses-falling-off and we will have a sweet game! :nut:


Well, to be fair, as far as we know, Adam's sunglasses can't fall off. :D

Pinky_Powers
18th Jun 2010, 19:04
FEAR 3 has a first-person cover system now, and it looks pretty damn good.

But then, R6Vegas looked damn good in its third-person system, and was quite intense.

As for the take-downs, though... I agree, it's much more visceral in first-person.

However, we haven't seen how Human Revolution handles them. We do know from interviews, that the take-downs aren't designed to be glorious, but rather brutal and ugly. I don't think it will have much flourish. I certainly hope not, anyway.

Badmaker
18th Jun 2010, 19:16
I have a question for developers: whats the point of human eye augmentation seeying enemies through walls if u already can see them from cover ?

This whole 3rd camera person is stupid and its clearly made for younger generation gamers.

KSingh77
18th Jun 2010, 19:22
yep

Kodaemon
18th Jun 2010, 19:29
This whole 3rd camera person is stupid and its clearly made for younger generation gamers.

I'm getting a feeling of self-contradiction from this sentence for some reason. :rasp:

ZakKa89
18th Jun 2010, 19:30
I have a question for developers: whats the point of human eye augmentation seeying enemies through walls if u already can see them from cover ?



I am pretty sure you won't be able to see enemies trough walls while in the cover system :rolleyes:.

Seriously now, What if there isn't a door or hallway?

Kodaemon
18th Jun 2010, 19:36
Then you punch one out.

Pinky_Powers
18th Jun 2010, 19:39
Then you punch one out.

Sounds nice and dirty.

SlySpy
18th Jun 2010, 20:39
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHjtshegzME

I think the takedowns in the Riddick game are much better suited to a Deus Ex game than a third person camera pullout that wastes energy every time you use it.

Badmaker
18th Jun 2010, 20:40
Seriously now, What if there isn't a door or hallway?

See how depended are this 3P system for cover ?
But, how much we are complaining, the devs probably will ignore us and will continue to make their "Cool" game.

Malah
18th Jun 2010, 21:33
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHjtshegzME

I think the takedowns in the Riddick game are much better suited to a Deus Ex game than a third person camera pullout that wastes energy every time you use it.

No way dude, with their pathetic immersion-preserving system you wouldn't get to see Adam's superawesome augmentations nor the gold/black theme of his clothing. It's whack bro! Check it out and become a believer!!!! Third person for teh win!!!


EIDOS MONTREAL PERSON: IT WORKED FOR THE JASON BOURNE AND JAMES BOND GAMES SO WHY SHOULDN'T IT WORK FOR OUR GAMEE?????!!

Anasumtj
18th Jun 2010, 22:07
I absolutely hate that they're tying takedowns to some kind of bull**** "pip" system. Splinter Cell Conviction tried something similar with they're Mark & Execute crap. Instead of having a simulated experience, everything screamed "HEY, YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME WITH ARBITRARY GAME RULES".

That's assuming I've understood the released information correctly. There's a lot of things about this game that need clarification.

Daedalus Ciarán
20th Jun 2010, 11:20
I absolutely hate that they're tying takedowns to some kind of bull**** "pip" system.

The one thing I've never understood about the takedowns, is why, why why why, you're only able to do them with augmentations? Why do augmentations confer a skill on the user? Because all martial arts and their ilk are skills, something which has to be learned. Adam should be able to do them without getting augmented, and they shouldn't take up bio energy, unless all actions using your arms use bio energy (which would make sense). As it is though, it doesn't make any sense what-so-ever.

Unless the augmentations have a mind of their own, so that when you press a button on them you completely lose control while they take out several people using an automated, internal system. That would explain the loss of energy as the targeting system takes over. And it fits since we're not able to do anything during these takedowns, they're completely automated. But if that were the case, why would someone want that on them? Why would you want augmentations you can't control completely, or that can take control of you? What happens if you get a broken augmentation that starts making you do Nazi salutes?

It'd be like your new hands enable you to have all the knowledge of how to knit, which you've never known anything about before. Or a leg augmentation which turns you into a swimmer, even though you've never been in the water before. You're not getting a brain chip loaded with information, they're just replacement limbs. Why do skills cost energy? Skills =/= augmentations.

Invictus Sol
20th Jun 2010, 14:19
Hey guys, this is related more to the article than the thread topic (voted that I'm still not sure), but not sure if anyone else noticed one of the comments the writer mentioned about regenerating health:


That being said, the regeneration isn't immediate. Eidos Montreal is still including recovery items for players who don't have time to wait for the regen to kick in as well as ways to boost overall health reserves.

So perhaps medkits are out but Adam still has access to food or something similar? Haven't seen this mentioned, before. If so, it might go some way to reconciling those that really hate HR to the game.

In regards to 3rd person takedowns, I'll have to see them in action repeatedly to get a better sense of how they've been implemented. My worry is that they may become very grating, especially after multiple playthroughs.

Ilves
20th Jun 2010, 14:33
Eidos Montreal is still including recovery items for players who don't have time to wait for the regen to kick in as well as ways to boost overall health reserves.


Hoho, that's rich, IGN. You hear that, medkit huggers? You impatient, instant satisfaction craving lot, you. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/4.gif

mad_red
20th Jun 2010, 15:34
Hoho, that's rich, IGN. You hear that, medkit huggers? You impatient, instant satisfaction craving lot, you. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/4.gif

Ouch. Of course, I want medkits so that I can run out of health like the idiot I am, not for insta-regen. :rasp:



The one thing I've never understood about the takedowns, is why, why why why, you're only able to do them with augmentations? Why do augmentations confer a skill on the user?

Yeah, it really bugs me out that Adam cannot improve as a person. He can only become better at what he does by upgrading his augmentations. Pretty lame if you ask me.

Daedalus Ciarán
20th Jun 2010, 16:04
Yeah, it really bugs me out that Adam cannot improve as a person. He can only become better at what he does by upgrading his augmentations. Pretty lame if you ask me.

It strikes me that the game is sort of transhumanist propaganda to a certain extent in that it's essentially saying skills mean nothing, the only way for the character, you and by proxy humanity in general, to improve is through artificial means. I mean, I don't mind a game having that idea, but to go from DX1, which was much more ambiguous about technology, to a, seemingly, one sided game which sees technology as setting people free, is a step down in my mind.

Kodaemon
20th Jun 2010, 16:28
You're all insane. The game probably takes place within less than a week. Not the time to build up skills, really. The game's just doing away with a ludicrous rpg cliche.

Badmaker
20th Jun 2010, 16:38
DX1, which was much more ambiguous about technology, to a, seemingly, one sided game which sees technology as setting people free, is a step down in my mind.

How can u make such statements if HR is not out yet ?
This will make a great game, it has a lil bit of DX 1 and action based gameplay.

Who Watches Me
20th Jun 2010, 16:59
I just hope that is a system were it doesn’t really show you what’s on the other side as much… like rainbow six vegas 2 hardcore cover system… for example it can show my character while in cover but in order for me to see what’s really ahead I’ll have to poke out a bit.

Fluffis
20th Jun 2010, 17:40
How can u make such statements if HR is not out yet ?
This will make a great game, it has a lil bit of DX 1 and action based gameplay.

Well, the lack of a skill system does seem to imply it.

Remember: in DX, Manderley said that even JC would be worthless without exercise and practice.

Badmaker
20th Jun 2010, 17:42
Well, the lack of a skill system does seem to imply it.

Who knows.....maybe its better without it...

Personally, i get bored when the game has many RPG elements.

Fluffis
20th Jun 2010, 18:05
Who knows.....maybe its better without it...

Personally, i get bored when the game has many RPG elements.

I think we'll leave it at that. I don't want open that can of worms again.

Pretentious Old Man.
20th Jun 2010, 18:32
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHjtshegzME

I think the takedowns in the Riddick game are much better suited to a Deus Ex game than a third person camera pullout that wastes energy every time you use it.

Great point. I would love to see some brutal first person takedowns.

Badmaker
20th Jun 2010, 19:20
Great point. I would love to see some brutal first person takedowns.

Its been confirmed double takedowns :) and in a screen, its clearly shown multiple takedowns with Icarus aug. This game is gettin better and better.

Invictus Sol
20th Jun 2010, 19:55
Really looking forward to the claymore mine aug, myself.

Anasumtj
20th Jun 2010, 23:42
Claymore aug is ridiculous and should be in another game.

Fluffis
21st Jun 2010, 00:26
Claymore aug is ridiculous and should be in another game.

It is. Only, there it's called Arcane Explosion.

I agree with the people that say it will be cool and all, but really... do we need a PBAoE in Deus Ex? There's already rocket launchers and grenades. We're going to be overrun with youtube videos of people trying to do the biggest insta-kill. This is one of those things that I feel the devs are putting in just to be Cool™. I hope I'm wrong, and that there will be genuine use for it, but I have doubts.

I think it would be enough with the Thunder Stomp.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 01:21
I've just looked at these poll options, and I don't see the rational for third person take-downs, and here's why.

One word: Riddick.

First person take-downs rock intergalactic booty. Kudos to SlySpy for bringing this up already, but any mention of Richard B. Riddick needs rear its ugly, shaven head at least twice, preferably three times.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 01:26
DE:HR is a game of choice. So uh... just don't get the claymore and spend your hard-earned money and xp on donuts or better guns

Anasumtj
21st Jun 2010, 02:01
Just saying. It's ridiculous.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 02:05
Deus Ex had a cranial implant that made your nanobots manufacture a SPY DRONE, wit a camera connected to your brain that you flew for about 10 seconds and could give off a massive EMP blast

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 02:12
Haha, precisely. A claymore mine lodged in a chest that's mostly metal at that point is no more ridiculous than Gunther's coveted skull-gun and frankly less so, since it's impossible to imagine exactly how to make room in a freaking skull for a gun. Don't be so cranky about my beloved claymore.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 02:12
No, never did actually get that aug too much. Much too silly. What, did the thing birth out of JC's nose?

Similarly, with the claymore augmentation, just because it exists in the game doesn't mean that you have to lay your eyes on it once in a single play-though.

Who the hell upgrades their swimming skills in DX? But it's still there as a viable, upgradable skill. Doesn't make the game similarly insufficient and useless.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 02:13
also i think the miniclaymores are lodged in your arms

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 02:15
a "mini-claymore?" Isn't that an oxymoron?

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 02:16
Similarly, with the claymore augmentation, just because it exists in the game doesn't mean that you have to lay your eyes on it once in a single play-though.

Who the hell upgrades their swimming skills in DX? But it's still there as a viable, upgradable skill. Doesn't make the game similarly insufficient and useless.

Well said, Tricky.

Fluffis
21st Jun 2010, 02:17
Haha, precisely. A claymore mine lodged in a chest that's mostly metal at that point is no more ridiculous than Gunther's coveted skull-gun and frankly less so, since it's impossible to image exactly how to make room in a freaking skull for a gun. Don't be so cranky about my beloved claymore.

I'm guessing you'll be able to fire it more than once... right? So how would that work? Will we be running around with a sack of shrapnel, reloading every time it's fired?

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 02:20
I'm guessing you'll be able to fire it more than once... right? So how would that work? Will we be running around with a sack of shrapnel, reloading every time it's fired?

I think it only would work as a single-use weapon that must be reloaded after every use (say Adam has a carrying limit of 1 or 2 claymores max per level). If he can carry 5 or 10 claymores to reload with then I'd agree it's ridiculous and overpowered. Once or twice per mission it might be cool, though.

Fluffis
21st Jun 2010, 02:21
Who the hell upgrades their swimming skills in DX? But it's still there as a viable, upgradable skill. Doesn't make the game similarly insufficient and useless.

I do. Every playthrough. Aqualung may let you swim long enough, but Swim gets you there faster. Edit: it also doesn't waste BE.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 02:22
I see how it is.

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 02:24
I think it only would work as a single-use weapon that must be reloaded after every use (say Adam has a carrying limit of 1 or 2 claymores max per level). If he can carry 5 or 10 claymores to reload with then I'd agree it's ridiculous and overpowered. Once or twice per mission it might be cool, though.

It might be more than cool, it would be an awesome weapon to keep in reserve for those situations where you've kinda screwed yourself into having no easy route to the objective.

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 02:29
Yeah, that's a good point. It's well suited for either a grand entrance (Icarus drop + claymore) or a desperate bid for survival.

Fluffis
21st Jun 2010, 02:34
It might be more than cool, it would be an awesome weapon to keep in reserve for those situations where you've kinda screwed yourself into having no easy route to the objective.

As a one- maybe two-off it could work. Any more than that, and it starts to become completely ridiculous.

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 03:38
As a one- maybe two-off it could work. Any more than that, and it starts to become completely ridiculous.

Agreed. It has to be a bit onerous to reload and can't be used too often, otherwise it's just too powerful with no drawbacks. (It would be perhaps a good equalizer if employing the claymore actually results in some damage to Alex from kickback or whatever, though I haven't gotten this impression so far.)

Anasumtj
21st Jun 2010, 06:32
Deus Ex had a cranial implant that made your nanobots manufacture a SPY DRONE, wit a camera connected to your brain that you flew for about 10 seconds and could give off a massive EMP blast


Haha, precisely. A claymore mine lodged in a chest that's mostly metal at that point is no more ridiculous than Gunther's coveted skull-gun and frankly less so, since it's impossible to imagine exactly how to make room in a freaking skull for a gun. Don't be so cranky about my beloved claymore.

*Watches leaked gameplay footage.*

Yeah, it's ******* ridiculous.

MaxxQ1
21st Jun 2010, 06:55
Don't forget that it's been said (I forget where) that aug usage uses up energy. The energy supply can vary, depending on whether you've upgraded it or not, and requires you to recharge all the energy "pips" (I think that term is just what the previewer was calling the indicator(s), and not the actual name) after the first one, which regenerates slowly. No mention of how you recharge, except an allusion to charging stations. I'd also hazard a guess and say that there may be "batteries" (like the biocells in DX) you can find/buy/steal/whatever.

So, unless you can spam recharging, you won't be able to spam the claymore. Considering how powerful something like that can be, I'd be willing to bet that one use will drain your energy level more than halfway.

Anasumtj
21st Jun 2010, 07:20
I just think its design is kind pretty extreme and inspired by the "Sweet Move" school of design. I also hate the pip system as I understand it currently. So I'm pretty much offended by the whole thing! :D

Maybe I'd feel differently towards it if it's not always activated in that damn, slow-motion, action pan crap.

Deus_Ex_Machina
21st Jun 2010, 07:27
After seeing the leaked gameplay, now more than ever, I'm against the takedown system, especially the 3rd person aspect of it. :mad:

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:33
the pip system isn't too different from the % system

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 08:02
The takedowns, I feel there doesn't even need to be an argument for. Before we just whacked em' on the back and they were dead, now we get a cool animation. Fine, don't see the big deal.

However, I'm not a fan of third-person cover for combat generally. In Mass Effect 1 I barely used it and mostly ran around shooting which was a blast. In ME2 I hated it because I was FORCED to use it 24/7 or die almost instantly.

The reason I'm somewhat OK with it in Deus Ex is two reasons:

1. Hopefully it will be optional (besides during takedowns, which i don't care about). I don't want to be a tank, but I better not die instantly when outside of cover like ME2. I like having MORE health that doesn't regenerate, rather than less health that does. I don't really mind the regenerating health so much just don't make me instantly die.

2. THIS IS THE BIG REASON THEY DID IT IMO: They can have better AI now. In Deus Ex 1 the AI was pretty much blind/retarded.

I think the reason 3rd person was implemented was, to make a stealth game fun/fair, you kind of DO have to cheat, IE seeing around corners without actually making yourself visible. The reason they were so blind in Deus Ex 1 is because you had to physically peak out to see where they were, and if they were geniuses, you would never be able to do anything stealth in the game. I think third person makes the stealth much more viable.

However, I think that could hurt the combat portion of the game but I hope not. luckily I always played through using stealth, so third person doesnt bother me for stealth, but I hate it for shooting/cover mechanics GENERALLY. We'll see how they do it though.

So I'm optimistic that it won't bother me, but it could.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 08:06
There are already 12 threads talking about this on the first page.

You don't need to make a new thread for attention - just post it somewhere active...

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 08:09
There are already 12 threads talking about this on the first page.

You don't need to make a new thread for attention - just post it somewhere active...

Too late. :rasp:

Mods will fix it or whatever. Too hard to keep track of this place.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Jun 2010, 08:28
Too late. :rasp:

Mods will fix it or whatever. Too hard to keep track of this place.

Merged. :)


EDIT: I closed Sabretooth's poll as we already have this one.

ZakKa89
21st Jun 2010, 09:34
after seeing the gameplay, I absolutely love the third person takedowns. The way the camera switches from first to third person and vice versa is very well done IMO.

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 11:42
damm I have to admit that I'm not so keen on 3d takedowns anymore.
It would be better if it was rendered in first person view instead.
for example, that one punch K.O shouldn't have broken the 1st person
perspective. yes the punch was beautiful but will you think the same
when you see the same, 3d rendering of that punch for the 20th or 30th time?
It's beautiful for a cutscene or a movie. but for a game, the takedowns just has to
be much faster than that.They shouldn't break the first person view either coz
it feels like you would lose control for that moment. and that disrupts immersion.

3d stealth is fantastic!
3d takedown is fantastic at first, but surely tedious with repetition.

Ephemeral
21st Jun 2010, 12:09
About quicktime events, the problems I see:

1) Like said above, they get very tedious after a while. I'm sure anyone who's played Assassin's Creed 1/2, where they work almost identically can attest to this. They could be generated to look entirely unique and they would still be tedious. As far as rewarding goes, look at how annoying they get in Fallout 3 after a while, where that's basically their function. At first sure, but after you see them a couple of dozen times they're just 3 to 5 seconds that you're out of the action.

2) It hardly appears difficult, at least in the environments they've shown, to get the jump on multiple enemies. Some of the interviews I've read have led to believe that it will be difficult to get into close quarters without dying, this doesn't seem to be the case. Perhaps harder than say in AC1/2 but still not that difficult. To then be able to dispose of two enemies without any further interaction hugely simplifies the game. This should be something that's at least somewhat difficult to do. You should have to be able to quickly shoot both in the head before they can react, or something equivalent. It almost feels like these events have been directly included to cater to consoles where you can't do those kind of quick reflex shots, so instead it's all done for you.

3) Assuming the quicktime events are in for good, you should at least make sure they stay in the behind the shoulder 3rd person perspective and don't circles around the action. Doing that completely disassociates you from the action and character. It's more reminiscent of acting out a movie than playing a character which I assume is what Eidos is going for.

4) Not to mention I can already see this being very awkward if you're performing a takedown on one enemy while another can see you. Does he just wait for you to finish? Or does he shoot you while you're powerless to do anything? Either way it doesn't work. If instead you were to make it so these takedowns can only be done when no one else can see you, then it will be lead to awkward circumstances where you're expecting to be able to pull one off but can't.

5) In fact, the whole similarity to Assassin's Creed worries me, which is almost the perfect example of a game with derivative, repetitive and generally skill-less combat. I sincerely hope it isn't a model that they're trying to emulate.

While on the topic of 3rd person perspective:

1) I see the advantage of being able to see whether you're in cover and being able to actively judge who can see you or not.

2) Problem is, like others have said, being able to continuously see the movements of enemies around a corner vastly simplifies things. I think the game would be vastly more rewarding if the perspective was narrowed, and instead you had to peak around a corner, or say peak over a barrier to track enemy movements.

mad_red
21st Jun 2010, 14:02
You're all insane. The game probably takes place within less than a week. Not the time to build up skills, really. The game's just doing away with a ludicrous rpg cliche.

Yeah I was wondering about that in another thread, Kodaemon. It's a valid point.

However, I had come to the following conclusion.

1. Gameplay =/= realism =/= immersion.

2. You actually do learn new things every day, even at things that you've been practicing for years. This is from personal experience.

(3. If you don't believe me, here's something to prove you wrong:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090706-humans-bats-echolocation.html


After just a few days of training, the students had all acquired basic echolocation skills, the scientists report in the March/April 2009 issue of the journal Acta Acustica.

PenguinsFriend
28th Jun 2010, 16:00
damm I have to admit that I'm not so keen on 3d takedowns anymore.
It would be better if it was rendered in first person view instead.
for example, that one punch K.O shouldn't have broken the 1st person
perspective. yes the punch was beautiful but will you think the same
when you see the same, 3d rendering of that punch for the 20th or 30th time?
It's beautiful for a cutscene or a movie. but for a game, the takedowns just has to
be much faster than that.They shouldn't break the first person view either coz
it feels like you would lose control for that moment. and that disrupts immersion.

3d stealth is fantastic!
3d takedown is fantastic at first, but surely tedious with repetition.

Good point - I hadn't thought about the repitition. That also leads me to ask when Adam would use one move over another (like his weird as 5 finger face grab thingy); is it just aug triggered or based on agu+skill, or some other as yet to be named factor?

Slack
27th Aug 2010, 02:58
please:
-we don't need 3rd person
-we don't need regenerating health

thanks for your attention

Khaeru
27th Aug 2010, 10:46
please:
-we don't need 3rd person
-we don't need regenerating health

thanks for your attention

don't know if the regeneration health will be that useful, from the leaked gameplay vid the game looks easy. And about the TP mode, it's not that cheaty at all...adam's got a special sight he uses to literally look through walls. So maybe devs should have stuck with the first person mode, but they decided to mix both TP and FP modes...in a bad way (i mean some actions are one mode sided) . Maybe you shall ask for the option to switch from FP to TP mode etc whenever you want.

Cronstintein
27th Aug 2010, 18:12
I just hope they don't jerk my camera around when going from 3rd to 1st person. I tried Rainbow6 LV to see how the system works and it's actually not as bad as people make it out to be. EXCEPT if you're leaning out of cover and let go of the cover button the camera snaps back behind cover before giving you back the FPS reigns... not cool. The avatar should move into my camera so I'm not all pulled around, as it's very disorienting.

DON_The_Grey
28th Aug 2010, 02:32
About quicktime events, the problems I see:

1) Like said above, they get very tedious after a while. I'm sure anyone who's played Assassin's Creed 1/2, where they work almost identically can attest to this. They could be generated to look entirely unique and they would still be tedious. As far as rewarding goes, look at how annoying they get in Fallout 3 after a while, where that's basically their function. At first sure, but after you see them a couple of dozen times they're just 3 to 5 seconds that you're out of the action.

2) It hardly appears difficult, at least in the environments they've shown, to get the jump on multiple enemies. Some of the interviews I've read have led to believe that it will be difficult to get into close quarters without dying, this doesn't seem to be the case. Perhaps harder than say in AC1/2 but still not that difficult. To then be able to dispose of two enemies without any further interaction hugely simplifies the game. This should be something that's at least somewhat difficult to do. You should have to be able to quickly shoot both in the head before they can react, or something equivalent. It almost feels like these events have been directly included to cater to consoles where you can't do those kind of quick reflex shots, so instead it's all done for you.

3) Assuming the quicktime events are in for good, you should at least make sure they stay in the behind the shoulder 3rd person perspective and don't circles around the action. Doing that completely disassociates you from the action and character. It's more reminiscent of acting out a movie than playing a character which I assume is what Eidos is going for.

4) Not to mention I can already see this being very awkward if you're performing a takedown on one enemy while another can see you. Does he just wait for you to finish? Or does he shoot you while you're powerless to do anything? Either way it doesn't work. If instead you were to make it so these takedowns can only be done when no one else can see you, then it will be lead to awkward circumstances where you're expecting to be able to pull one off but can't.

5) In fact, the whole similarity to Assassin's Creed worries me, which is almost the perfect example of a game with derivative, repetitive and generally skill-less combat. I sincerely hope it isn't a model that they're trying to emulate.

While on the topic of 3rd person perspective:

1) I see the advantage of being able to see whether you're in cover and being able to actively judge who can see you or not.

2) Problem is, like others have said, being able to continuously see the movements of enemies around a corner vastly simplifies things. I think the game would be vastly more rewarding if the perspective was narrowed, and instead you had to peak around a corner, or say peak over a barrier to track enemy movements.

> 1) I agree with you and PinguinsFriend: Such animations tend to become tedious after a while. Danger is: The intended reward turns into annoying immersion breaking waiting time. I completely share your opinion here. Whats more, it is really a difficult job to balance those mini sequences. Just imagine. How would you like that to go on, at all? - I'd like to have a quick and smooth change followed by the main action with fewest slow motion only in main action and then return to 1st person. Sounds tricky. Maybe impossible. So.. at least it looks cool the 1st times hehe

> 2) When you mention that aspect it reminds me immediately on Maggie Chow's appartement in DX1: To engage from roof was soo difficult man! Her personal security team was fierce! You would be dead a dozen times minimum before one successful approach. I'd say that should be the meter, huh? Besides I very lively imagine to have had this ability to shoot all enemies from a built-in machine gun. Awesome.

> 4) Full support on that one. Remember this lil prob hacking in security cams in DX1 while being shot by your enemies/ turrets? Couldnt die as long as your hanging in there :)

JCpies
28th Aug 2010, 09:52
24 people let their hand slip.

Cronstintein
28th Aug 2010, 10:04
Yeah I was pretty surprised at those numbers. I think first-person takedowns are a better solution. Although 3rd person vs wild billy-club flailing... I think I'd prefer the takedowns.

Multiple person take-downs seem a bit too easy and contrived but I guess we'll have to wait and see :/

Jace_Auditore
28th Aug 2010, 11:20
I think giving the players takedowns as a reward for being stealthy is a good idea.
What I dont like is that the takedowns are in 3rd person.The 3rd person view is something not necessary,that takes away the inmersion in the game.
Takedowns on 1st person on the other hand are realy good ideas.

Example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHjtshegzME&feature=related

-Thief: Deadly Shadows:Blackjack and Dagger takedown animation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv90MhDc5VE-8:38

By the way,multiple enemies takedowns are a really bad idea,It would make the game to easy.

hardwired
28th Aug 2010, 12:34
I dont like games that try to impress me, with something thats unrealistic and over the top. For most persons over the age of 20 it got the opposite effect: You cant take it serious.
You can make something cool and realistic and some things can seem cooler, "cause" they are realistic.
Some of move of Riddik, Hitman and the backstab of Thief are just realistic and pretty effective and by the same time cruel and/or elegant (see Garrett).
It still doesnt seem adult to think thats cool, but I clearly prefer that.

Thats a real problem with all the Hollywood-movies and games that try to copy that. Even dramas seem often silly, cause they are theatralic, just out of touch from what a adult intelligent person see as realitiy or a (alternative) reality in the future.
But reality can be so much more beautyfull in a realistic way, without all the phrases, theatralic kind of talking and
elevated music in the background.
Thats why i just rolled my eyes, as i heard the woman in the E3-trailer screaming for Adam and some of the things the characters say and how the say it.

Besides it really isnt good for the immersion or "kind" of immersion (so specificly the type of 1st), if you always see long animation. They become old after a few times and you just start to wait and maybe be angry, cause it takes long and irritates you.
And You dont have to wait for the release of the game, if some games allready did it similiar.

Overall you still can like it, for some games it just fits.
But its not like Deus Ex.
And nooooo, you dont have to copy the old one but you can expand the universe (so no theatralic voiceacting and music) and advance the gameplay (Riddik-instantkills and no 3person cinematic movements, without making). something totally different. In that case, you can still make another game with a different title or a spin off, so its clear, that its not a real prequel or sequel from a great franchise.

Seriosly: They are just enough unrealistic games with an alternative "hollywooresc" kind of world.

Khaeru
28th Aug 2010, 14:04
@hardwired you may find this article interesting http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/07/27/the-psychology-of-immersion-in-video-games/comment-page-1/#comment-3396
Basically what 1st person mode lovers are asking for is to mantain their spatial presence in the game (if i got it right). Still, devs are going to mix both tp and fp modes and what's worst is that takedowns can't be "controlled". So i agree with you saying cinematics can become tedious and meaningless after a while (especially because they don't seem to offer a great challenge), but i'd always go for TPM instead of FPM (to see why check the last post in the article by Alex). As i've already repeated many times DE shall let the player switch from fpm to tpm whenever the player wants, so i'm going for "Still not sure" 'cause takedowns are one mode sided and the player has no role in them.

hardwired
28th Aug 2010, 14:53
Thank you for the article.

I think its anyway senseless to argue about it (ok, at that point I should ask myself, why I actually do that...),
as long as the industry works, how it works.
So they choose some popular aspects and take some "experts" (like all the poor movie/book-writers) to make something most people will like, but noone really loves (expect some people with not the best kind of taste).
Besides great artists, with taste are something unusuall in the game-industrie or they just dont have any authority, to realize their visions.
And there is no respect for franchises, so if you play a sequel from an older game, you wake up in a total different world.

I dont know it, but Im sure Spector and his team got a lot more freedom to create their own thing and what makes the first game great is the love they put into it.
Maybe Im just lucky they hadnt the resources for a succesful composer and better voiceactors and they were technological limited. But I cant imagine, that the series would be lookin and sounding like it does in DXHR, if the original team would be behind it (or an better one, then Eidos Montreal) and the publisher wouldnt control the whole
process.

The changes in design, music and voiceacting are still my main issues (which includes ludicrous actions and animations). Its not what you expect from Deus Ex-Sequel, thats stringent (could be better in some ways, for sure) in comparsion to its precursor. Im quite happy, that not every Scifi-movie is like Blade Runner, Ghost in the Shell or Matrix even if they have their strengths. DXHR is different and to near to some movies/games, who got weeknesses I really dont like and I simply dont expect in the world of Deus Ex.

Im still shocked if I remember the E3-trailer and the leaked gameplayfootage, which isnt much different.

Damn, I wanted to stop to write about games, even DXHR is the only one, and spent my time with things I overall like. :hmm:

BTW: Isnt there any video from the policestation-demonstration at the gamescom?

Pinky_Powers
28th Aug 2010, 17:35
BTW: Isnt there any video from the policestation-demonstration at the gamescom?

Nope. :(

Slack
28th Aug 2010, 23:32
Major factors that made the success of Deus Ex 1
is that it is highly immersive (and one way of achieving this is to not keep changing the camera as if it were a movie, we see the situation in first-person, raw and naked, only in moments of conversation is that the situation changes), has a story that has
content and can be interpreted in various points of
view, and it gives freedom to the player and the most important in
My opinion: the moments when you have low health,
only a few bullets and some grenades and have to kill
a whole army and you get hours and hours tasting
that situation, setting a strategy ... ahhhhh no
make more games like that nowadays!

ELNoscho
31st Aug 2010, 23:17
Well i voted for "3rd person takedowns" but i think they could also be done in first person. First person is always more immersive in my opinion IF you get a feeling for the body you actually playin. Thats one of the problems i have with first person, the guy you are normally playin doesn't have a body or feet so if i have to decide between a 3rd person fully animated guy or ah 2 handed crosshair i'll take the 3rd person. Especially in this type of game a lot of these (missing?)animations could somehow ruin my experience. (based on the Trailer)

I also had a Problem with one of the Trailers, where Adam dragged a body but her were no Animation or well some reaction...he pulled him with his mind or...?
Well lets get to the point... I fear Adam will not have a Body in first person so i'll take the 3rd person takedowns with pleasure but if he is going to have a full first person view i would rather play the hole game in first person




PS: I'm new, so hi :flowers:

Esnuk
31st Aug 2010, 23:27
after seeing the gameplay, I absolutely love the third person takedowns. The way the camera switches from first to third person and vice versa is very well done IMO.

I agree. :cool:

xAcerbusx
1st Sep 2010, 01:14
There's quite enough first-person dreck on the market, thank you very much.

It's refreshing to see some of Eidos Montréal's excellent character designs after controlling all these faceless space marine characters in so many current-gen FPS games, and it seems that the third-person segments really add to the tension of infiltration. I would also add that when I played Deus Ex and DE: IW upon release, I felt the only thing they lacked was a third-person function. This is just a natural extension of the core game design.

Bravo, I say.

Anasumtj
1st Sep 2010, 01:43
Because the first person perspective is employed solely for faceless space marines. Furthermore, EM retaining the focused perspective of the first two games would have been an attempt to cash in on said faceless space marine sensation.

Great job.

(Note: It's actually modern marines that are all the rage these days, sir.)

lithos
1st Sep 2010, 14:20
First post, might as well make it a good one. Failing that, a long one.


About quicktime events, the problems I see:

1) Like said above, they get very tedious after a while. I'm sure anyone who's played Assassin's Creed 1/2, where they work almost identically can attest to this.

Spot on. Ubisoft seems to have one novel idea per game, and then stretch it out for five or six hours (they're the only dev I'm glad doesn't make longer games,) and never seem to playtest it much, because after about three times of doing something, it gets boring, fast. The "Mark & Execute" in SC: C. The technicals that always overtook you and blocked the road in FC2. The "Alpha Limiter Off" mode in HAWX. And the wristblades in Assassins Creed. I hate Ubisoft games. Note, when talking about Ubisoft, I always use the term "game" in the loosest possible sense. You don't control their characters. You merely offer them suggestions.

The takedowns aren't gameplay. They are, at best, quick-time events, or at worst, cut scenes. Actually, more like the latter since once you initiate the takedown, it seems, you do nothing until it's done.

What do you call a sequence in a game we're you can see characters, but cannot control them? A cut scene. If you want to make movies, try moving to Hollywood. The original DX had four cut scenes in it - conversations don't count, nor does watching Jock's chopper take off at the end of every stage.


2) It hardly appears difficult, at least in the environments they've shown, to get the jump on multiple enemies.

From the amount of press I've heard about the takedowns, I'm betting they'll be lampshaded. My guess is that there'll be things like:

* Guys standing under sky lights - HINT, HINT.
* Sections of wall that look exactly like the other sections of wall where you first used the rip-through-wall takedown - NUDGE, NUDGE.
* And, of course, the ol' favourite, the classic that just has to be in there: Bad Guy Taking A Leak - WINK, WINK.


4) Not to mention I can already see this being very awkward if you're performing a takedown on one enemy while another can see you. Does he just wait for you to finish? Or does he shoot you while you're powerless to do anything? Either way it doesn't work.

5) In fact, the whole similarity to Assassin's Creed worries me, which is almost the perfect example of a game with derivative, repetitive and generally skill-less combat. I sincerely hope it isn't a model that they're trying to emulate.

Ah, the memories of Assassins Creed. Because Ubi had such a hard-on for the "OMG kewl animation wristblade kilz" thing, nothing broke immersion like what happened with those. You walk up to a guy who's standing six inches away from a guard. You reach up, grab his mouth. Stab his kidneys. Even with your hand over his mouth, he makes a pretty loud "HRRRRNNNNG!" which is a rather suspicious noise. Despite the fact some random stranger has grab someone from behind and made a stabbing motion, which results in that someone crying out in and ending up motionless on the ground, the guard still waits until this little animation is all over until he finally goes "Huh?" and saunters casually over.

This all had to happen because a) Ubi said: "OMG diz iz so kewl u hav 2 wathc it!" b) the guard has to be impossibly blind to what's just happened to artificially reinforce how much of a bad-arse Altair is, because god knows they couldn't write it into the game worth a damn. (Sidenote: Question: If you're in a machine that can make you replay the memories of your 12th century, Arabic ancestor and bestow him with every single trait and skill he had, why don't you have his accent?)

That's what I thought when I heard HR would have these takedowns. I thought Ubisoft and Eidos employees must end in the same bar in downtown Montreal on a Friday night. Maybe Ubisoft gets Eidos drunk and, while Eidos' inhibitions are down, gets them to do strange things, abnormal things, things they wouldn't do sober...like try to pass off cut scenes as gameplay.

There needs to be some sort of support group for victims of this sort of thing.

Look, there are two things that are the pillars of game design. Interactivity, and Immersiveness. The two I's. People may ***** about the baton's effect in Deus Ex as be cheesily simple, but I found it much more immersive and interactive than the takedowns in Assassins Creed. Why? Because it's easier to equate the click of a mouse with a simple swing of a club than it is to equate the same click to a complex set of maneuvres that play out on screen, with no further input from the player. And if you hit the NPC, it felt great, because you accomplished something. Or it felt bad if you missed.

With the takedowns, once you initiate one, it'll work. No sense of accomplishment. And the jarring sense of knowing that bad-arse takedown is done through no fault of your own. If there's a chance that it may not work, it's just random, flip-a-coin crap that has no place in modern gaming.

Interactive. It's not. It's not controlling Adam Jensen (nice name, although the first name is weighted with enough Christian symbolism to make Dan Brown choke on one of his eight dozen copies of Foucault's Pendulum.) It's simply telling him to do something, and he does it. Breaks the immersion that we are the character. The jerk to third person doesn't help. It smacks of merely making something to look good in the trailers, or to keep the Ritalin kiddies attentions focused between doses.

The Two I's. If I wanted to watch awesome martial arts action, I'd got get a DVD of Enter The Dragon. Games aren't movies. The debate over whether or not games are art is a stupid - of course they bloody well are - except the art of games lies not in flashy visuals, big-name actors, sweeping orchestral sound tracks, or a marketing budget that would make Jose Ramos-Horta weep.

It lies in gameplay. Interactivity and immersiveness. Gameplay is the only measure of a game. All the rest are just garnishes.

Fluffis
1st Sep 2010, 14:57
First post, might as well make it a good one. Failing that, a long one.


Nice to see you catching on to the forum standard so quickly. :D

But don't worry; it was a good one. A really good one.

WildcatPhoenix
1st Sep 2010, 15:23
Games aren't movies. The debate over whether or not games are art is a stupid - of course they bloody well are - except the art of games lies not in flashy visuals, big-name actors, sweeping orchestral sound tracks, or a marketing budget that would make Jose Ramos-Horta weep.

It lies in gameplay. Interactivity and immersiveness. Gameplay is the only measure of a game. All the rest are just garnishes.

A...f**kin...MEN, brother!

Welcome to the boards. More sensible, articulate posts like this are always welcome!

Ashpolt
1st Sep 2010, 15:31
First post, might as well make it a good one. Failing that, a long one.

I like you already!


That's what I thought when I heard HR would have these takedowns. I thought Ubisoft and Eidos employees must end in the same bar in downtown Montreal on a Friday night. Maybe Ubisoft gets Eidos drunk and, while Eidos' inhibitions are down, gets them to do strange things, abnormal things, things they wouldn't do sober...like try to pass off cut scenes as gameplay.

It may or may not surprise you to find out that a chunk of the DXHR development team are former employees of Ubisoft Montreal, who made Assassin's Creed (as I'm sure you know), so despite the humorous tone, this suggestion probably isn't too far off the mark.


The jerk to third person doesn't help. It smacks of merely making something to look good in the trailers, or to keep the Ritalin kiddies attentions focused between doses.

Have you heard David Anfossi's justification for the third person takedowns? They're a "reward," apparently, for getting close enough to the enemy to use them. Again, I think you're pretty much spot on the money: EM either think we're all ADD-afflicted teenagers, or realise we're not but only care in the slightest about this other market: either way, they think their target audience needs something OMG KEWL to get them to play.

Pretentious Old Man.
1st Sep 2010, 16:08
But Ashpolt, theindustryhasgrownupweareabusinessitsnotourplaceasconsumerstoarguewitheidosmontrealbecausethey'reprofessionalsandweareonlystupidgamerswhatthehelldoweknowaboutanythingwejustlongforhalycondayswithoutrecognisingthattheindustryhasgrownupandthereismoremoneytobehadfromtwitswho'lljustbuyanyoldcrap.

lithos
1st Sep 2010, 16:24
Nice to see you catching on to the forum standard so quickly. :D

But don't worry; it was a good one. A really good one.


A...f**kin...MEN, brother!

Welcome to the boards. More sensible, articulate posts like this are always welcome!


I like you already!

Cheers. Didn't realise there was a formal intro thread, but I'm not that formal.

Two things you need to know about me: I'm verbose, I really, really hate Ubisoft, I'm cynical, and I'm not good at numerical estimates.


It may or may not surprise you to find out that a chunk of the DXHR development team are former employees of Ubisoft Montreal, who made Assassin's Creed (as I'm sure you know), so despite the humorous tone, this suggestion probably isn't too far off the mark.

Oh sweet heavens, no. No, I didn't know that. Assassins Creed really was a terrible piece of digital media (not gonna say "game.") Most Ubisoft games are. The only one in recent memory that was decent was Far Cry 2, which, save for the NPC vehicles and their exclusive sixth gear, was great. Why? Because they tried to make a minimalist game, rather than a complex game (which always ends up the same way: THE XBOX ONLY HAS ABOUT TWELVE BUTTONS. So you get all that context-sensitive excrement, which I didn't like, not even in Ocarina of Time.)

And hence you get what we've got in DX: instructions popping up on the screen every time you get near a door saying "PRESS E TO OPEN DOOR." Does no one RTFM anymore? Are they trying not to get sued by people who think that their game is not sensitive to the needs of those with short-term memory loss?

Pretty much every other gamer I've come across loves AC and hated FC2, so I'm urinating uphill here, go figure.

AC was repetitive, a terrible port, with a horrendous interface (it took about a minute and two loading screens to exit the game, for crying out loud.) Hold down three buttons, and you're in auto-pilot. Character automatically runs, jumps and climbs. The only challenges came artificially - from being swamped by enemies, or from poor design, with your character not ducking into a hiding spot because the context-sensitivity thing hadn't kicked in because you three millimetres and two degrees off from being on the right spot.

The best bit of the whole game was the disclaimer at the beginning ("Seriously, I've got, like, two Muslim friends who're cool with this. For real.") I suppose the other bit was how the hell they managed to not get effigies of Yves Guillemot burned in the streets, since the entire game is basically you playing a 12th-Century al-Qaeda operative. You're Muslim, you kill the white, Christian invaders of the Middle East using unconventional warfare tactics specifically designed to inflict terror upon them...I imagine Ubi's lawyers were on holidays.

It was the developers showing off, not thinking what the player might like. I miss the days when John Romero was the exception, not the rule.

But, really, they let these Ubi-refugees work on it? 'Scuse me. I've got a date with a fistful of sleeping pills and a bottle of Bundy.


Have you heard David Anfossi's justification for the third person takedowns? They're a "reward," apparently, for getting close enough to the enemy to use them. Again, I think you're pretty much spot on the money: EM either think we're all ADD-afflicted teenagers, or realise we're not but only care in the slightest about this other market: either way, they think their target audience needs something OMG KEWL to get them to play.

Getting close is reward enough. Failing that, knocking 'em out is reward enough. That's all. Good game design is its own reward, dammit.

I think becoming Bigger Than Jesu- er, Bigger Than Hollywood has been the worst thing for the gaming industry. That inevitably attracts lawyers and accountants, and those guys ain't gonna let the risk-taking that happens in the movie industry happen in gaming. Oh no. You appeal to the idiots, because chances are they're less fiscally sensible and have poor pattern recognition. Think Michael Bay, not Martin Scorcese.

No one wants to make a game for the hardcore gamers anymore - instead every game has to appeal to the widest possible audience (I believe it's called the "lowest common denominator" in mathematics,) instead of supremely pleasing a segment. And developers seem to think they're making games for themselves, not the gamers.

And, hell, if you ride the coattails of an established franchise, congratulations! You just saved the marketing department $940,000 dollars!

Fluffis
1st Sep 2010, 16:45
I think I'm in love...

Pretentious Old Man.
1st Sep 2010, 16:56
Cheers. Didn't realise there was a formal intro thread, but I'm not that formal.

Two things you need to know about me: I'm verbose, I really, really hate Ubisoft, I'm cynical, and I'm not good at numerical estimates.



Oh sweet heavens, no. No, I didn't know that. Assassins Creed really was a terrible piece of digital media (not gonna say "game.") Most Ubisoft games are. The only one in recent memory that was decent was Far Cry 2, which, save for the NPC vehicles and their exclusive sixth gear, was great. Why? Because they tried to make a minimalist game, rather than a complex game (which always ends up the same way: THE XBOX ONLY HAS ABOUT TWELVE BUTTONS. So you get all that context-sensitive excrement, which I didn't like, not even in Ocarina of Time.)

And hence you get what we've got in DX: instructions popping up on the screen every time you get near a door saying "PRESS E TO OPEN DOOR." Does no one RTFM anymore? Are they trying not to get sued by people who think that their game is not sensitive to the needs of those with short-term memory loss?

Pretty much every other gamer I've come across loves AC and hated FC2, so I'm urinating uphill here, go figure.

AC was repetitive, a terrible port, with a horrendous interface (it took about a minute and two loading screens to exit the game, for crying out loud.) Hold down three buttons, and you're in auto-pilot. Character automatically runs, jumps and climbs. The only challenges came artificially - from being swamped by enemies, or from poor design, with your character not ducking into a hiding spot because the context-sensitivity thing hadn't kicked in because you three millimetres and two degrees off from being on the right spot.

The best bit of the whole game was the disclaimer at the beginning ("Seriously, I've got, like, two Muslim friends who're cool with this. For real.") I suppose the other bit was how the hell they managed to not get effigies of Yves Guillemot burned in the streets, since the entire game is basically you playing a 12th-Century al-Qaeda operative. You're Muslim, you kill the white, Christian invaders of the Middle East using unconventional warfare tactics specifically designed to inflict terror upon them...I imagine Ubi's lawyers were on holidays.

It was the developers showing off, not thinking what the player might like. I miss the days when John Romero was the exception, not the rule.

But, really, they let these Ubi-refugees work on it? 'Scuse me. I've got a date with a fistful of sleeping pills and a bottle of Bundy.



Getting close is reward enough. Failing that, knocking 'em out is reward enough. That's all. Good game design is its own reward, dammit.

I think becoming Bigger Than Jesu- er, Bigger Than Hollywood has been the worst thing for the gaming industry. That inevitably attracts lawyers and accountants, and those guys ain't gonna let the risk-taking that happens in the movie industry happen in gaming. Oh no. You appeal to the idiots, because chances are they're less fiscally sensible and have poor pattern recognition. Think Michael Bay, not Martin Scorcese.

No one wants to make a game for the hardcore gamers anymore - instead every game has to appeal to the widest possible audience (I believe it's called the "lowest common denominator" in mathematics,) instead of supremely pleasing a segment. And developers seem to think they're making games for themselves, not the gamers.

And, hell, if you ride the coattails of an established franchise, congratulations! You just saved the marketing department $940,000 dollars!

http://www.atomix.vg/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/bob_kotick.jpg

lithos
2nd Sep 2010, 13:50
Holy mother of god. When I saw that photo, I thought the guitroller or whatever it's called was actually wrapped around Bobby's neck.

Now there's a pleasant visual Freudian slip.

Also took me a while to figure out what you were getting at, then remembered he's the man who rather pay lawyers than devs.

LostinTransplantation
3rd Sep 2010, 18:57
So the two big ones seem to be:

1. Recharging health: whether it be for automatically recharging or other solutions (ideally ones where you never have to backtrack), at some point, maybe beginning with halo ce's hybrid system, games started to leave healthpacks behind. and i must say i was always disappointed when a new game stuck to the traditional method - imo healthpacks are in almost all cases either...
- a source for frustration because even when you're playing on the level of difficulty that suits you best a healthpack system can still catapult you two levels up when you have to enter a new arena with only 30 percent health -> one overlooked balancing mistake (badly placed supplies) can be gamebreaking.
...or
- obsolete, as was the case for me in deus ex 1. i never had to use those things, when mistakes caused me to get gunned down i simply loaded up the quicksave from right before the encounter and found a better way to master the situation. i repeated this tactic over the course of the entire game and consequently had to rarely use any medkits even though otherwise the difficulty i was playing on suited me perfectly. the absence of recharging health complicated the gameplay without adding anything positive.
I suppose the fear about recharging health stems from the typical current third person shooter: no matter how deadly the enemies are, you're going to beat ANY of those games by simply popping out of cover, killing as many enemies as you can before your screen gets all red (PLEASE eidos, don't do this), hiding back into cover, waiting a couple seconds and beginning anew. any game that can be beaten in this manner should be prevented from ever being made by time travel, thus freeing developing talent up for a better purpose, i agree one hundred percent with the critisizm all the gears-clones receive.
however i don't think that HR will suffer from this ridiculous flaw since you're mostly making your way through close quarters, inside buildings or in confusing maze-like structures you can be attacked from any side at any time, taking away the element of safety that allows for the pop out, shoot, pop back in - tactic to be so successful.

2. third person camera moments:
- the instant kill maneuvers simply wouldn't work as well in first person. take for example the double stab move, in first person you wouldn't see a thing of the epic takedown cause a realistic FOV would exclude most of the action. seriously, imagine you were adam, reenact the trailer right now - it would be awkward and to some people motion sickness inducing rather than "immersive".
- the ladder climbing. with this one i actually agree, can be done in first person, works perfectly fine in crysis and actually increases immersion. 3rd person is uncalled for here.
- cover system. a good point made for a lean machanic / against taking cover + 3rd person is that in real life you can't look around edges, cover mechanics give you a superpower that usually isn't justified in any way. however here's proof that that doesn't need to be the case in HR:

http://www.ingame.de/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/deus-ex-3/deus-ex-3-screenshot-17.jpg

as you can see adam is peaking around the corner just a little bit and yes, we can still see more than he theoretically could but it's a minor exaggeration that, inside of a video game, really shouldn't distract anyone.
i'm not saying HR wouldn't have made a great F.P.exclusiveS., i love "consistency" and all. but if you think about it from an unbiased point of view i don't think you can call the developers traitors for a few decisions that CAN be reasonably explained and defended.

DeusWhatever
3rd Sep 2010, 19:42
as you can see adam is peaking around the corner just a little bit and yes, we can still see more than he theoretically could but it's a minor exaggeration that, inside of a video game, really shouldn't distract anyone.
i'm not saying HR wouldn't have made a great F.P.exclusiveS., i love "consistency" and all. but if you think about it from an unbiased point of view i don't think you can call the developers traitors for a few decisions that CAN be reasonably explained and defended.

I get your point here, still i dont think its a good choice. I think it looks great in this picture, still im pretty shure it would be awful ingame since if you dont use some automated-takedown move from this position getting back in first-person with the need to aim will be pretty annyoing due to the perspective-switch.

Still i guess i cant do anything about it anymore now, so i will wait. I just hope they dont screw up completely by making the cover system "sticky". The only thing i would tolerate is "press A too cover" whilste the cover will only be activated as long as you press a. Still the new Cover-System in games degrades games to a "whack-a-mole"-gameplay. (I know this is SP but just imagine how boring games with a sticky-cover-system would be in multiplayer ...)

PenguinsFriend
3rd Sep 2010, 20:25
I get your point here, still i dont think its a good choice. I think it looks great in this picture...

My signature refers to the pic you are saying looks good - the guard looks like he has cow hocks :)

WildcatPhoenix
3rd Sep 2010, 20:39
Yeah, I absolutely hate the character design on that enemy NPC. "Fat S&M enthusiast with a leaf blower" is a perfect description.

Adam's pose and clothing look much better, but I still am not sold on the "hey look, I've got a detachable camera that lets me see around corners" approach to gameplay.

DeusWhatever
3rd Sep 2010, 20:59
My signature refers to the pic you are saying looks good - the guard looks like he has cow hocks :)

Well i just meant the perspective. The Screenshot looks pretty crappy indeed, not just because of the design, also bad textures, no aa or af etc. (not to mention the "the cover here makes total sense"-effect due to placing a random object in a room so it supports your cover-system ...)

OT:
Wow i just had a WTF moment, Duke Dukem Forever is coming, and by what i read on kotaku they are doing it right, they seem to be making a classic Duke-Dukem ^^
So even if Deus Ex will eventually fail to impress me, the Duke can't (not anymore at least ^^)
He even urinates in first-person. Thats what i would call immersive.

xAcerbusx
4th Sep 2010, 07:05
Too much first-person in modern games, anyways. I appreciate what the other games brought to the table, but those games already exist. No reason to make them again.

The third-person seems well-implemented, it doesn't make the movement jerky or the gun-handling inaccurate. Give it a chance.

Pinky_Powers
4th Sep 2010, 08:25
On the issue of third-person, I came to terms with what EM was dong fairly quickly when I realized it didn't detract from the way I played the original Deus Ex. All it did was make stealth more applicable in more environments.
The thing I like about that screenshot (http://www.ingame.de/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/deus-ex-3/deus-ex-3-screenshot-17.jpg) Mr. LostinT posted, is how close-in the camera is. It almost doesn't feel like third-person at all. It doesn't suddenly look like you're playing Splinter Cell. R6Vegas did this to great effect as well. The Camera moves to third-person, but it still handles like it's in First.

As for the takedowns... there's just no justification for third-person. Melee takedowns in general are a wonderful thing in Stealth games. But it should be in first-person if it's a first-person game.
And I'm fully against being able to squelch two guys in one go. ...unless using something like the Claymore Aug. It's not that a trained fighter shouldn't be able to take on two foes at once, but this is a game. The point to a game is to give the control to the player. The longer you take that away, the less of a game it is. Watching Adam take out two guys without any further input from the player is overkill.
I personally think the Melee should work a bit like Batman Arkham Asylum. Not to the extent that it becomes a brawler, but just enough to allow the player to direct his takedowns. He should have to control Jensen into assaulting two soldiers standing next to each other. It mustn't be as simple as "press one button and sit back and watch Adam go".

Irate_Iguana
4th Sep 2010, 10:45
Too much first-person in modern games, anyways. I appreciate what the other games brought to the table, but those games already exist. No reason to make them again.

There is just as much 3rd person as 1st person. Cover shooters with regen health are a dime a dozen nowadays. HR isn't trying to be fresh on all fronts, they are following quite a few industry standards.



The Camera moves to third-person, but it still handles like it's in First.

And you still get to see a huge portion of the level that you shouldn't be able to see. It makes stealth way more easy than it should be. You are safely behind cover, nobody can see you or detect you and you ca scout out your approach.



And I'm fully against being able to squelch two guys in one go. ...unless using something like the Claymore Aug.

Agreed. One of the biggest challenges that the stealth player can face is two or more guards. A single guard has an enormous number of blind spots. He is essentially helpless prey. When you get two guards the number of blind spots decreases enormously. It becomes much more of a challenge to take them both out quickly and silently. If you take away that challenge by introducing "combo takedowns" the challenge of having multiple guards falls away.

Pinky_Powers
4th Sep 2010, 11:05
And you still get to see a huge portion of the level that you shouldn't be able to see. It makes stealth way more easy than it should be. You are safely behind cover, nobody can see you or detect you and you ca scout out your approach.

I don't believe the challenge of stealth should be about what the player can and cannot see. The best stealth games have always been a challenge due to the number of enemies, their patrol, and the perceptiveness of the AI. You play a game like Thief or Splinter Cell, it doesn't matter that one is in first-person, or the other in Third, the real challenges are the same; remaining undetected while you take out the enemy.

Red
4th Sep 2010, 11:31
I'm counting on K^2 for the solution of 3rd person problem. :)

Fluffis
4th Sep 2010, 12:44
I don't believe the challenge of stealth should be about what the player can and cannot see. The best stealth games have always been a challenge due to the number of enemies, their patrol, and the perceptiveness of the AI. You play a game like Thief or Splinter Cell, it doesn't matter that one is in first-person, or the other in Third, the real challenges are the same; remaining undetected while you take out the enemy.

Or, you know... not taking them out. Yes, the challenge is the same, but in FP it's a lot more intense and challenging.

Donvermicelli
4th Sep 2010, 21:47
read through this thread and all I can say is this:
Swimming was very much a usable skill in DX1 especially in HongKong, the channels were filled with underwater tunnels that held aug and weapon upgrades. It would take a lot of biocells and/or re-breathers without the swimming skill. It was also usable in a couple of other places but still it made SENSE as a skill that a human can have. RPG element or not this gave immersion and actually made every single play through unique.

Als thirdperson in Deusex... From what I've seen it doesn't only sound bad it is, gives you more of a Splintercell feel than anything else. That wouldn't be a problem if this was a Splintercell game, but it's not. This is Deusex.
And no I do not want a DX1 clone, what I want is a game that features the same elements of the first and has justifications for each element used in a prequel for being there. Hover droids from IW wouldn't make sense if they were in a DX:HR game since this is supposed to take place before DX1 where no such thing existed yet.

IOOI
5th Sep 2010, 03:37
I hate it, I hate it, I hate it!

Takedowns are replacing Player controlled Melee Combat - what I thought I would see improved in this third title. Takedowns are definitely an abomination for me.


That's all. Now I'll cuddle my teddy and go to sleep.

xAcerbusx
5th Sep 2010, 06:42
There is just as much 3rd person as 1st person. Cover shooters with regen health are a dime a dozen nowadays. HR isn't trying to be fresh on all fronts, they are following quite a few industry standards.

Actually, I already had this argument over at the Thief 4 forum. I listed off every game released so far in 2010, and first-person-perspective games still outnumbered third-person by over half. Check it out:


2010 in Video Games:

First Person Shooters
MAG
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. - Call of Pripyat
BioShock 2
Alien vs. Predator
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Metro 2033
Perfect Dark HD
Red Steel 2
Singularity
Sniper: Ghost Warrior
Battlefield 1943
Fallout: New Vegas
Halo: Reach
Medal of Honor (2010)
F.E.A.R. 3
Goldeneye 007 (Wii)
Call of Duty: Black Ops
The Agency: Covert Ops

Third-Person Shooters
Resident Evil 5 Gold
Vanquish
Quantum Theory
Red Dead Redemption (Sort of)
Kane & Lynch 2
Crackdown 2
Army of Two 2
Lost Planet 2


I mean... they're making a Halo and Call of Duty game every year... as a matter of fact, last year they came out with two Call of Duty games. I, for one, am getting more than a little weary of it. FPS was overused in 1999 and it's only proliferating more with each passing year.

mad825
5th Sep 2010, 07:47
Mass Effect 2 should be somewhere on that list btw and Battlefield 1943 in 2010? O.o.

but any way FPS are bound to be more popular for the industry and the consumer alike because the graphics can be slightly improved without experiencing a major drop in Frames per sec

Bushmonster
5th Sep 2010, 18:02
ive never been a fan of third person and takedowns look lame and gimmicky

third peron will make the stealth a bit too easy imo because it gives you an omnipotent view of your enemies position and after that point getting the patrols of npc's in mind just makes all a bit simple

Shralla
5th Sep 2010, 18:41
Alright, I have to say I'm really ******* sick of hearing people say "hurr third-person will make stealth too easy."

Yeah, because I'm sure that the ENTIRE GAME HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED AROUND THE IDEA OF THIRD-PERSON COVER-BASED STEALTH, INCLUDING ALL BALANCING AND AI BEHAVIOR. Also, I'm equally sure that you've played it so you could possibly have any kind of idea AT ALL as to how easy the game is.

Bushmonster
5th Sep 2010, 18:45
Alright, I have to say I'm really ******* sick of hearing people say "hurr third-person will make stealth too easy."

Yeah, because I'm sure that the ENTIRE GAME HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED AROUND THE IDEA OF THIRD-PERSON COVER-BASED STEALTH, INCLUDING ALL BALANCING AND AI BEHAVIOR. Also, I'm equally sure that you've played it so you could possibly have any kind of idea AT ALL as to how easy the game is.

did you notice the imo in my post, guess not.

Shralla
5th Sep 2010, 18:46
Except you can't possibly have an opinion about something that you've never experienced. That's called guessing.

Irate_Iguana
5th Sep 2010, 18:50
Except you can't possibly have an opinion about something that you've never experienced. That's called guessing.

As much guessing as saying that everything will be fine.

Bushmonster
5th Sep 2010, 18:51
there is not much of a difference

i was speculating how it will be based on my opinion in games that i have experience

and another thing fallout 3 wasnt steath based but 3rd person made it a quite bit easier, because it gave me absolute knowledge of the enemies location, leaving little to rely on thought

Mindmute
5th Sep 2010, 18:56
Actually, I already had this argument over at the Thief 4 forum. I listed off every game released so far in 2010, and first-person-perspective games still outnumbered third-person by over half. Check it out:



I mean... they're making a Halo and Call of Duty game every year... as a matter of fact, last year they came out with two Call of Duty games. I, for one, am getting more than a little weary of it. FPS was overused in 1999 and it's only proliferating more with each passing year.

New Vegas is playable in 3rd person so that's one less for you 1st person list;
Battlefield_1943 was released over an year ago, not in 2010;
Mafia 2 is a 3rd person game.
Mass Effect 2 is missing from your list.


Your list is also only considering shooters. DX:HR isn't a shooter, it's a RPG-Action hybrid game, so it'd be fair to consider other types of games for your ratio.

But even without those and just the ammendments I made above the ratio switches to 16-10, making the margin a LOT smaller than you'd like to paint it.

xAcerbusx
5th Sep 2010, 21:30
Your list is also only considering shooters.

...and Mass Effect 2 isn't a shooter. It's an RPG / shooter / whatever else. Applying the same logic you just applied to Fallout 3 New Vegas, it's disqualified.


But even without those and just the ammendments I made above the ratio switches to 16-10, making the margin a LOT smaller than you'd like to paint it.

Actually, it's still around 2-to-1. You see, on the third-person side, I included games that haven't even been released yet, some of which have since been pushed back to 2011 or later. Also, one must bear in mind... that 2010 has more third-person shooters than any year in recent memory. We push this little survey back even one year and the disparity gets even more cavernous.

Mindmute
5th Sep 2010, 21:38
...and Mass Effect 2 isn't a shooter. It's an RPG / shooter / whatever else. Applying the same logic you just applied to Fallout 3 New Vegas, it's disqualified.


Neither are DX:HR or Thief 4 shooters, they're also RPG-Action games, so by that logic, your whole list is disqualified, since it's irrelevant for this dicussion regarding a trend that affected DX!



We push this little survey back even one year and the disparity gets even more cavernous.

That's exactly why it's considering a growing trend, in the past year alone the number of 3rd person games shot up immensely like you commented.

xAcerbusx
5th Sep 2010, 22:22
Neither are DX:HR or Thief 4 shooters, they're also RPG-Action games, so by that logic, your whole list is disqualified, since it's irrelevant for this dicussion regarding a trend that affected DX!

We weren't talking about a trend with consequences for Deus Ex. Try to follow the discussion, rather than simply replying to a sentence at a time. I was talking about the ratio of FPS games to TPS games, because I stated that I was 'weary of all the FPS games being released'. I then illustrated this point by listing FPS games and TPS games. At no point were the consequences for DX3 discussed. The only reason it relates is because I felt it was refreshing in the current market of first-person shooter oversaturation to have Deus Ex 3 embrace a third-person viewpoint at times.


That's exactly why it's considering a growing trend, in the past year alone the number of 3rd person games shot up immensely like you commented.
Can't argue with you, there. The TPS market has grown immensely in the last year. But here's the thing: Third-person shooters have only started to rise in popularity over the last couple years. On the other hand, the market has been oversaturated with first-person shooters since the late '90s at the very least. It's time to embrace a different formula, in my view.

Mindmute
5th Sep 2010, 22:37
We weren't talking about a trend with consequences for Deus Ex. Try to follow the discussion, rather than simply replying to a sentence at a time. I was talking about the ratio of FPS games to TPS games, because I stated that I was 'weary of all the FPS games being released'. I then illustrated this point by listing FPS games and TPS games. At no point were the consequences for DX3 discussed. The only reason it relates is because I felt it was refreshing in the current market of first-person shooter oversaturation to have Deus Ex 3 embrace a third-person viewpoint at times.


This is a board about DX:HR though, people were discussing this phenomenom in light of the DX:HR situation.

Even the thread is about DX:HR specifically, so I'm not to blame for assuming that your comment'd follow the topic of the thread. That's why I commented your list wasn't relevant as long as it includes only shooters and not other action games.




Can't argue with you, there. The TPS market has grown immensely in the last year. But here's the thing: Third-person shooters have only started to rise in popularity over the last couple years. On the other hand, the market has been oversaturated with first-person shooters since the late '90s at the very least. It's time to embrace a different formula, in my view.

No arguements about that here either, FP and TP can be just as enjoyable provided they are done right. What people are complaining about regarding the takedowns is that they lead to frequent changes in the ongoing perspective of the game. It's an awkward design decision that apparently is based around a "Let's reward the player with a cool shot of himself" philosophy rather than putting the game as it's own reward.