PDA

View Full Version : After seeing the gameplay leak are you buying?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 03:41
For me? Day one purchase. If I had never heard of Deus Ex it would be amazing, but on top of that, it appears to be a worthy successor to the original (so far). We can at least tell it's better than Invisible War.

As a huge Deus Ex fan, I can say it's done enough right that I must have it, and I hope they do even more right before it comes out. Keep up the great work EM.

Can you believe we're getting a real, big budget sequel to Deus Ex? It's like a dream come true.

Also Warren Spector said he may be making a spiritual successor in the future, so hopefully he could apply what he learned from the Invisible War tragedy!

It's a good time to be a Deus Ex fan, I never could have imagined that the sequel would get such a long amount of time and such excellent production values to be made. This is amazing.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 03:51
Undoubtedly. The only thing that could possibly make me not preorder it is hearing conflicting things about the length of the game. If it's a legit thirty hours, I'll even camp out overnight.

Invictus Sol
21st Jun 2010, 03:56
Undoubtedly. The only thing that could possibly make me not preorder it is hearing conflicting things about the length of the game. If it's a legit thirty hours, I'll even camp out overnight.

I've seen enough now that I feel I at least need to play the game, and not with the snivelling caveat that I'll only purchase it from the bargain bin, blah blah. It would take some disastrous news to prevent me from buying at this point.

ArcR
21st Jun 2010, 04:04
These aren't the best poll options. You basicly have Yes, Maybe, No. You need some inbetweens.

-Absolutely will
-Very Likely
-On the fence
-Unlikely
-Won't

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 04:11
These aren't the best poll options. You basicly have Yes, Maybe, No. You need some inbetweens.

-Absolutely will
-Very Likely
-On the fence
-Unlikely
-Won't

I really don't care for that much detail.

ArcR
21st Jun 2010, 04:37
I really don't care for that much detail.

...and that's how we got Invisible Wars. :rolleyes:

Slaughts208
21st Jun 2010, 04:43
Damn right I will. I'll even buy the CE.

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 04:44
...and that's how we got Invisible Wars. :rolleyes:

Stupidest comment anyone could have posted. My poll isn't going to change the game moron. Grow up.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 04:45
Stupidest comment anyone could have posted. My poll isn't going to change the game moron. Grow up.

Umm. His post was hysterical. And definitely not meant to be taken that seriously.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 04:53
that gameplay was more awesome than this

http://fc00.deviantart.com/fs6/i/2005/064/4/7/Bird_by_qubik.jpg

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 04:55
Not me.

It's basically Mass Effect 2 with some easy mode stealth moves - apparently.

I'll play it, but I'm not supporting the death of the games industry AND one of my favorite game series.

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 05:05
There should really be a "Provisional Day One purchase provided a few key areas are polished/improved" option. I like what I see so far, but there were a few nagging bits of the gameplay demo that left me wondering whether it was an incomplete feature or "working as intended".


Not me.

It's basically Mass Effect 2 with some easy mode stealth moves - apparently.

I'll play it, but I'm not supporting the death of the games industry AND one of my favorite game series.

Wow, really? Third person stealth and takedowns = "the death of the games industry"? Melodramatic much?

ArcR
21st Jun 2010, 05:08
Stupidest comment anyone could have posted. My poll isn't going to change the game moron. Grow up.

You didn't get it... :lol:

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:12
Well, Im must say I have been terribly worried at what game was going to be produced this time around.

With that said and after seeing the footage I am very pleasantly surprised,
A. Nice voice acting
B. First to 3rd person transition in combat seems to work well
C. That wall punch was off the hook :D
D. The freedom of choice well not seen to much was mentioned by the narrator. IE number of different paths into the warehouse etc.
E. Ol boy even sounded like JC for a bit there.
I also saw some elements of other games in there. The stealthy movement of a Splinter Cell and the on screen bubble menus of Crysis.
F. There seems to be plenty (so far) for those that were big fans of the original to bond with. I hope Im right here it's very important. If I for one can't bond the 2 games together it will be a problem.

A good friend and fellow DX'er did point out one thing to me that I wasn't paying attention to. Alot of it is cinematic. If there is a lot of this throughout the game it's going to take the play out of the gamers hands. IE press A to attack the 2 guys type thing. That type of thing would be a big kick in the nuts. But we shall see. At the moment, color me impressed and a purchaser early on. (unless something happens LOL )

LisuPL
21st Jun 2010, 05:12
Looks really nice, that I must admit.

But the 3rd person thing with auto-killing everyone seems a bit out of the place for me.

Maybe in the final game you will need enough skills to perform this with 100% success change.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 05:18
Wow, really? Third person stealth and takedowns = "the death of the games industry"? Melodramatic much?

Considering this game is inspired by ME2 more than DX, yes, easy mode cinematic 3rd person rubbish = the death of the games industry. Every time something is successful everyone else starts to rip it off. Eventually it's going to get so stupid that even our very treasured game series are going to gulp the dumb-down treatment - which is exactly what we're seeing here.

I just hope I don't live to see them murder Thief as well.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 05:18
I don't understand the complaints about the autokilling. In DX1, you pressed one mouse button, and you either shocked them unconscious or hacked them to pieces with the DTS. Here you take them down in awesome ways. I see no fundamental difference.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:18
Looks really nice, that I must admit.

But the 3rd person thing with auto-killing everyone seems a bit out of the place for me.

Maybe in the final game you will need enough skills to perform this with 100% success change.

Agree, I to could live with skill playing a part in that type of kill. I do think your skill should be maxed for such an easy way to err retire someone :D

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 05:20
You retards are the reason this stuff happens, you don't see a problem when every game uses the exact same methods to generate 'dumb ****' sales. Dumb **** meaning you, but like I said if you like it how can you see a problem with it?

Compare the dynamics to Deus Ex 1. Is it the same? For the most part? No, it's just another generic shooter now.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 05:23
Considering this game is inspired by ME2 more than DX

Can you go through ME2 without killing anyone?

Is there any sort of stealth in ME2?

Are there any branching paths in ME2?

The only ways to complete objectives differently in ME2 is through conversation options. Not through gameplay.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:23
I don't understand the complaints about the autokilling. In DX1, you pressed one mouse button, and you either shocked them unconscious or hacked them to pieces with the DTS. Here you take them down in awesome ways. I see no fundamental difference.

I don't think it's so much the auto as the way it would take place. It needs to feel like your in control of it. IE this combo does a choke out or this one does a puch out. As long as the player feels he is in control I would not have a problem. I always felt in control in DX 1. I think this is one of those things we won't know for sure untill it's in our hands so im not going to sweat it to much personally.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 05:24
I'm not bothered by the 3rd person bits. I'm a big fan of stealth games like Tenchu, MGS and Splinter Cell, so all these new elements like stealth kills and wall hugging/corner checking represent exactly what I would implement if I was making the game.

I'm not bothered by the "being taken out of the game for cutscenes and cover shooting" because I never took the original as that kind of game. It's not Half-life where the main character is just an avatar. You're controlling a unique character, not a custom character. The game should be allowed to take advantage of the strengths a unique character offers.

demon boy
21st Jun 2010, 05:27
I loved the original DX and I have waited for 10 years for them to make a sequel that takes a step forward graphically and improves the action by making the combat more flexible and exciting as well as revamping the AI. I also hoped against hope that a trully legitimate stealth path could be taken where you really feel like you are infiltrating a complex.

So far they loo 3 for 3! Highly Optimistic!

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 05:27
I don't think it's so much the auto as the way it would take place. It needs to feel like your in control of it. IE this combo does a choke out or this one does a puch out. As long as the player feels he is in control I would not have a problem. I always felt in control in DX 1. I think this is one of those things we won't know for sure untill it's in our hands so im not going to sweat it to much personally.

I think you can partially control it, but not completely. What upgrades you have/have turned on determine which you have available, but from that list of available kills I think the game chooses for you.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 05:28
You retards are the reason this stuff happens, you don't see a problem when every game uses the exact same methods to generate 'dumb ****' sales. Dumb **** meaning you, but like I said if you like it how can you see a problem with it?

Compare the dynamics to Deus Ex 1. Is it the same? For the most part? No, it's just another generic shooter now.


http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/files/images/obvious_troll.preview.jpg



2/10 try harder next time okay?

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 05:31
You retards are the reason this stuff happens, you don't see a problem when every game uses the exact same methods to generate 'dumb ****' sales. Dumb **** meaning you, but like I said if you like it how can you see a problem with it?

Compare the dynamics to Deus Ex 1. Is it the same? For the most part? No, it's just another generic shooter now.
Did you read any reports about the footage or listen to anything the speaker was saying? Part 1 was, except for first person dialog, entirely like DX1. They went through great lengths in part 2 to explain that what we were watching was about showing off the gunplay. That if they wanted to, they could've went through it in an entirely different, stealthy fashion.

It's quite sad how predispositions are blinding some.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:33
I'm not bothered by the 3rd person bits. I'm a big fan of stealth games like Tenchu, MGS and Splinter Cell, so all these new elements like stealth kills and wall hugging/corner checking represent exactly what I would implement if I was making the game.

I'm not bothered by the "being taken out of the game for cutscenes and cover shooting" because I never took the original as that kind of game. It's not Half-life where the main character is just an avatar. You're controlling a unique character, not a custom character. The game should be allowed to take advantage of the strengths a unique character offers.

I agree for the most part, I don't want to be taken out for "to many" cut scenes. Some ok. Anyway, at first I was terribly against anything that would change. I wanted the old DX with better graphics and a new story. I have evolved though to accepting new things if they enhance the experience. The problem there is I don't get to make the decision of "does it enhance the game" :D Again, something else I won't know till actually playing the game.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 05:33
I don't think it's so much the auto as the way it would take place. It needs to feel like your in control of it. IE this combo does a choke out or this one does a puch out. As long as the player feels he is in control I would not have a problem. I always felt in control in DX 1. I think this is one of those things we won't know for sure untill it's in our hands so im not going to sweat it to much personally.
I find this to be a perfectly rational way of viewing it.

Since this all conjecture as none of us have played it yet, do you think making takedowns quick time events would add a feeling of control?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 05:38
http://blog.infinitemonkeysblog.com/files/images/obvious_troll.preview.jpg



2/10 try harder next time okay?

If wanting the game to stay to the original formula makes me a troll, I'm the biggest mother fcking troll you will come across. Meanwhile, while the Halo generation (who were probably 4 or so when DE1 came out) call this atrocity 'great, innovative' or 'new' continue to dumb down games with their useless opinions that pretty much send every single genre or series into the same snorefest direction.

Congrats.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:40
I find this to be a perfectly rational way of viewing it.

Since this all conjecture as none of us have played it yet, do you think making takedowns quick time events would add a feeling of control?

I do think it can be made that way yes. I used the analogy before of some things looking like Splinter Cell. I would not be opposed to certain elements being used from something like that. Also I think after the kill being able to drag the body is still very big as far as keeping you in the game. I like it better actually than DX1 where you chucked the guy over your shoulder. hehe I wonder if there will be flys around the bodys as in DX1, I had forgotten about that ;)

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 05:42
If wanting the game to stay to the original formula makes me a troll, I'm the biggest mother fcking troll you will come across. Meanwhile, while the Halo generation (who were probably 4 or so when DE1 came out) call this atrocity 'great, innovative' or 'new' continue to dumb down games with their useless opinions that pretty much send every single genre or series into the same snorefest direction.

Congrats.


http://poeslaw.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/emperor-palpatine.jpg

Good.. Gooood release your anger.

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 05:46
Every time I hear someone bitterly complaining about DX:HR being "dumbed down for the Halo generation blah blah blah" I can't help but picture some cantankerous old man telling his grandchild how that newfangled rock'n'roll is just a bunch of screeching and noise and how they had REAL music back in his day... :rolleyes:

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 05:46
http://poeslaw.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/emperor-palpatine.jpg

Good.. Gooood release your anger.

Laugh it up, notice how you have no argument? You *try* to be funny instead of producing any valid argument to counter the fact they've dropped most of the formula that made the first great. Then again, you probably are from the Halo generation yourself, in which case I may as well continue the conversation with a wet brick.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 05:48
Laugh it up, notice how you have no argument? You *try* to be funny instead of producing any valid argument to counter the fact they've dropped most of the formula that made the first great. Then again, you probably are from the Halo generation yourself, in which case I may as well continue the conversation with a wet brick.


Why bother arguing with you? You bitter fanboiz are about as approachable as christian weston chandler.

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 05:49
You didn't get it... :lol:

Sorry I'm used to trolls....my bad. :(

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 05:52
If wanting the game to stay to the original formula makes me a troll, I'm the biggest mother fcking troll you will come across. Meanwhile, while the Halo generation (who were probably 4 or so when DE1 came out) call this atrocity 'great, innovative' or 'new' continue to dumb down games with their useless opinions that pretty much send every single genre or series into the same snorefest direction.

Congrats.

Nothing in the gameplay footage contradicts the original formula. Character interaction, passcodes, sneaking, shooting, alternate paths, vents, everything. It's all there.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 05:57
Why bother arguing with you? You bitter fanboiz are about as approachable as christian weston chandler.

Deus ex is $10, go buy it, fanboism has nothing to do with a winning formula. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.


Nothing in the gameplay footage contradicts the original formula. Character interaction, passcodes, sneaking, shooting, alternate paths, vents, everything. It's all there.

Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 05:57
I wish i was 4 when DX1 came out. I was infortunatly like 40. I have no problems with change if it enhances the game. None of us however have a voice in what direction the game has taken development wise. Our only voice comes when it's time to buy and after we have played it. They heard us after DX2 and I believe (at least I want to) that they are trying to correct what went wrong with 2. All we can do at this point is wait and converse about what we see. Don't worry Philljc we can see and understand what you hope for in the game. I would also be very happy if you got what you wanted. Would not be bad at all ;)

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 06:02
Deus ex is $10, go buy it, fanboism has nothing to do with a winning formula. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.



Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

Yes cover is totally awful. Because in real life soldiers stand or crouch, directly facing a wall then strafe slightly to the left and shoot. While their opponents deal with an extreme case of myopia.

What emphasis on killing?? Sure, in the demo he killed a couple guys. He also knocked out a couple guys. La di da.

Now please go hide under a bridge and scare goats like a good troll should

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 06:03
Deus ex is $10, go buy it, fanboism has nothing to do with a winning formula. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.



Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

All really good points, especially the one about "user error" and thats what I meant when i said whatever they do the player has to feel he is in control. Error in combat is part of that. when you go "**** I sould not have done that" that to me is still the player in control and I agree with you. Stuff like that is a strong part of what the game has to include to satisfy the "fanbase" part of the potential buyers.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 06:04
Oh look I got scolded by the swear filter :D

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:07
Yes cover is totally awful. Because in real life soldiers stand or crouch, directly facing a wall then strafe slightly to the left and shoot. While their opponents deal with an extreme case of myopia.

If you really want to deal with real life, realism and a game, you're going to get a whole other list. Stop deviating with irrelevant sht, the first game didn't need it and it was fine. Call of Juarez 2 has a perfectly fine FPS cover system that involves the player not being able to unfairly see around corners and would have been a viable option - it's clear to me with the rest of the changes that the game is targeted at people recovering from lobotomy operations.

Still going with the troll theory? Well, whatever makes you feel better. You still have no argument.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:08
I wish i was 4 when DX1 came out. I was infortunatly like 40. I have no problems with change if it enhances the game. None of us however have a voice in what direction the game has taken development wise. Our only voice comes when it's time to buy and after we have played it. They heard us after DX2 and I believe (at least I want to) that they are trying to correct what went wrong with 2. All we can do at this point is wait and converse about what we see. Don't worry Philljc we can see and understand what you hope for in the game. I would also be very happy if you got what you wanted. Would not be bad at all ;)

Thank you.


Also I have played the first Deus Ex and, while a great game it had it's share of issues such as:

terrible voice acting

poor characterization among most of the cast

useless skills (swimming anyone)

poor combat

obnoxiously difficult in the beginning

hell terrible beginning period

poor graphics even for it's day

For a game that emphasizes choice it's story was annoyingly linear at many points

useless weapons (sawed of shotty,the one shot plasma pistol)

see there is room for improvement in everything

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 06:10
You retards are the reason this stuff happens, you don't see a problem when every game uses the exact same methods to generate 'dumb ****' sales. Dumb **** meaning you, but like I said if you like it how can you see a problem with it?

Compare the dynamics to Deus Ex 1. Is it the same? For the most part? No, it's just another generic shooter now.

dude did you miss the part where they said that Adam was invincible in the demo?
They mentioned that he also had upgraded augs and no limits on his charge/energy.
That's why he was able to deal with those enemies with ease.
In the actual game you can apparently die with 4 bullets!!

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 06:10
Deus ex is $10, go buy it, fanboism has nothing to do with a winning formula. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.



Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

There was no more emphasis on killing, the environment simply happened to be more believable, because there were more guards around. As opposed to one guard every 50 yards like in the first game, which made it unbelievably easy.

The cover system is fantastic. It allows the stealth to actually work like a stealth game, as opposed to requiring brain dead AI to cover for the lack of spacial awareness.

LOL & "health regen without an aug"

Oh no, something everybody chose anyway is given to you automatically for the sake of difficulty balance. That's just SOOOOOOOO ****ing terrible. Yeah, you didn't get the regen aug automatically. Instead the game gave you way too much health on every difficulty except "realistic" mode, which wasn't realistic at all because the enemies could take 5 shots to the head.

Take downs which leave to room for error? The only "room for error" that was left in the first game was due to the fact that melee sucked balls. Instead of acting like melee, melee weapons acted like close range guns that you had to aim perfectly in order for them to work. That was broken to begin with, only a cry baby would want a "feature" that was due to poor controls to return.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:11
dude did you miss the part where they said that Adam was invincible in the demo?
They mentioned that he also had upgraded augs and no limits on his charge/energy.
That's why he was able to deal with those enemies with ease.
In the actual game you can apparently die with 4 bullets!!

No I didn't miss that part, which is why I didn't bring it up?

Oh dear, its worse than I thought.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 06:13
If you really want to deal with real life, realism and a game, you're going to get a whole other list. Stop deviating with irrelevant sht, the first game didn't need it and it was fine. Call of Juarez 2 has a perfectly fine FPS cover system that involves the player not being able to unfairly see around corners and would have been a viable option - it's clear to me with the rest of the changes that the game is targeted at people recovering from lobotomy operations.

Still going with the troll theory? Well, whatever makes you feel better. You still have no argument.

Call of Juarez cover actually looks pretty good. Whatdoya know, and they say debates never change minds.

Well the lobotomy operations part was just mean.

Either way this isn't destroying a critical pillar of deus ex. If occasional TPS ruins the entire experience for you, well, that's that, but you'd be missing out on a lot

mr_cyberpunk
21st Jun 2010, 06:13
A person is only a troll if they're attacking you and then *****ing like a little *****, not the case if they're arguing with you. accusing someone of being a troll is just petty when their arguments may actually be very truthful. That said though the use of language could definitely be trolling, I ask you guys to just stop it with the childish crap and focus on the discussion at hand.

The arguments are valid on both sides, proceed.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 06:15
No I didn't miss that part, which is why I didn't bring it up?

Oh dear, its worse than I thought.

So you don't like it when you think the combat is too easy, and you don't like it when you find out the combat is actually balanced to account for taking cover?

Oh wait, we already know you prefer the painfully easy health system of the original game that allowed for Rambo gameplay the whole way through. Okay, that's cool. You complain when you think its easy, then you complain when you find out it's actually challenging.

That's right, OBVIOUS TROLL IS OBVIOUS.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:16
There was no more emphasis on killing, the environment simply happened to be more believable, because there were more guards around. As opposed to one guard every 50 yards like in the first game, which made it unbelievably easy.

Easy? You think the first game was easy, yet with all these additions you think this will somehow be harder? The hardest thing will be staying awake.


The cover system is fantastic. It allows the stealth to actually work like a stealth game, as opposed to requiring brain dead AI to cover for the lack of spacial awareness.

Yeh, and gives you another unfair advantage. You can see them, they can't see you. Again it could have been integrated like in the first game where you had a spy drone, but that would require an IQ in the double digits.


LOL & "health regen without an aug"

Oh no, something everybody chose anyway is given to you automatically for the sake of difficulty balance. That's just SOOOOOOOO ****ing terrible.

It is actually, adults like playing games too.


Yeah, you didn't get the regen aug automatically. Instead the game gave you way too much health on every difficulty except "realistic" mode, which wasn't realistic at all because the enemies could take 5 shots to the head.

They take one shot if you master any of the firearms skills, fool. Two at most with a rubbish gun.


Take downs which leave to room for error? The only "room for error" that was left in the first game was due to the fact that melee sucked balls. Instead of acting like melee, melee weapons acted like close range guns that you had to aim perfectly in order for them to work.

It's not my fault you can't aim, I can get them fine every time. Aiming perfectly is genuinely what is required, more evidence that you need this type of stuff done for you.


That was broken to begin with, only a cry baby would want a "feature" that was due to poor controls to return.

If anything, in this 10 year old game it was due to having poor hitboxes, something that has been rectified more than it needs to have since. Again, you have a pointless rant of an argument which translates to you not being able to play a game properly.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:18
So you don't like it when you think the combat is too easy, and you don't like it when you find out the combat is actually balanced to account for taking cover?

Balanced for cover? How is something balanced for seeing where you can but they cannot? The only balancing is severely in the players favor, for no reason but to accommodate kids being able to play the game.


Oh wait, we already know you prefer the painfully easy health system of the original game that allowed for Rambo gameplay the whole way through. Okay, that's cool. You complain when you think its easy, then you complain when you find out it's actually challenging.

So let me get this straight. Having to find medkits or buy them is easier than free health for being shot? You are officially the stupidest person in this topic. As for the Rambo shooting, I don't know which game you played but this was one called Deus ex, it came out in the year 2000.


That's right, OBVIOUS TROLL IS OBVIOUS.

It certainly is, feel free to stop whenever you're ready.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:20
A person is only a troll if they're attacking you and then *****ing like a little *****, not the case if they're arguing with you. accusing someone of being a troll is just petty when their arguments may actually be very truthful. That said though the use of language could definitely be trolling, I ask you guys to just stop it with the childish crap and focus on the discussion at hand.

The arguments are valid on both sides, proceed.


"You retards are the reason this stuff happens, you don't see a problem when every game uses the exact same methods to generate 'dumb ' sales. Dumb meaning you, but like I said if you like it how can you see a problem with it?

Compare the dynamics to Deus Ex 1. Is it the same? For the most part? No, it's just another generic shooter now. "



you were saying?

Rindill the Red
21st Jun 2010, 06:22
Nothing in the gameplay footage contradicts the original formula. Character interaction, passcodes, sneaking, shooting, alternate paths, vents, everything. It's all there.

Am I the only one who thinks that man sized vents everywhere that only have short little paths to exactly where you want to go are a little old and unrealistic? :scratch: I've never seen vents that big in my life.

I mean, I think a better alternative, especially in the demoed situation, would be something similar to the DX1 spybot (also featured in Perfect Dark).

So, the vents are normal sized, and you have to have the right aug to spy through the vents and on the conversation... (and you have to actually figure out the right path, or you might end up looking into the women's bathroom. ;) )

Just my thoughts...

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:22
you were saying?

Marvelous, still no argument.

It's no secret that I think anyone who enjoys this crap is retarded, and at least so far I've been spot on about you.

LisuPL
21st Jun 2010, 06:26
Sad truth....

Those who say YES, will buy and enjoy the game

Those who say NO, will download and enjoy the game

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 06:26
Clearly someone who curses like a sailor and insults everyone with a different opinion from his own is the paragon of maturity. You'll have to excuse us if we find it a bit difficult to take you seriously, especially when you make an Everest size mountain out of what's in reality an ant hill. I'm sure the game will be plenty difficult in other ways even if you can "unfairly" see around corners. That doesn't make it "for braindead morons and lobotomy patients", so cut the childish melodrama please.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:26
Calling someone retarded because their opinion differs from yours is fantastically immature.

Funny coming from a guy who keeps calling those who disagree with him "kids".

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 06:27
just let the man die an anthritis-related death already
i believe that now makes me a troll. hypocrisy!

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:30
Calling someone retarded because their opinion differs from yours is fantastically immature.

Funny coming from a guy who keeps calling those who disagree with him "kids".

Still no argument, still trying to be funny? If you have nothing to say I'm still unsure what compels you to hit that little reply button.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 06:30
Easy? You think the first game was easy, yet with all these additions you think this will somehow be harder? The hardest thing will be staying awake.

Sneaking around when you have multiple enemies in the immediate area will make it more difficult, yeah.


Yeh, and gives you another unfair advantage. You can see them, they can't see you. Again it could have been integrated like in the first game where you had a spy drone, but they that would require an IQ in the double digits.

Unfair compared to what? As if a 3 second reaction time to balance out the FPV wasn't an unfair advantage before? As for the spy drone, it was NEVER NEEDED. Not ONCE. This game requires the TPV because there are more enemies to deal with, like in any proper stealth game.


They take one shot if you master any of the firearms skills, fool. Two at most with a rubbish gun.

Which only emphasizes the worst aspect of the originals RPG system. You're a complete gimp until you've fully mastered a weapon skill. A UN commando detective that just graduated from the academy has no skills whatsoever. A regular guy off the street has better aim than you begin with on Liberty Island. You can say "master the firearms skill" but you can't master it until several hours into the game. You still begin as a chump every time, which is totally unbelievable and only done because the AI was so terrible the game would be too easy if the player didn't suck to begin with.


It's not my fault you can't aim, I can get them fine every time. Aiming perfectly is genuinely what is required, more evidence that you need this type of stuff done for you.

Where did I say I had a hard time with it? The stealth was so easy, all you'd have to do is run straight at somebody from behind. Even if they didn't die immediately, they'd be dead before they turned around. I was just breaking it down for you, because you were pretending it was a "skill" system when it was actually...


If anything, in this 10 year old game it was due to having poor hitboxes, something that has been rectified more than it needs to have since. Again, you have a pointless rant of an argument which translates to you not being able to play a game properly.

...a crappy hitbox system, as you admit yourself.

The stealth kill system is just more rewarding. My guy has robot arms which give him enhanced combat skills, I want to see him use them. If you don't, that's your problem. I killed people with one button press before, I'm still killing them with one button press now, except now it looks more like real combat, as opposed to a stiff first person animation that looks the same regardless if you hit or miss.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:32
Again you claim to be the paragon of maturity and having the last word on everything when you just throw **** everywhere. You can have your opinion on Deus Ex just don't be so immature about it.

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 06:32
Just report Philljc to the mods for abusive language. Hopefully he'll be given a timeout until he can learn how to communicate about a 5th grade level.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:33
drivel

I can sum all that up in one sentence, ready?

I have nothing to say, but I will fight for the sake of argument, I will make excuses for every misgiving the game has introduced because I can't play games designed for adults.

I can argue here all day, it makes no difference. You can argue using logic, facts, proof - it means nothing when the person or group you are arguing with have the combined intelligence of a flea.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:35
There you go insulting peoples intelligence again. It doesn't make you look smart it makes you look like an insecure manchild.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:35
Just report Philljc to the mods for abusive language. Hopefully he'll be given a timeout until he can learn how to communicate about a 5th grade level.

Better yet, ban me permanently. If you think I enjoy being here think again.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 06:36
Better yet, ban me permanently. If you think I enjoy being here think again.

Yet you remain

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:36
There you go insulting peoples intelligence again. It doesn't make you look smart it makes you look like an insecure manchild.

Still nothing, amazing. At least when the others make **** up they are putting effort in.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:37
Better yet, ban me permanently. If you think I enjoy being here think again.


Is my immortal putting a gun to your head forcing you to post?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:37
Yet you remain

Sad isn't it? I can't wait to get away from this pathetic circle jerk. Please mods, make it so.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:39
Is my immortal putting a gun to your head forcing you to post?

It seems to be fixated on you at the moment. Too bad it isn't real.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 06:39
Sad isn't it? I can't wait to get away from this pathetic circle jerk. Please mods, make it so.

What, can't do it by yourself? Need some awful AI to help you along?

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:40
pathetic circle jerk.


http://www.lolwut.com/layout/lolwut.jpg

This is the most flamewar ridden forums I've ever seen brah. Now you are just ignoring facts.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 06:40
In all seriousness Philljc is the only person in this debate providing any tangible arguement or valid points.

The rest of you are just defending the fact that you enjoy dumbass games and dumbass gimmicks, period. You're doing nothing else.

As for the swearing - there's a filter, who cares? Obviously he's passionate about retaining the integrity of this great series - whereas you people just want another 'me-too' easy mode game and have absolutely no game design sense of how it will adversely effect the experience for anyone that actually wants to PLAY this game rather than sit there WATCHING it due to all the hand holding and 1 button for everything mechanics.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:40
What, can't do it by yourself? Need some awful AI to help you along?

I think thats why I came here, to get overbearing help.

I just had a thought, why is it called revolution if it's gone backwards instead of forwards?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:41
This is the most flamewar ridden forums I've ever seen brah. Now you are just ignoring facts.

I'll tell you what, when you stop using ~5 year old recycled-to-death memes you may actually have a chance of appearing humorous.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 06:44
I can sum all that up in one sentence, ready?

I have nothing to say, but I will fight for the sake of argument, I will make excuses for every misgiving the game has introduced because I can't play games designed for adults.

I can argue here all day, it makes no difference. You can argue using logic, facts, proof - it means nothing when the person or group you are arguing with have the combined intelligence of a flea.

Nice irony. What's really funny is that it describes your own behavior perfectly.

The most pathetic straw man I've ever seen, all because you failed to deal with my actual arguments. You knew you couldn't argue against someone that had actually played the original and knew its faults, so you gave up and resorted to trolling with straight trash talk.

But that's okay, because I can make up quotes too:


"You're not just bowing down and letting me troll, that means U R TEH DUMB AND I R TEH BRIL-YANCE. ALSO I AM OLD AN U R KIDDY. MY WEAK, CHILDISH ATTITUDE BETRAYS MY ACTUAL AGE, BUT I'LL PRETEND I AM AN ADULT, WHEN AT BEST I AM A WHINY MANCHILD."

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:45
Nice irony. What's really funny is that it describes your own behavior perfectly.

If it describes my behavior perfectly I'd had to see what the translation to yourself and all of your dimwit friends would be.

By the way I'll address your *points* when you have some.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 06:48
Why does every thread make me feel like half the people have not played a game made before Halo?

Games with 3rd person stealth have never and never will be more challenging than games with first person stealth. Throwing in more guards "to compensate" does not increase challenge. It increases frustration and number of attempts you need to make to beat the level. Not skill required. I'm having hard time calling that a difficulty increase. Though, sometimes, playing through games like that does give me great difficulty. Not because of the challenge.

Game that requires resource management will always be more complex than game that does not. Again, "balancing" the game to work with regenerating health will not make it more challenging. It can simply require the same amount of time to beat it. Not the same thing.

Having you roll a 100 on 100-sided die to advance would also increase "difficulty", but that's not what you call a challenging gameplay.

It's like the first 2 decades in gaming haven't happened. These things have been tried. There is nothing new in either 3rd person stealth or regenerating health. These things weren't used in most decent games because they aren't as challenging.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 06:49
In all seriousness Philljc is the only person in this debate providing any tangible arguement or valid points.

The rest of you are just defending the fact that you enjoy dumbass games and dumbass gimmicks, period. You're doing nothing else.


That's right, anybody that enjoys stealth and gunplay mechanics that actual work is a dumbass. Smart people hate good games, and only appreciate mechanics if they're twitchy and unpolished, thus creating accidental "challenge."

Goddamn cavemen and your good games.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 06:50
Why does every thread make me feel like half the people have not played a game made before Halo?

Games with 3rd person stealth have never and never will be more challenging than games with first person stealth. Throwing in more guards "to compensate" does not increase challenge. It increases frustration and number of attempts you need to make to beat the level. Not skill required. I'm having hard time calling that a difficulty increase. Though, sometimes, playing through games like that does give me great difficulty. Not because of the challenge.

Game that requires resource management will always be more complex than game that does not. Again, "balancing" the game to work with regenerating health will not make it more challenging. It can simply require the same amount of time to beat it. Not the same thing.

Having you roll a 100 on 100-sided die to advance would also increase "difficulty", but that's not what you call a challenging gameplay.

It's like the first 2 decades in gaming haven't happened. These things have been tried. There is nothing new in either 3rd person stealth or regenerating health. These things weren't used in most decent games because they aren't as challenging.

Post of the year, maybe I'm a little riled up and being a douche but I couldn't be any more sick of the way games are - your last paragraph is fantastic.

Anasumtj
21st Jun 2010, 06:52
I was on the fence, but there were a lot of things in the footage that really left a bad taste in my mouth. I don't necessarily want to say I'll never buy it, but I won't be picking it up myself any time soon.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 06:56
That's right, anybody that enjoys stealth and gunplay mechanics that actual work is a dumbass. Smart people hate good games, and only appreciate mechanics if they're twitchy and unpolished, thus creating accidental "challenge."

Goddamn cavemen and your good games.

Yeah, no. I didn't say anything like that. Stop putting words in my mouth to suit your moronic point of view.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 06:57
Okay it is quite obvious we all have wildly differing opinions on this matter.

The question is, Why are we fighting? I mean I usually stay away from flamewars and even I are getting drawn into this. What about a game, a toy for someone to play makes us so defensive? Why do we feel the need to insult one another simply because we have a differing idea on how this toy should be made?


(wow, I need to stay off the existentialism)

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 06:58
That's right, anybody that enjoys stealth and gunplay mechanics that actual work is a dumbass.
You ever actually played Deus Ex? The stealth worked great. AI was dumb as rocks, but all of the mechanics worked.

You don't need 3rd person for stealth. First of all, it's cheating, plain and simple. Second of all, if you stick your head around the corner to see if the guard is watching your corner, you deserve to be shot in your stupid head. That's how it should work. It's not a problem with stealth. That's the whole point.

You are supposed to learn what the guards are doing and figure out a good way to get in without being seen before getting that close to the guards.

Now, what exactly is the challenge? To make sure you hit the cover button while standing behind corner and make sure the guard turns around before walking out and hitting another button to perform a kill?

You must be a big fan of games that consist entirely of quick time events and cinematics.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:00
At this point, 15 buying, 7 on the fence, 3 not buying.

A 5:1 buying:not buying is impressive.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:00
Why does every thread make me feel like half the people have not played a game made before Halo?

Games with 3rd person stealth have never and never will be more challenging than games with first person stealth. Throwing in more guards "to compensate" does not increase challenge. It increases frustration and number of attempts you need to make to beat the level. Not skill required. I'm having hard time calling that a difficulty increase. Though, sometimes, playing through games like that does give me great difficulty. Not because of the challenge.

Game that requires resource management will always be more complex than game that does not. Again, "balancing" the game to work with regenerating health will not make it more challenging. It can simply require the same amount of time to beat it. Not the same thing.

Having you roll a 100 on 100-sided die to advance would also increase "difficulty", but that's not what you call a challenging gameplay.

It's like the first 2 decades in gaming haven't happened. These things have been tried. There is nothing new in either 3rd person stealth or regenerating health. These things weren't used in most decent games because they aren't as challenging.

Third person stealth does not and has never increased frustration if you actually pay attention to your environment, same as with any first person stealth game. If stealth games that actually focus on stealth frustrate you, it's because you're not paying attention.

You mention 3rd person stealth has never been used in "decent games."

Outside of the Thief franchise (or Deus Ex if you count it as a true stealth game, which it isn't) there has never been a stealth game that used anything but 3rd person, so right there you admit you're not a fan of the stealth genre to begin with. What makes you fit to complain about stealth mechanics, then?

Health packs never required resource management. I had full health packs the entire time through both games, as did pretty much anybody that didn't deliberately go out of their way to avoid searching for items.

What it DID do is make sure that bullets did almost no damage on normal and hard, because you always had to have enough life left in order to walk away and heal. Only the bots ever provided a legitimate challenge.

MaxxQ1
21st Jun 2010, 07:00
I don't necessarily want to say I'll never buy it, but I won't be picking it up myself any time soon.

Yeah, well... neither will anybody else. At least not for another 9 months or so. :D

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:01
Okay it is quite obvious we all have wildly differing opinions on this matter.

The question is, Why are we fighting? I mean I usually stay away from flamewars and even I are getting drawn into this. What about a game, a toy for someone to play makes us so defensive? Why do we feel the need to insult one another simply because we have a differing idea on how this toy should be made?


(wow, I need to stay off the existentialism)

Well the existence of an internet forum is basically a place where any idiot, such as myself, can go and express their opinion, and the ability to unleash a controversial and passionate opinion without an repurcussions like a bullet to the head is really quite fun. It's not necessarily the game itself. People can get into a flamewar about whether bananas are better than lobsters.

The fact that Deus Ex is a beloved game and more interesting than bananas helps too

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 07:02
In all seriousness Philljc is the only person in this debate providing any tangible arguement or valid points.

The rest of you are just defending the fact that you enjoy dumbass games and dumbass gimmicks, period. You're doing nothing else.

As for the swearing - there's a filter, who cares? Obviously he's passionate about retaining the integrity of this great series - whereas you people just want another 'me-too' easy mode game and have absolutely no game design sense of how it will adversely effect the experience for anyone that actually wants to PLAY this game rather than sit there WATCHING it due to all the hand holding and 1 button for everything mechanics.

Philljc has provided no argument, nor has he responded to the plethora of arguments made against him. He's simply said that the game is for dumbasses simply because it uses a third-person cover system and features stealth takedowns without providing any logical or sound reasoning for why that should be the case or how it's fundamentally at all different from what was in DX1, and called anyone who likes or defends HR's system a dumbass by association. And whenever anyone has said "I disagree" he's accused them of being a 4 year old lobotomized retard. If that's your idea of "tangible debate", you and I have a vastly different world view my friend.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:03
Yeah, no. I didn't say anything like that. Stop putting words in my mouth to suit your moronic point of view.

He's good at that, not much else unfortunately.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:05
You ever actually played Deus Ex? The stealth worked great. AI was dumb as rocks, but all of the mechanics worked.

You don't need 3rd person for stealth. First of all, it's cheating, plain and simple. Second of all, if you stick your head around the corner to see if the guard is watching your corner, you deserve to be shot in your stupid head. That's how it should work. It's not a problem with stealth. That's the whole point.

You are supposed to learn what the guards are doing and figure out a good way to get in without being seen before getting that close to the guards.

Now, what exactly is the challenge? To make sure you hit the cover button while standing behind corner and make sure the guard turns around before walking out and hitting another button to perform a kill?

You must be a big fan of games that consist entirely of quick time events and cinematics.

Either that or I've played more than 5 games in my life and can deal with 3rd person stealth mechanics without curling up into a ball.

It's sad that you can say that the AI was dumb as rocks and follow it up by saying the mechanics worked.

It "worked" by balancing bad stealth with bad AI. If the game didn't have the amount of choice and variety it offered, it would be a crappy game. Judged on their own, all the mechanics in the game were terrible, even by the standards of 2000 when it was released. It was supposed to be a futuristic Thief game, and Thief had better stealth. Much better stealth, I'll add.

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 07:06
Why does every thread make me feel like half the people have not played a game made before Halo?

Games with 3rd person stealth have never and never will be more challenging than games with first person stealth. Throwing in more guards "to compensate" does not increase challenge. It increases frustration and number of attempts you need to make to beat the level. Not skill required. I'm having hard time calling that a difficulty increase. Though, sometimes, playing through games like that does give me great difficulty. Not because of the challenge.

Game that requires resource management will always be more complex than game that does not. Again, "balancing" the game to work with regenerating health will not make it more challenging. It can simply require the same amount of time to beat it. Not the same thing.

Having you roll a 100 on 100-sided die to advance would also increase "difficulty", but that's not what you call a challenging gameplay.

It's like the first 2 decades in gaming haven't happened. These things have been tried. There is nothing new in either 3rd person stealth or regenerating health. These things weren't used in most decent games because they aren't as challenging.

Dude in the real game you can apparently die from just 4 bullets!
so getting close to enemies and spamming lethal takedowns is not possible except for
those with mad skills! For the demo, they turned Adam invincible, that's why it seems like
the game is easy.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:08
Third person stealth does not and has never increased frustration if you actually pay attention to your environment, same as with any first person stealth game. If stealth games that actually focus on stealth frustrate you, it's because you're not paying attention.
No. It has two modes. Easy as pie and frustrating. Somehow, I've never seen 3rd person that's actually challenging.


You mention 3rd person stealth has never been used in "decent games."

Outside of the Thief franchise (or Deus Ex if you count it as a true stealth game, which it isn't) there has never been a stealth game that used anything but 3rd person, so right there you admit you're not a fan of the stealth genre to begin with. What makes you fit to complain about stealth mechanics, then?
There aren't a lot of pure stealth games I liked, yes. All of the ones I did like were first person or let you play in first person. I preferred playing Hitman in first person. First person stealth in Fallout 3 worked alright. Thief is an example in itself. Saying "except thief" is like saying, "except for the game that set the standard". Not very convincing.

What do you have to bring to the table? Splinter Cell and Metal Gear? I really don't recall any challenge in either.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:08
Yeah, no. I didn't say anything like that. Stop putting words in my mouth to suit your moronic point of view.

I didn't put words in your mouth, I offered my own criticism of your opinion, which was itself a criticism. If you can't handle that, you shouldn't be on the internet.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:09
Philljc has provided no argument

Uh oh! Look out, I have no argument because this guy said! With no examples! Hooray for everything!

If you would look past the insults, a lot of which you took personally I am sure as they would almost certainly apply to you - I even gave plenty of examples of how this game could have been better, how it's being dumbed down. I gave a good amount of responses before a certain somebody somehow mistook his opinion for facts against what I was saying. The posts haven't gone anywhere, you can read them again if your daily attention span hasn't peaked. But the point of caring has gone out the window. If we were in a room discussing it half of you little smartasses wouldn't even open your mouths, you don't have 5 minutes to think up an *argument* in that instance which is why forums will always be the asshle of any debate.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:10
He's good at that, not much else unfortunately.

Says the guy that literally just made up a quote in order criticize it? You can't see the irony in that?

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:10
Dude in the real game you can apparently die from just 4 bullets!
so getting close to enemies and spamming lethal takedowns is not possible except for
those with mad skills! For the demo, they turned Adam invincible, that's why it seems like
the game is easy.
When you can stand behind a corner and look out? Yeah, I'll be fine with one shot-one-kill. Nothing is going to be hitting me anyways in the stealth sections.

Besides, if they were actually going to make Adam that vulnerable, stealth would be the only way to go. Action requires you to take a few hits, otherwise you'd keep getting killed by a random bullet. And again, that's not challenge, that's roll of the dice.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:11
Uh oh! Look out, I have no argument because this guy said! With no examples! Hooray for everything!


This was the EXACT SAME LOGIC you used. You made the claim that everyone else had no argument BECAUSE YOU SAID SO. How hypocritical can you get???

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:12
You HAVE no argument. Your argument is, "First person stealth is HARD!" Which is equivalent to no argument. It's a game. If you have difficulties with it, watch a movie.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:13
This was the EXACT SAME LOGIC you used. You made the claim that everyone else had no argument BECAUSE YOU SAID SO. How hypocritical can you get???

No it's not, if you're going to quote logic you might want to use it. I gave plenty of examples, such as COJ2's aiming system, what Deus ex 1 was, differences in how these *features* work. He didn't.

Are you having a hard time comprehending them? Here's a tip, it's called the 20 second rule. Think for 20 seconds before you post, it'll save you from looking like a complete clown everytime.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:15
.

First person stealth in Fallout 3 worked alright.



You're kidding

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 07:16
Uh oh! Look out, I have no argument because this guy said! With no examples! Hooray for everything!

If you would look past the insults, a lot of which you took personally I am sure as they would almost certainly apply to you - I even gave plenty of examples of how this game could have been better, how it's being dumbed down. I gave a good amount of responses before a certain somebody somehow mistook his opinion for facts against what I was saying. The posts haven't gone anywhere, you can read them again if your daily attention span hasn't peaked. But the point of caring has gone out the window. If we were in a room discussing it half of you little smartasses wouldn't even open your mouths, you don't have 5 minutes to think up an *argument* in that instance which is why forums will always be the asshle of any debate.

You made a lot of irrational, baseless arguments which were quickly refuted, to which your reply was to label everyone who disagreed with you a lobotomized moronic retard without actually bothering to respond to any of the arguments counter to yours, all with an undeserved sense of smug maturity that lies in stark contrast to your childish behavior and vulgarity-strewn language. Have I left anything out?

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 07:16
Deus ex is $10, go buy it, fanboism has nothing to do with a winning formula. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.



Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?


Uh oh! Look out, I have no argument because this guy said! With no examples! Hooray for everything!

If you would look past the insults, a lot of which you took personally I am sure as they would almost certainly apply to you - I even gave plenty of examples of how this game could have been better, how it's being dumbed down. I gave a good amount of responses before a certain somebody somehow mistook his opinion for facts against what I was saying. The posts haven't gone anywhere, you can read them again if your daily attention span hasn't peaked. But the point of caring has gone out the window. If we were in a room discussing it half of you little smartasses wouldn't even open your mouths, you don't have 5 minutes to think up an *argument* in that instance which is why forums will always be the asshle of any debate.

It has been said that Adam's character had been turned near invincible for the sake of the demo.
So how is it fair to say that the game is easy or that it has been dumbed down?
We've heard that it takes 4 bullets for you to die in the actual game.
That enemies can actually follow a line of sight and can also hear you, if you are not careful.
That soldiers who suffer non lethal takedowns can be woken up if you are not careful.
also that lethal takedowns cost energy, so you can't spam them.
There's no sign of dumbing things down. In fact the game seems to be much harder than the original!

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 07:17
so yeah...


how bout them mets?

Romeo
21st Jun 2010, 07:17
Alright, first, last and only warning to Philljac, Beastrn and Ubersuntzu: Play nice, or out come the punishments. I don't mind you all arguing your points, but be respectful about it.

On topic: There's still a few gameplay concepts that have me worried, I'll be honest. But over-all, I think I'll still up getting it. Collector's Edition, but not multiple copies (Hence why I picked the second option).

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:18
You made a lot of irrational, baseless arguments which were quickly refuted, to which your reply was to label everyone who disagreed with you a lobotomized moronic retard without actually bothering to respond to any of the arguments counter to yours, all with an undeserved sense of smug maturity that lies in stark contrast to your childish behavior. Have I left anything out?

I'm actually going to bother now.

Which, as you termed as 'a lot', baseless arguments were these pertaining to the game?

You can keep trying to articulate your posts to make it seem as if you have a point, so far you're as bad as the rest.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:18
You're kidding
Compared to 3rd person? Oh yes. It worked.

jtr7
21st Jun 2010, 07:19
Other than the thrill of being one of the first purchasers of the first version of the new game, and not having to wait one day longer to play it, what value does it have to be a day-one purchaser? Having a possible collector's item (mainly if you have an official copy of the game on disc, not just a Steam activation)?

You know you end up being a public beta-tester, right? While I thank you in advance for helping EM work out their first patch(es) so I can install a less-buggy copy, I wonder if you would consider it willing sabotage of your fun by being THE person to find and report a glitch. If there was satisfaction in being a public beta-tester of a full-priced game copy (license, actually), I could see how one would feel heroic for aiding the cause for future gamers, but from what I've seen in every forum for a game that just came out is screaming rage and spittle for an entirely predictable set of circumstances. So thank you for taking the brunt, so I can avoid a lot of the struggle myself! :flowers:

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:19
Compared to 3rd person? Oh yes. It worked.

Press sneak. walk about.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:21
Press sneak. walk about.
Only if you invested everything you've got into sneaking, and then wore no armor.

If you played as a balanced player, you had to watch for lines of sight. Which for an RPG game is about as much as you can ask from it.

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:21
No. It has two modes. Easy as pie and frustrating. Somehow, I've never seen 3rd person that's actually challenging.


There aren't a lot of pure stealth games I liked, yes. All of the ones I did like were first person or let you play in first person. I preferred playing Hitman in first person. First person stealth in Fallout 3 worked alright. Thief is an example in itself. Saying "except thief" is like saying, "except for the game that set the standard". Not very convincing.

What do you have to bring to the table? Splinter Cell and Metal Gear? I really don't recall any challenge in either.

No, I said "except thief" because there have been 3 Thief games in the history of the world. There's a lot more to the genre than one franchise. Hitman is great, but it's a totally different kind of stealth for the most part. Fallout 3 is nice, but it's even less challenging than Metal Gear Solid and Splinter Cell. In fact, they're both more challenging than Hitman ever since it gave you the ability to fight your way through any situation.

If you don't like the vast majority of stealth games unless it comes packaged on your own preferred and very specific context, you don't like stealth.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:23
but it's even less challenging than Metal Gear Solid and Splinter Cell. In fact, they're both more challenging than Hitman ever since it gave you the ability to fight your way through any situation.

Yeh Conviction was really challenging, another good example of games being stupi-fied. Revolution is to Deus ex 1 as to what Conviction is to Chaos theory.

Romeo
21st Jun 2010, 07:24
Compared to 3rd person? Oh yes. It worked.
I do find myself in the rare position of being on your side: I think third person pretty much counts as cheating. If I can see my opponent, and they can't see me, the stealth is severely tapered in my favor.

However, that being said, Splinter Cell (I only played the original, so I can't comment on it's sequels) had pretty damn good stealth, and that was exclusively third-person. I suppose it depends on how it's implemented. SC for example, had you being nearly useless at combat, so stealth wasn't an option - it was mandatory.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 07:24
I didn't put words in your mouth, I offered my own criticism of your opinion, which was itself a criticism. If you can't handle that, you shouldn't be on the internet.

Getting tired of your rubbish kiddo. You DID put words in my mouth. Nothing you said had ANYTHING to do with what I said, thus, you made up a bunch of stuff to suit your different point of view. If you'd like to elaborate on what was actually said, go ahead - but you can't, because it all boils down to "it's fun and accessible" which obviously you enjoy more than I do.

edit: sorry Romes - I didn't see your post. This is my last one regarding this guy

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 07:27
I mean I'm pretty exited about their new season what with David Wright and all

Ubersuntzu
21st Jun 2010, 07:28
Getting tired of your rubbish kiddo. You DID put words in my mouth. Nothing you said had ANYTHING to do with what I said, thus, you made up a bunch of **** to suit your moronic point of view. If you'd like to elaborate on what was actually said, go ahead - but you can't, because it all boils down to "it's fun and accessible" which obviously you enjoy more than I do.

edit: sorry Romes - I didn't see your post. This is my last one regarding this guy

It had nothing to do with what you said because you didn't like what I had to say. You might also notice I never once got into the name calling. That's something you've been doing since the beginning, though. Always the sign of a man that believes in his own argument.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:30
If you don't like the vast majority of stealth games unless it comes packaged on your own preferred and very specific context, you don't like stealth.
That's roughly like saying that if I don't like pop, I don't like music, and it has nothing to do with the fact that pop is made for quick appeal to mass public and has no actual worth.

Yes. Most stealth games made in the past decade are in 3rd person. Most of the games made in the past decade are also void of challenge. I see a pattern.

The fact that I'm coming up with very few examples sort of makes my case here.

Oh, and yes. Hitman was not particularly challenging once you chose to shoot your way out. But stealth was challenging. Because you had to rely on actually studying the situation, rather than various gimmicks, like looking around the corners in 3rd person and using instant action for kills, even though both were actually available.

Again, don't mistake difficulty for challenge. Random chance is difficult. It is not challenging. Challenge requires skill to overcome. A skillful player will find a challenging game a lot easier than an unskilled one. A game without challenge will present equal difficulty to skilled and unskilled player.

3rd person stealth presents no challenge. It gives you an algorithm for disposing of enemies, and a certain chance that the algorithm will fail. That's all there is to it.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:33
SC for example, had you being nearly useless at combat, so stealth wasn't an option - it was mandatory.
That's not really so much a challenge as a restriction. If the game is challenging to begin with, it may make it more so. But if your odds of getting caught depend more on chance than on your skill, being unable to shoot your way out of sticky situation only adds to frustration.

SC walks a tight line there.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:34
Didn't they say in the PCGamer interview that it's rare to take more than four bullets and live? That the regeneration only started once you were out of combat, and that you couldn't just duck undercover and regenerate? Seems like that's enough of a challenge to combat anything that's inherently "easy" about 3rd person.

Deus_Ex_Machina
21st Jun 2010, 07:34
Most of the games made in the past decade are also void of challenge. I see a pattern.

Unfortunately, I feel that statement accurately represents this generation of games, with VERY few exceptions. :(

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 07:37
Unfortunately, I feel that statement accurately represents this generation of games, with VERY few exceptions. :(


what about demon's souls and vampire the requiem? what about Halo on legendary or the Ninja gaiden games

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 07:37
I'm actually going to bother now.

Which, as you termed as 'a lot', baseless arguments were these pertaining to the game?

You can keep trying to articulate your posts to make it seem as if you have a point, so far you're as bad as the rest.

Let's see...

You claimed that third-person stealth inherently makes games easy, and said nothing when it was pointed out that first-person stealth with dumb-as-doornails AI as was seen in DX1 is no better and a third-person cover system comes with the tradeoff of vastly more competent opponents in much more numerous numbers so it's not just one lobotomized guard every 50 yards as was the case prior nor have you explained how being able to view around cover without exposing yourself is fundamentally any "cheaper" than being able to lean out of cover undetected or, as was the case in DX1, being able to actually leave cover entirely and not be spotted for upwards of 3 full seconds thanks to the aforementioned ridiculously lobotomized AI which was put in place to compensate for the reduced field of view you get with a first-person stealth and cover system.

You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1 and, even if it was only an augmentation, it was an augmentation that everyone who played the game took so it's really a moot issue. You also failed to elaborate when you were asked to explain how being able to pop one of the ridiculously plentiful health packs in DX1 and instantly be back at full health in the middle of a firefight was any less cheap and or required more skill when it allowed you to "go rambo" for more easily than you'll ever be able to in HR.

You claimed that automatic stealth takedowns were "easy mode" and required no skill, yet failed to respond when you were asked how sneaking up on an enemy in HR, pressing the takedown button and having them instantly killed/incapacitated with a flashy dramatic animation is fundamentally any different than sneaking up on an enemy in DX1, pressing the attack button and having your DTS or riot prod instantly kill/incapacitate your target with a single stiff animation.

I'm sure I'm forgetting a few, but as it's 2:30 in the morning you'll have to excuse me if I don't feel like writing an essay.

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 07:37
I bet most gamers will start complaining that the game is too hard when
it finally comes out.lol.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:38
Didn't they say in the PCGamer interview that it's rare to take more than four bullets and live? That the regeneration only started once you were out of combat, and that you couldn't just duck undercover and regenerate? Seems like that's enough of a challenge to combat anything that's inherently "easy" about 3rd person.
Again, that's not a challenge. Anything that would make it more difficult to stealth in 3rd person would make actual combat a lesson in frustration.

If the guard you ambush after examining the corridor from 3rd person has enough time to turn around and fire enough bullets into you to get you killed, what chance do you stand in any sort of a fire fight?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:39
Didn't they say in the PCGamer interview that it's rare to take more than four bullets and live? That the regeneration only started once you were out of combat, and that you couldn't just duck undercover and regenerate? Seems like that's enough of a challenge to combat anything that's inherently "easy" about 3rd person.

Or, when out of combat you could go and find a medkit, so as when the next fight pops up you can't just rely on regenerating out of combat from the fight before. Just like every other FPS to incorporate it, it'll just be another rinse and repeat cycle. Why bother caring in combat if you know that when it ends you get free health? Then you can keep being careless. It's pointless really.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:41
Halo on legendary
Not sure about the rest of your examples, but again, don't confuse difficulty and challenge. I know enough of Halo to say that on Legendary it depends more on how many attempts you make than on how skilled you are.

I've played multiplayer against people who have beaten Legendary in Halos 1-3. I've had no trouble taking on the lot. I also know that I had about as much difficulty in single player than they did. What does that tell you?

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:42
what about demon's souls and vampire the requiem? what about Halo on legendary or the Ninja gaiden games

GRAW 2 PC?
not sure guitar hero counts but..

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 07:43
After hunting down a second source for the leaked footage I say I´m not supriced, it´s pretty much the exprience I was expecting and it lookt good and lookt very Deus Ex to me, the 3rd person cover system is what we seen before and gave me quite a good Splinter Cell/Metal Gear Solid vibe, some of the takedowns (mostly the grenade arms one) seamed a bit to long but otherwise it was awesome sauce.


I will pre order this game for sure and enjoy it as a Deus Ex fan.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:44
Again, that's not a challenge. Anything that would make it more difficult to stealth in 3rd person would make actual combat a lesson in frustration.
I'm not sure what you're getting at.



If the guard you ambush after examining the corridor from 3rd person has enough time to turn around and fire enough bullets into you to get you killed, what chance do you stand in any sort of a fire fight?
Why would the guard be alive if you ambushed him properly? I'd be worrying about any friends of his.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:46
Why would the guard be alive if you ambushed him properly? I'd be worrying about any friends of his.
How exactly are you supposed to mess it up if you are standing behind perfect cover, looking at him, waiting for him to turn around?

Seriously?

Either he has an ability to spot you leaving cover even after turning around (hear steps, or whatever) or you just get kill after kill.

You can't make 3rd person stealth difficult without making fire fights impossible. Splinter Cell already came up in this discussion.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Jun 2010, 07:46
Option 1 for me. Of course I'm buying the game... I can't wait!!!

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 07:49
It had nothing to do with what you said because you didn't like what I had to say.

I don't get it. You ALREADY SAID THAT. This post that I'm quoting right now. I ALREADY REPLIED TO THAT EXACT THING BECAUSE YOU POSTED IT ALREADY.


[QUOTE=Ubersuntzu;1425589]I didn't put words in your mouth, I offered my own criticism of your opinion, which was itself a criticism. If you can't handle that, you shouldn't be on the internet.

See? I've already addressed this. It has nothing to do with what I like or don't like. You litterally took what I said, forgot about it, and made up a bunch of crap to support your own point of view. As for name calling? Frankly, you deserve it. You're like a brick wall - nothing I say here will have any effect on you because it's a public forum and you can't admit that you're wrong or have stupid tastes - I digress though.

And as much as I loath to waste my time on you - I'll detail exactly what I said and what you said, so, hopefully, you'll stop replying to me with utter nonsense. I'm not holding my breath though.

Here's what I said


In all seriousness Philljc is the only person in this debate providing any tangible argument or valid points.

The rest of you are just defending the fact that you enjoy dumbass games and dumbass gimmicks, period. You're doing nothing else.

Here's what you said(you're Ubersuntzu in case you forgot)


That's right, anybody that enjoys stealth and gunplay mechanics that actual work is a dumbass. Smart people hate good games, and only appreciate mechanics if they're twitchy and unpolished, thus creating accidental "challenge."

Goddamn cavemen and your good games.

Simple enough right? Still with me?

Now - you sarcastically say that people that enjoy "stealth and gunplay mecahnics that actual work is a dumbass" - what's this "work" thing about? To you, does EASY mean IT WORKS? Is that the connection in your mind? So you're saying because Thief didn't hold your hand at every corner, it didn't work? Because it's down to YOUR eyes and YOUR ability, it doesn't work? You're making no sense.

The best part is I (and nobody else afaik) have not said it doesn't WORK. I'm saying it's TOO EASY, it's UNFAIRLY SLANTED TOWARDS THE PLAYER, the gimmicks REMOVE RISK by giving you basically god mode and freedom to look anywhere.

Next part;

"Smart people hate good games, and only appreciate mechanics if they're twitchy and unpolished, thus creating accidental "challenge."

Your perception of "good" is obviously based on 24/7 playtesting, graphics, "innovative arrow following" and cool looking action scenes, but I'll ignore that for now.

Where did I say that games are only good if they're unpolished and "twitchy"? Again - I'm not hating on DX3 because it is polished and not twitchy, I'm hating on it for the aforementioned easy-mode 3rd person cover ****, and the "cool bro" kills. It has nothing to do with what you said I said.

And if you think this is some personal attack - it's not. People like you are a dime a dozen and some probably even nod their head in agreement with you while singing Eminem and playing Halo with one hand - so it's not just for your benefiet but for theirs as well.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:49
Or, when out of combat you could go and find a medkit, so as when the next fight pops up you can't just rely on regenerating out of combat from the fight before.
Was there ever a point in DX1 where you didn't have close to the max medkits? Or any point where you needed to use a medkit but didn't have any? The medkits were so abundant to have caused the same lack of urgency you're lamenting here.



Just like every other FPS to incorporate it, it'll just be another rinse and repeat cycle. Why bother caring in combat if you know that when it ends you get free health?
Because you have to survive the battle and the regeneration doesn't take place in the battle? Because the abundance of medkits in the first game essentially made it free health?


Then you can keep being careless. It's pointless really.
They've made it a point to say you can't be careless. That four shots and you're dead. Have you read any of PCGamer's Deus Ex week coverage? A lot of your complaints are obsolete.

Show of hands. Who in the first game didn't have a medkit when you needed one?

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 07:50
lol nice location immortal
anyways ninja gaiden is both third person AND hard
what? what? what???

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 07:50
what about demon's souls and vampire the requiem? what about Halo on legendary or the Ninja gaiden games

Halo 1 Legendary? Difficult? I got somewhat good at MP before doing a Legendary playthrough. It was boring.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 07:53
I meant Halo 2

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:53
You claimed that third-person stealth inherently makes games easy, and said nothing when it was pointed out that first-person stealth with dumb-as-doornails AI as was seen in DX1 is no better and a third-person cover system comes with the tradeoff of vastly more competent opponents in much more numerous numbers so it's not just one lobotomized guard every 50 yards as was the case prior nor have you explained how being able to view around cover without exposing yourself is fundamentally any "cheaper" than being able to lean out of cover undetected or, as was the case in DX1, being able to actually leave cover entirely and not be spotted for upwards of 3 full seconds thanks to the aforementioned ridiculously lobotomized AI which was put in place to compensate for the reduced field of view you get with a first-person stealth and cover system.

Apart from using no periods and having an insanely long sentence structure that makes no sense when you haven't quoted what I said, which was what I asked for, I'm going to have to go in point form.

1. If you cannot see how seeing around corners makes a game easier when you previously had to stay out of their line of site, and take peeks in a first person view then you really need to have a deep think about why that would be evident to anyone.

2. Third person = being able to see around a corner, leaning out or not. First person = Only being able to see around when you look. How is this hard to comprehend? You're not doing well so far.

3. You keep quoting the AI as if I praised it in some way, yes the AI is dumb, the game is still harder than any game out today. Do you want to maybe say that again using some structure? And quoting which post of mine you are referring to?


You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1 and, even if it was only an augmentation

4. LOL, I failed to respond to my own point? I brought it up myself. Wow.


You also failed to elaborate when you were asked to explain how being able to pop one of the ridiculously plentiful health packs in DX1 and instantly be back at full health in the middle of a firefight was any less cheap and or required more skill when it allowed you to "go rambo" for more easily than you'll ever be able to in HR.

5. I cannot fail to elaborate on something that doesn't exist. In my current game, where I am presently in Hong Kong, a health pack gives me 30 or so hit points per heal. Damage is brutal so one med kit barely makes a difference, I need close to 10 or so to get a decent heal after a hefty fight, or running from gunfire. Again I have no idea where you pulled those stats from but I am notorious for providing video evidence, if you would like some, or if you would like to consult the game yourself you can then be properly informed. By the way you have to first find these medkits, and without exploring or using lockpicks / multitools in exchange you won't get as many. Do you really want to compare all of that to regenerating health? Really? Again, fail.


You claimed that automatic stealth takedowns were "easy mode" and required no skill, yet failed to respond when you were asked how sneaking up on an enemy in HR, pressing the takedown button and having them instantly killed/incapacitated with a flashy dramatic animation is fundamentally any different than sneaking up on an enemy in DX1, pressing the attack button and having your DTS or riot prod instantly kill/incapacitate your target with a single stiff animation.

6. Again: Inform yourself first. Did you even play the first or are you going from distant memories? For a start the close up takedowns in Revolution happen if you sneak up on them or not. In DE1 the riot prod doesn't take them down in one prodding the majority of the time, nor do the mini crossbow tranq darts as they are time delayed. If they see you and you take them front on, it can take up to 3 prods to bring them down. As I said, in Revolution, either way it's a one button wonder. Again, you have nothing.

All of that could be found by actually playing and familiarizing yourself with the game. If you're going to keep going, please actually quote what I said as half of your examples are gibberish.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 07:54
Was there ever a point in DX1 where you didn't have close to the max medkits? Or any point where you needed to use a medkit but didn't have any? The medkits were so abundant to have caused the same lack of urgency you're lamenting here.

And if you play on Realistic, they are almost useless. As in my previous post, have a good read.

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 07:54
Wow this thread exploded. I'm not even going to try and catch up.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:54
How exactly are you supposed to mess it up if you are standing behind perfect cover, looking at him, waiting for him to turn around?

I don't know. But you said this:


If the guard you ambush after examining the corridor from 3rd person has enough time to turn around and fire enough bullets into you to get you killed, what chance do you stand in any sort of a fire fight?
Why would he have enough time to turn around? You posed an 'if' question. To which I responded that if you ambushed him correctly, your hypothetical remains a hypothetical.



Seriously?

Yes.


Either he has an ability to spot you leaving cover even after turning around (hear steps, or whatever) or you just get kill after kill.
I know they said the detection is LoS, but didn't they also say there are audio cues as well?


You can't make 3rd person stealth difficult without making fire fights impossible.
Because a few games haven't been able to do it, this is an ironclad gaming law?


Splinter Cell already came up in this discussion.Good for Splinter Cell.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 07:56
Was there ever a point in DX1 where you didn't have close to the max medkits? Or any point where you needed to use a medkit but didn't have any? The medkits were so abundant to have caused the same lack of urgency you're lamenting here.
If you actually took time to explore, sure. If you didn't, you had to learn to.

Because you have to survive the battle and the regeneration doesn't take place in the battle? Because the abundance of medkits in the first game essentially made it free health?
A better compromise would have been health kits that take a few second to replenish your health, and that get interrupted by additional damage.

But you still have no leg to stand on. You took something that is inherently finite, even if plentiful, and replaced it with something that's inherently infinite.

Considering the fact that there is plenty of cover to take at all times, it's not a solution to the problem. It's replacing a problem of quantity with problem of quality, which is also known as "making things even worse".

serjo
21st Jun 2010, 07:57
for Deus Ex's sake....pm me the video!
Thank you

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 07:58
And if you play on Realistic, they are almost useless. As in my previous post, have a good read.
Right. Let's tailor a game to not just the hardcore audience, but the hardcore of hardcore audience that only play on Realistic. What percentage of gamer do you think only plays on Realistic?

Do you just not care that there's a story reason for the regenerative health?

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 08:00
Wow this thread exploded. I'm not even going to try and catch up.



you didn't miss much

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:01
Right. Let's tailor a game to not just the hardcore audience, but the hardcore of hardcore audience that only play on Realistic. What percentage of gamer do you think only plays on Realistic?

Probably the same percentage that like me, after having finished it on normal and hard, wanted more from the game.


Do you just not care that there's a story reason for the regenerative health?

Put it this way, which do you think came first. The regenerative health, or the story as a reason to include it?

Random
21st Jun 2010, 08:02
You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1 and, even if it was only an augmentation, it was an augmentation that everyone who played the game took so it's really a moot issue.

Not disagreeing with your whole post, but just with this part. There was health regen in DX1, but it consumed bioelectric energy, which you needed to replenish with consumables. So it's effectively the same thing as using medpacks, you just consume biocells instead.

But I don't really have a problem with health regen in DX:HR. It's impossible to know how it'll work until we play it, and different ways of playing mean it'll be very hard for Eidos to balance the difficulty with regenning health, but we'll see.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 08:03
Do you just not care that there's a story reason for the regenerative health?

It's all very convenient, isn't it.

JC didn't have auto magic heal, and it's set 27 years in the future and he's the most up to date being there is. That's weird, don't you think?

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:05
If you actually took time to explore, sure. If you didn't, you had to learn to.
I asked a different poster the percent of players he thought play each playthrough on Hardcore. I would hazard a guess that the players who didn't have enough medkits are just as uncommon as the only on hardcore/realistic playthroughers.

What about you, personally?



A better compromise would have been health kits that take a few second to replenish your health, and that get interrupted by additional damage.

There's a built in story reason for the regenerating health. Why isn't that sufficient? You're given a precursor to an augmentation from the first game against your choice. In your case, that should immerse you even more because you're so vehemently opposed to it, as is Adam towards getting work done to his body.



But you still have no leg to stand on. You took something that is inherently finite, even if plentiful, and replaced it with something that's inherently infinite.

It's finite in name only. In practice it's infinite.



It's replacing a problem of quantity with problem of quality, which is also known as "making things even worse".
It's replacing [4 + 3] with [5 + 2]. They're both seven.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 08:05
It's all very convenient, isn't it.

JC didn't have auto magic heal, and it's set 27 years in the future and he's the most up to date being there is. That's weird, don't you think?

The economy is a huge turd in Deus Ex though

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:05
I don't know. But you said this:


Why would he have enough time to turn around? You posed an 'if' question. To which I responded that if you ambushed him correctly, your hypothetical remains a hypothetical.


Yes.


I know they said the detection is LoS, but didn't they also say there are audio cues as well?


Because a few games haven't been able to do it, this is an ironclad gaming law?

Good for Splinter Cell.
If you are going to keep treating every sentence as disjointed from the conversation, we are not going to have a conversation. You can follow that, can't you? Ok, lets try something a little more advanced. Don't read each paragraph on its own. Follow them through and consider how they connect. It's called logic.

First. Finding opportune time for attack in 3rd person is easier than in first person. I hope you don't argue with that. It's a simple fact.

So to balance that, we are told that Adam can "rarely take more than 4 bullets" at a time. Ok. But how does that fix the problem? If you made a successful attack, it doesn't matter how many hits Adam can take. This only applies to failed attacks.

This means, that while standing behind a corner, and watching a guard turn around and start walking away, there is still a chance to mess up the sneak attack. Again, if I can't mess it up, how many bullets Adam can take is irrelevant. He won't be shot at.

So say you can mess it up somehow. Guard has how much time to turn around and kill you? Not a lot. If he fails to fire off the 5+ shots and kill you, it doesn't matter how many shots you took. You'll regenerate.

So in brief time it takes you to jump out from behind the corner and kill a guard, he should be able to kill you if he does spot you, by whatever means. Otherwise, there is no difficulty, let alone challenge, to the stealth.

Now, if he can kill you in so brief a time when you surprise him, how are you supposed to have an actual combat? Sure, if you keep going one-on-one and dropping enemy first, it's all good. But who gets the short off first in an open fire fight will be fairly random.

So in fire fights, you'll keep getting randomly killed. The only way to avoid that, is to allow you to take a few hits before it becoming a problem. But then it again becomes a problem with stealth.

You can't have both good stealth and good gunfight in a game with 3rd person stealth and regenerating health. The two options contradict each other.

That's a major problem. And one you cannot resolve by simply attacking individual statements I make as if they are disjoint from conversation. You might feel good about yourself, but it won't make the game any better.

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 08:06
And if you play on Realistic, they are almost useless. As in my previous post, have a good read.

well since we don´t know at what kind of difficulty the demo was using the highest one in Deus Ex 1 gives a bit unfair image, comparing it to Deus Ex when you play on normal makes more sense. And as someone who last played Deus Ex 1 yesterday I can say yes there is such a abundance of health packs you would have to be playing like Rambo not to have a huge stock all the time. And once you had the regen aug they make a nice looking mini tower (damn should have taken a screen shot, looks so silly :3)

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:06
It's all very convenient, isn't it.

JC didn't have auto magic heal, and it's set 27 years in the future and he's the most up to date being there is. That's weird, don't you think?
Yes he did.

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 08:07
It's all very convenient, isn't it.

JC didn't have auto magic heal, and it's set 27 years in the future and he's the most up to date being there is. That's weird, don't you think?

Only reason JC didn't have it off the bat story-wise (I presume) was because Nanotech augmentation was, relatively speaking, just out of the lab. The first ever batch of third-party augs were just shipping from production by the time he hit Liberty Island.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 08:09
Yes he did.

No he didn't - not in my game :) if I wanted it I had to make the sacrifice of energy. A resource that wasn't common!

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:09
It's replacing [4 + 3] with [5 + 2]. They're both seven.
You can't make a math analogy if it's not connected to subject you're talking about. That's not how it works. What's 4? What's 5?

You took a problem where you had excessive quantity and replaced it with infinite quantity. That's not the same thing, even if you personally did not notice the difference in your own experience.

At any rate, it is not an improvement. Reducing quantity would be an improvement. Changing effect of health kits would be an improvement. Replacing it with a mechanic that's inherently as bad as or worse and claiming it an improvement is just dishonest.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 08:09
It's all very convenient, isn't it.

JC didn't have auto magic heal, and it's set 27 years in the future and he's the most up to date being there is. That's weird, don't you think?

JC was also trained from birth to be a UN commando, yet couldn't hit the blind side of a barn. He also swam like a 5 year old.

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 08:10
No he didn't - not in my game :) if I wanted it I had to make the sacrifice of energy. A resource that wasn't common!

You should have looked harder.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:10
Probably the same percentage that like me, after having finished it on normal and hard, wanted more from the game.
You didn't answer the question. How many gamers, from the very start, play on the toughest of difficulties? Will you at least agree that the majority don't?


Put it this way, which do you think came first. The regenerative health, or the story as a reason to include it?
This irrelevant to the process of art. Sometimes when building a story, you work backwards from a known point to the beginning. Other times, you start from point A and see what organically evolves. Each way is just as valid as the other.

ShadowXOR
21st Jun 2010, 08:10
No he didn't - not in my game :) if I wanted it I had to make the sacrifice of energy. A resource that wasn't common!

Nano augmentations were new. Adam has mechanical augmentations for it JC had nano. Not everything available mechanically was available via nano yet.

Qwfwq
21st Jun 2010, 08:10
For what it's worth, I found stealth gameplay in DX rather frustrating. It's not because it was too difficult, but because it was difficult in all the wrong ways.

Enemy AI was wildly inconsistent. They were blind when you were crouched, but under certain circumstances (usually after killing someone near another guard) everyone would know exactly where you were, even if you had been concealed the entire time. Guards almost never searched in a sensible manner if they spotted you — they would either conclude it was a JC Denton-shaped apparition, or everyone on the map would start shooting you. Sometimes they would get stuck on stairs because the pathfinding was awful. If you were lucky, they would mysteriously forget you were even there if you hid for long enough.

It was nearly impossible to score a silent one-hit melee takedown (sometimes the riot prod succeeded at this, but it consumed ammunition). How is it that augmented secret agent man can't knock a guy out in one blow or snap his neck, or even just stab him through the neck so he doesn't scream when he dies? Whether by intent or not, the available melee weapons made stealth frustrating not because of an interesting challenge, but because JC was apparently the worst secret agent ever.

I don't want an aspect of a game to be challenging because all of my tools arbitrarily suck (unless it's consistent with the premise). That aspects of DX were challenging demonstrates nothing. I want challenges to be creative in their own design, not just in the solutions they prompt.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:12
You can't make a math analogy if it's not connected to subject you're talking about. That's not how it works. What's 4? What's 5?
Different factors of the different systems.



You took a problem where you had excessive quantity and replaced it with infinite quantity. That's not the same thing, even if you personally did not notice the difference in your own experience.

What percent of gamers did experience it? A large enough segment to painstakingly craft the game to? Hardly.



At any rate, it is not an improvement. Reducing quantity would be an improvement. Changing effect of health kits would be an improvement. Replacing it with a mechanic that's inherently as bad as or worse and claiming it an improvement is just dishonest.
I never said it was an improvement. It's a tautology.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:12
You didn't answer the question. How many gamers, from the very start, play on the toughest of difficulties? Will you at least agree that the majority don't?
What's your point?

If a game is too easy on lower difficulty settings, I restart with higher difficulty. It doesn't take long to spot.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Jun 2010, 08:12
You didn't answer the question. How many gamers, from the very start, play on the toughest of difficulties? Will you at least agree that the majority don't?


I always go for the toughtest difficulty first. IF it is too tough, then I drop a notch and restart the game. Its trial and error really, but I do always start at the highest first and see how I get on. So, I think you are wrong.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:13
You should have looked harder.
Yeah. No kidding.

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 08:13
You should have looked harder.

Agreed :) This was many years ago when I was completely immersed in the game and the story and gameplay though, not much time to explore the scary world for something I didn't know I'd find.

Regardless - you both prove that auto health regen for free isn't a direct fair replacement for looking for the resource to enable it - which as you both admit, was hard.

Not a fair trade. Neither in a story sense, or a gameplay one.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:14
well since we don´t know at what kind of difficulty the demo was using the highest one in Deus Ex 1 gives a bit unfair image, comparing it to Deus Ex when you play on normal makes more sense. And as someone who last played Deus Ex 1 yesterday I can say yes there is such a abundance of health packs you would have to be playing like Rambo not to have a huge stock all the time. And once you had the regen aug they make a nice looking mini tower (damn should have taken a screen shot, looks so silly :3)

That's nice, I was playing it earlier today when I got it working on my Mac, for a good 5 hours. Does the time someone last played it affect anything they say? I'll go fire it up now if it helps peoples understanding.

Let's clarify a few things that have been brought up, just so this inane comparison between health packs and health regeneration can go away for good (I'm betting it won't):

Health packs


Have to be found
Require lockpicks or multitools to find them all
Do less healing on higher difficulties
Take up one spot in your inventory
There is not an infinite amount


Regenerative health via an AUG in DE1


Isn't given to you at the start of the game
Requires you to choose it as there is an alternative
Requires power cells to keep using
Requires you to find it
Because it requires power, there is not an infinite amount. No, the power AUG does not give infinite power.


Regenerative health in Deus Ex revolution

You have it from the start, does not have to be found
Requires no power source
You can use it as much as you like out of combat, it is infinite


k?

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:15
I always go for the toughtest difficulty first. IF it is too tough, then I drop a notch and restart the game. Its trial and error really, but I do always start at the highest first and see how I get on. So, I think you are wrong.
Do you think the majority of gamers are like you?

I'm not saying tailor the game to the lowest common denominator. But I'm not saying the game should be tailored to the hardest of hardcore, either.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 08:16
if nothing else, the alternative to regen in de1 was just absolutely bloody awful

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 08:16
Apart from using no periods and having an insanely long sentence structure that makes no sense when you haven't quoted what I said, which was what I asked for, I'm going to have to go in point form.

1. If you cannot see how seeing around corners makes a game easier when you previously had to stay out of their line of site, and take peeks in a first person view then you really need to have a deep think about why that would be evident to anyone.

2. Third person = being able to see around a corner, leaning out or not. First person = Only being able to see around when you look. How is this hard to comprehend? You're not doing well so far.

3. You keep quoting the AI as if I praised it in some way, yes the AI is dumb, the game is still harder than any game out today. Do you want to maybe say that again using some structure? And quoting which post of mine you are referring to?

Congrats on proving my point yet again. You say nothing in particular to refute the argument at hand. You just insult me three times and say I'm wrong.




4. LOL, I failed to respond to my own point? I brought it up myself. Wow.

Your point was about how, because health regen was an augment in DX1, that made it irrelevant in a comparison between it and HR which has health regen by default. To which the counterpoint, which you never responded to, was that literally everyone took the health regen augment in DX1, effectively making it a moot point.

Perhaps you should try some reading comprehension yourself?


5. I cannot fail to elaborate on something that doesn't exist. In my current game, where I am presently in Hong Kong, a health pack gives me 30 or so hit points per heal. Damage is brutal so one med kit barely makes a difference, I need close to 10 or so to get a decent heal after a hefty fight, or running from gunfire. Again I have no idea where you pulled those stats from but I am notorious for providing video evidence, if you would like some, or if you would like to consult the game yourself you can then be properly informed. By the way you have to first find these medkits, and without exploring or using lockpicks / multitools in exchange you won't get as many. Do you really want to compare all of that to regenerating health? Really? Again, fail.

I'll have to agree to disagree with you there, as I never had any problem finding health packs in DX1 and don't recall any point where I actually needed one and didn't have it. And as I'm not the only one who's pointed that fact out, it seems you're in the minority there. But as usual, it's "FAIL" and move on...

By the way, you still have not explained how only being able to take 4-5 shots before dying and having to wait until you're out of combat for health regeneration to kick in is fundamentally easier than being a literal bullet sponge and being able to pop a health pack mid battle to instantly recover your health. The fact that you apparently have trouble finding health packs in your playthrough does nothing to negate this.


6. Again: Inform yourself first. Did you even play the first or are you going from distant memories? For a start the close up takedowns in Revolution happen if you sneak up on them or not. In DE1 the riot prod doesn't take them down in one prodding the majority of the time, nor do the mini crossbow tranq darts as they are time delayed. If they see you and you take them front on, it can take up to 3 prods to bring them down. As I said, in Revolution, either way it's a one button wonder. Again, you have nothing.

All of that could be found by actually playing and familiarizing yourself with the game. If you're going to keep going, please actually quote what I said as half of your examples are gibberish.

Takedowns in HR are also limited and you won't be able to spam them as you could your riot prod or DTS in DX1. The fact of the matter is, we don't know everything there is to know about how they work yet (so don't act like you do), and it's been stated in interviews already that a takedown outside of stealth in full view of enemies is not only vastly more difficult but also functions differently (and the fact that you again die in only 4-5 shots would mean that an unstealthed takedown is likely to result in certain death).

You're taking HR concepts and applying them as if it was DX1, which it is not.

Again, you have nothing.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:16
Different factors of the different systems.
Prove that it's 5, and not 6. You can't, because you are making up numbers. That's not an argument.



I never said it was an improvement. It's a tautology.
No. A tautology is a statement of the form A is because A.

Two different implementations that result in equivalent experience are not a tautology.

And keep in mind that in one implementation, a player at least has a chance to use up his resources on something stupid, or not to go search for them in the first place. In another, it's inherently infinite. One you can tweak to improve (and people have edited DX maps to reduce number of health kits) another is always infinite.

You keep trying to use fancy terms and math in your "proofs" without understanding them. No wonder you don't understand why stealth and action are mutually exclusive in a game with 3rd person and health regeneration. That requires several steps of logic or some experience.

Qwfwq
21st Jun 2010, 08:16
Man this thread sucks.

A: "I think this."
B: "I disagree."
A: "I am right, you are wrong."
B: "I am right, you are wrong."

Ad nauseam. You can throw in some other participants for variety and a more complete representation.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:17
What's your point?
That tailoring the game to the hardest of hardcore is a sure way to make an inaccessible, financial loss that will end the Deus Ex series.


If a game is too easy on lower difficulty settings, I restart with higher difficulty. It doesn't take long to spot.
Your first playthrough of Deus Ex. What difficulty level did you play at/

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 08:20
Regenerative health in Deus Ex revolution

You can use it as much as you like out of combat, it is infinite




and there in bold is the gameplay balance, only out of combat, because in the end anyone with low health and no packs in Deus Ex 1 would simply quickload until you came threw combat as unharmed as possible.


so in the end the only thing health regen does is removing busy work, and to me busy work =/= "deep" and "smart" gameplay, it´s just busy work and nothing else.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:21
You didn't answer the question. How many gamers, from the very start, play on the toughest of difficulties? Will you at least agree that the majority don't?

I played on hard, what is the difference? Deus Ex had replayability because of it, it was one layer anyway. A great one. This is the whole point anyway. The majority of people aren't exactly the smartest tools in any shed, so anyone with half a brain suffers. Why not just cater for us to shut us up? Surely it isn't hard to take out regenerative health on a harder difficulty setting - and if they have why not just say they have?


This irrelevant to the process of art. Sometimes when building a story, you work backwards from a known point to the beginning. Other times, you start from point A and see what organically evolves. Each way is just as valid as the other.

Again, like the other guy, you're inventing reasons for them - it is incredibly lame. It's what they do now in games to make them easier, period. Yes, period, it is one of the most favorable 'design' choices to go with.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:21
Prove that it's 5, and not 6. You can't, because you are making up numbers. That's not an argument.
[infinite medpacks + using them either behind a box during a fight or after] = [regenerative health, but health that only comes in well after firefights]

You're really grasping at straws, here.


No. A tautology is a statement of the form A is because A.

Two different implementations that result in equivalent experience are not a tautology.

I'm sorry I wasn't semantically correct. Even still, the systems are in practice the same.


And keep in mind that in one implementation, a player at least has a chance to use up his resources on something stupid, or not to go search for them in the first place. In another, it's inherently infinite. One you can tweak to improve (and people have edited DX maps to reduce number of health kits) another is always infinite.

You have to go out of your way to not have enough medkits.

And people editing DX maps != the actual DX game, and has no place in this discussion.


You keep trying to use fancy terms and math in your "proofs" without understanding them. No wonder you don't understand why stealth and action are mutually exclusive in a game with 3rd person and health regeneration. That requires several steps of logic or some experience.
Okay. You win.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:21
That tailoring the game to the hardest of hardcore is a sure way to make an inaccessible, financial loss that will end the Deus Ex series.
And making a game that is beatable by anyone, which is what's done today, makes it into a movie, not a game. Or an "experience" as the D'Astous likes to put it.

Your first playthrough of Deus Ex. What difficulty level did you play at/
You really think I remember? Again, why does that matter?

the resolute girl
21st Jun 2010, 08:22
gameleak:
- one button instakills: bad, bad, bad
it's like a constant "break immersion NOW" button and even after the brief demo it was already annoying. I'm sure someone will play through the game and measure how long you are watching stuff you don't have any impact on instead of PLAYING the game. It's the basic 101 nono's of gamedesign and the DX team seems to trample it with its feet. the constant switching is the most jarring.
- then there are augs/skill that are merged and you need XP TO UPGRADE THEM ??? wtf ?
- double takedowns that trigger from any distance ? how lame is that ?
- punch thru wall takedown that does not alert anyone in the vicinity ? enemy AI 1.0 ?
yeah, it all looks nice and the city looks living and the levels look semi-open and the animations are nice but if that is all I will do during my gameplay, watch perspective-shifts and one-button kill animations I cannot interrupt than: no, thank you. I thought I will buy a VIDEOGAME, not an interactive movie.

and to the above: I usually start ANY game on the hardest difficulty because nowadays HARD is the new EASY.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:24
[infinite medpacks + using them either behind a box during a fight or after] = [regenerative health, but health that only comes in well after firefights]
And that has to do with numbers....

In any case, even if I fiat you that these really are the same, it's something which could have been improved in an obvious way, but isn't.

Even if they ended up working equally bad, you start with a system that can be fixed, and go to the system which can't be. From a system where you had the worst case scenario play out, to the one that does the same thing in its best case scenario.

You don't see a problem with that?

beastrn
21st Jun 2010, 08:25
That's nice, I was playing it earlier today when I got it working on my Mac, for a good 5 hours. Does the time someone last played it affect anything they say? I'll go fire it up now if it helps peoples understanding.

Let's clarify a few things that have been brought up, just so this inane comparison between health packs and health regeneration can go away for good (I'm betting it won't):

Health packs


Have to be found
Require lockpicks or multitools to find them all
Do less healing on higher difficulties
Take up one spot in your inventory
There is not an infinite amount


Regenerative health via an AUG in DE1


Isn't given to you at the start of the game
Requires you to choose it as there is an alternative
Requires power cells to keep using
Requires you to find it
Because it requires power, there is not an infinite amount. No, the power AUG does not give infinite power.


Regenerative health in Deus Ex revolution

You have it from the start, does not have to be found
Requires no power source
You can use it as much as you like out of combat, it is infinite


k?

qft

Anyone seriously arguing that FREE/AUTOMATIC HEALTH REGENERATION is anything but a gameplay concession for console noobs needs to print this post, frame it, put it up in the toilet, and recite it every morning and night.

medpacks - you earn them and spend resources and time to obtain them
health regeneration - you get it for free, for no reason, and need to do nothing for them. Also gaurentees you're at full health for every fight and never have to worry about resource managment, or, anything, really.

There's a term for this.. what is it...

DUMBING DOWN

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:25
I played on hard, what is the difference?
You didn't play on realistic.


Again, like the other guy, you're inventing reasons for them - it is incredibly lame. It's what they do now in games to make them easier, period. Yes, period, it is one of the most favorable 'design' choices to go with.
You have no concept of how art is created.

Look at a television show like Breaking Bad. Before writing Season Two, the writers came up with the end of the season. The very last scene. They had no idea how this was going to happen, but they knew that this is how they wanted to end the season. So they worked backwards from it. How this event was going to happen. The principals involved. What would have to happen to the principals to get them there. It worked, and all critics say it was one of the finest seasons of television in the last decade.

Before writing Season Three, the writers wrote it in an entirely different fashion. They had no idea what was going to happen in the scene after the one they were currently writing. They didn't start with Z, and go back to Y, then X, and so on. They started with A, went to B, then C, and ended up at a conclusion just as powerful as the end of the Season before, a Season that was written in an entirely different fashion. It worked, and all critics say it was also one of the finest seasons of television in the last decade.

In terms of art, the question of "which came first, the chicken or the egg" has no bearing. It's all part of the creative process, and the order is wholly irrelevant.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:27
Congrats on proving my point yet again. You say nothing in particular to refute the argument at hand. You just insult me three times and say I'm wrong.

WHAT ARGUMENT, for a start you didn't even make sense and deciphering what the hell you were on about without quotes or full stops was about as fun as catching cancer.


Your point was about how, because health regen was an augment in DX1, that made it irrelevant in a comparison between it and HR which has health regen by default. To which the counterpoint, which you never responded to, was that literally everyone took the health regen augment in DX1, effectively making it a moot point.

Perhaps you should try some reading comprehension yourself?

My point was my point, your point didn't make sense as I did bring it up. I'm finding it *really* hard not to call you an idiot when you can see as plain as day I brought up what you said I didn't. Here, Ill show you:


You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1


Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?


You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1


Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?


You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1


Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ****ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

As for the rest, if it's as nauseating as the previous you can count me out. YOU DON;T EVEN MAKE SENSE. QUOTE WHAT I SAID AND WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:28
You have no concept of how art is created.

Look at a television show like Breaking Bad

Again, making excuses for them.

Being that I create art everyday, literally for a living, perhaps I need to re-evaluate this concept because a forum dweller told me so *rolleyes*

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:29
You have no concept of how art is created.
Well, THERE is your problem. It's a game, not art. Not a frigin' movie. If they wanted to make art, they should have made an animated series. They'd have all the opportunities to show off Adam's new hair do, and they wouldn't have to worry about some viewers being unable to make it to that final cinematic they put so much effort into.

Why the hell did they have to make it into a game, if they just want people to watch it?

Edit: Not that game can't ALSO be art. But it's a game first, damn it.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:29
And that has to do with numbers....
Are you intentionally being thick? Do you not understand what an analogy is?



In any case, even if I fiat you that these really are the same, it's something which could have been improved in an obvious way, but isn't.
So don't say regenerative health sucks. If you're going to say regenerative health sucks, you also in the same argument have to say the health system in the first game sucked. Because they're one in the same.


Even if they ended up working equally bad, you start with a system that can be fixed, and go to the system which can't be. From a system where you had the worst case scenario play out, to the one that does the same thing in its best case scenario.

You don't see a problem with that?
If I thought the first health system sucked, I'd be in agreement with you.

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 08:30
medpacks - you earn them and spend resources and time to obtain them
health regeneration - you get it for free, for no reason, and need to do nothing for them. Also gaurentees you're at full health for every fight and never have to worry about resource managment, or, anything, really.


so? Anyone with half sense in Deus Ex 1 would have quicksaved/quickloaded until they barly took any damage anyway. No player wanna be foolish to go into a gunfight near death anyway so they use whatever method they can to not be, again I see it more as streamlining and busy work removal rather then dumbing down.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:31
Well, THERE is your problem. It's a game, not art.
Games aren't art? What? Where have you been on the internet in the last few months where you didn't encounter the outcry against Roger Ebert who decreed the same thing you just did?



Not a frigin' movie. If they wanted to make art, they should have made an animated series. They'd have all the opportunities to show off Adam's new hair do, and they wouldn't have to worry about some viewers being unable to make it to that final cinematic they put so much effort into.

Why the hell did they have to make it into a game, if they just want people to watch it?Why can't one interact with art? Why can't one be a participant in art?

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:32
Again, making excuses for them.
How am I making excuses for them? By granting them creative process? Creative process is an excuse? What?


Being that I create art everyday, literally for a living, perhaps I need to re-evaluate this concept because a forum dweller told me so *rolleyes*
And what art is that?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:32
so?

There beastrn, the massive problem with this game. You change anything for the worst, and this is basically the pushing behind any argument. Give up mate.

Marses
21st Jun 2010, 08:33
Going to bed, gents. Later.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:34
How am I making excuses for them? By granting them creative process? Creative process is an excuse? What?

You are making references to a show, base it on something they have said themselves and you might have a point, till then, stop speculating and look at the trend in every single freaking game or reboot of a franchise, and use your brain. I cant be any clearer than that.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:34
Are you intentionally being thick? Do you not understand what an analogy is?
I actually do. Analogy is something where equivalent relation is demonstrated. Not when you come up with a situation that has relation you need, and say it's the same as the given situation, using analogy as argument that they are the same relation. That's not called an analogy. That's called circular logic.

you also in the same argument have to say the health system in the first game sucked
It did. Was that your whole point? Because you just wasted a lot of time simply making an assumption I disagreed with you.

What I said is that problem that's quantitative, such as the one in first game, is easier to fix than the qualitative one of HR. People HAVE made mods that fix abundance problem for Deus Ex. How do you propose fixing HR?

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:36
Why can't one interact with art? Why can't one be a participant in art?
One can. It's called interactive art. It's not called a game. A game has a goal and a choice of strategy, only some of strategies actually leading to the goal.

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 08:37
There beastrn, the massive problem with this game. You change anything for the worst, and this is basically the pushing behind any argument. Give up mate.

*shrugs* whatever if you wanna act like your opinion is a guiding light everyone must agree upon fine, at least I can happy knowing there is a bigger chance I get a copy of this game because some keep insisting looking back rather then forward.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:38
*shrugs* whatever if you wanna act like your opinion is a guiding light everyone must agree upon fine, at least I can happy knowing there is a bigger chance I get a copy of this game because some keep insisting looking back rather then forward.

So?

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 08:39
http://carrielikethemovie.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/buzz-lightyear.jpg

this thread in toy story language

"old buzz lightyear wuz awesome and if you dont like it your a retard

* lists reasons *

"new buzz lightyear is awesome and if you dont like it you fail

*lists reasons*


none are right and whoever wins, maturity loses

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:43
*hey look @ me*

Is that like your 6th off topic cry for attention? Sorry for breaking the trend by replying, please give up and go away.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 08:44
I'm trying to get everyone to chill the **** out.

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 08:45
Is that like your 6th off topic cry for attention? Sorry for breaking the trend by replying, please give up and go away.

more like the blunt truth, I for one agree with him, it´s not like this arguing back and forth will change the game in the end. You have your Deus Ex 1 and we other (soon) will have Deus Ex Human Revolution, simple as that.

LisuPL
21st Jun 2010, 08:46
Like it's been stated before....free auto-regen 27 years prior to the DX1 is illogical.....I can't imagine technology, that requires power source is superior to one witch is available from start...works like a full-auto and uses no power....

Just plain silly....this shows, that EM doens't have full knowledge about DX franchise and storyline.....and ofcourse, that consoles are responsible for death of real games....isn't it odd, that a lot of epic games came out in years 1999...2000...2001....(System Shock 2, Half-Life 1, Deus Ex 1) when consoles were still weak and had crappy games (with some exceptions ofcourse)?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Jun 2010, 08:46
I'm trying to get everyone to chill the **** out.

Enter "The Hive"... :cool:

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 08:50
This thread is simultaneously the most entertaining and irritating thing I've read recently. Keep it up! http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/popcorn.gif

Lady_Of_The_Vine
21st Jun 2010, 08:51
This thread is simultaneously the most entertaining and irritating thing I've read recently. Keep it up! http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/popcorn.gif

Lots of fun. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/popcorn.gif

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 08:52
WHAT ARGUMENT, for a start you didn't even make sense and deciphering what the hell you were on about without quotes or full stops was about as fun as catching cancer.

My point was my point, your point didn't make sense as I did bring it up. I'm finding it *really* hard not to call you an idiot when you can see as plain as day I brought up what you said I didn't. Here, Ill show you:



Originally Posted by Keiichi81
You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1



Originally Posted by Philljc
Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?



Originally Posted by Keiichi81
You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1



Originally Posted by Philljc
Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?



Originally Posted by Keiichi81
You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1



Originally Posted by Philljc
Nothing? No nothing at all, nothing like all the emphasis on killing, using ty cover systems, health regeneration that isn't an aug, animated take downs that leave no room for user error.. do I really have to reiterate the list again?

As for the rest, if it's as nauseating as the previous you can count me out. YOU DON;T EVEN MAKE SENSE. QUOTE WHAT I SAID AND WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

Wrong. This is what I said:



Originally posted by Keiichi81
"You claimed that health regeneration was cheap and removed all skill from the game, failing to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1 and, even if it was only an augmentation, it was an augmentation that everyone who played the game took so it's really a moot issue."

Notice the helpful bolded parts designed to show you context since you seem incapable of finding it on your own without it being highlighted for you. The fact that you pointed out in a prior post that a health regeneration augmentation was indeed present in DX1 is not the issue. The point to which you failed to respond is that, as practically everyone took said augment, it may as well be a moot issue. Isn't context lovely?

But then this is all just a tangent. Congrats on taking what I said, truncating it, removing the context and then focusing on it to the exclusion of all else. An internet winnar is you. Bonus points for repetition!

I'm done with you. It's bed time.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 08:53
isn't it odd, that a lot of epic games came out in years 1999...2000...2001....(System Shock 2, Half-Life 1, Deus Ex 1) when consoles were still weak?
These were the few exceptions among already mostly bad games. After that, the exceptions simply... got even fewer.

Most of the games I really enjoy are from the early to mid 90's. A few are from the late 80's. Even fewer from the past decade. This has not been a good decade for games. But consoles are more of a symptom than the cause.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:55
more like the blunt truth, I for one agree with him, it´s not like this arguing back and forth will change the game in the end. You have your Deus Ex 1 and we other (soon) will have Deus Ex Human Revolution, simple as that.

Yeh what was I thinking, taking a forum designed for discussion & debating and making something of it. Just stop everyone, find one point and agree on it because arguing back and forth was NOT vBulletins intention. Better yet can we have one rule dictating what we should believe / think? Better yet, I'm sure Ubersuntzu could tell us. Thanks.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 08:57
Wrong. This is what I said:

Notice the helpful bolded parts designed to show you context since you seem incapable of finding it on your own without it being highlighted for you. The fact that you pointed out in a prior post that a health regeneration augmentation was indeed present in DX1 is not the issue. The point to which you failed to respond is that, as practically everyone took said augment, it may as well be a moot issue. Isn't context lovely?

But then this is all just a tangent. Congrats on taking what I said, truncating it, removing the context and then focusing on it to the exclusion of all else. An internet winnar is you. Bonus points for repetition!

I'm done with you. It's bed time.

*deep breath*

I POINTED IT OUT

What is there to respond to??? Though hey, if you fcking quoted the posts like I asked you to instead of going off on a tirade of nonsensical sht then we'd be in a world of clarity right now.

LisuPL
21st Jun 2010, 08:58
These were the few exceptions among already mostly bad games. After that, the exceptions simply... got even fewer.

Most of the games I really enjoy are from the early to mid 90's. A few are from the late 80's. Even fewer from the past decade. This has not been a good decade for games. But consoles are more of a symptom than the cause.

I have a feeling, that consoles are both cause and symptom of current direction of "game" developing.
Still PC will never ultimately fail...it just can't.....you can always mod things, games, make stuff custom....upgrade your PC and overall have better graphics, than on console.....
Console games are like "you play what you get and that's it" way for me.
Modding is the essential part of PC gaming for me.....take The Nameless Mod for DX1 for instance....masterpiece done on PC, for PC and only for PC....feels good....

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 08:59
Wow, I left this thread a couple hours ago. Apparently just before things blew up. Forums are such fun :D

LisuPL
21st Jun 2010, 09:01
Wow, I left this thread a couple hours ago. Apparently just before things blew up. Forums are such fun :D

Soon you will need help of the Electronic Old Men to stop the riots on this forum boards.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 09:04
Soon you will need help of the Electronic Old Men to stop the riots on this forum boards.

whenever you have a problem you can always solve it with electronic old men :D

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 09:06
*deep breath*

I POINTED IT OUT

What is there to respond to??? Though hey, if you fcking quoted the posts like I asked you to instead of going off on a tirade of nonsensical sht then we'd be in a world of clarity right now.

Yes, you pointed it out... two pages ago, well after the post to which you were quoting.

Isn't revisionist history fun?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 09:08
Yes, you pointed it out... two pages ago, well after the post to which you were quoting.

Isn't revisionist history fun?

Which post is that then? C L A R I F Y. Q U O T E. U R L. O M G.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 09:08
I have a feeling, that consoles are both cause and symptom of current direction of "game" developing.
Still PC will never ultimately fail...it just can't.....you can always mod things, games, make stuff custom....upgrade your PC and overall have better graphics, than on console.....
Console games are like "you play what you get and that's it" way for me.
Modding is the essential part of PC gaming for me.....take The Nameless Mod for DX1 for instance....masterpiece done on PC, for PC and only for PC....feels good....

The PC will always have it's place, yes for the mods is a big reason. I for one have always preffered the PC for gaming. It's a much more personal experience to use the PC. We have a PS3 and Wii, I never use them unless I am going to watch a Blue ray or stream some Netflix or maybe play a racing game or something similar. Games that require alot of attention are much nicer in your own little world in front of the PC. You don't have people walking in front of the tv or asking you when your going to be done or "hey what are you playing" :lol: Or my favorite pet peeve. Telling you how you should be doing things in the game. There are more reasons but Im tired :D

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 09:08
Isn't revisionist history fun?
When in Rome...

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 09:12
Which post is that then? C L A R I F Y. Q U O T E. U R L. O M G.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1425722&postcount=166

Compared to the post to which you were quoting which was a full page prior.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1425643&postcount=122

Does that satisfy or do I need to go digging for more hyperlinks just to further clarify your own statements?

See you in the morning.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 09:27
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1425722&postcount=166

Compared to the post to which you were quoting which was a full page prior.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1425643&postcount=122

Does that satisfy or do I need to go digging for more hyperlinks just to further clarify your own statements?

See you in the morning.

Timeline, ready?

Page 2 - I said it

Pages later - You said I didn't. You are now quoting posts that have NOTHING TO DO with what you originally said, but INSTEAD you're going the backpedaling route of playing semantics.

Mind fck: What does a post, 40 posts after your original kindergarten post, have to do with you being wrong in the first place? It's out of context? It only seemed to be out of context once you seen you were wrong. I'm now fairly convinced you have no idea what the hell you are on about, maybe I should make a powerpoint presentation with pretty colours so you can keep up?

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 09:32
Make it into a generic shooter. I think that will work better.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 09:32
Timeline, ready?

Page 2 - I said it

Pages later - You said I didn't. You are now quoting posts that have NOTHING TO DO with what you originally said, but INSTEAD you're going the backpedaling route of playing semantics.

Mind fck: What does a post, 40 posts after your original kindergarten post, have to do with you being wrong in the first place? It's out of context? It only seemed to be out of context once you seen you were wrong. I'm now fairly convinced you have no idea what the hell you are on about, maybe I should make a powerpoint presentation with pretty colours so you can keep up?

What time will the Powerpoint be ready ? I will get some sleep and come back :D

Jerion
21st Jun 2010, 09:34
Most of the games I really enjoy are from the early to mid 90's. A few are from the late 80's. Even fewer from the past decade. This has not been a good decade for games.

I don't know if there really are fewer good games compared to the 90s, but while there may be just as many diamonds, there's a whole lot more rough now.


But consoles are more of a symptom than the cause.

Agreed, except where graphics are concerned. :thumb:

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 09:46
I don't know if there really are fewer good games compared to the 90s, but while there may be just as many diamonds, there's a whole lot more rough now.
If I compile list of, oh, lets say top 20 games of all time, there will still be at least twice as many 90's games than 00's games. And that's without counting the sequels. In the 90's there were actually games with sequels better than originals.

Keiichi81
21st Jun 2010, 09:46
Timeline, ready?

Page 2 - I said it

Pages later - You said I didn't. You are now quoting posts that have NOTHING TO DO with what you originally said, but INSTEAD you're going the backpedaling route of playing semantics.

Mind fck: What does a post, 40 posts after your original kindergarten post, have to do with you being wrong in the first place? It's out of context? It only seemed to be out of context once you seen you were wrong. I'm now fairly convinced you have no idea what the hell you are on about, maybe I should make a powerpoint presentation with pretty colours so you can keep up?

I ALREADY POINTED OUT THAT YOU SAID THERE WERE HEALTH REGEN AUGS IN DX1, and in the very first post that you quoted no less! Jesus, are you intentionally being obtuse? At no point did I ever say that you didn't except in the truncated post that you edited to make it seem that way. Again, the issue to which I stated that you never responded (and I quote) was that you "failed to respond when it was pointed out that health regeneration was present in DX1 and...it was an augmentation that everyone in the game took." I can't spell it out any clearer than that.

The only example on page 2 were you even attempt to respond to that is here (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1425483&postcount=50) at post #50, where your rebuttal is (of course) to simply insult the maturity of the person who brought it up while ignoring the actual point.

But you know what? Even if I were to give this one to you - this one little meaningless snippet of my original post - as some sort of victory, it doesn't get you anything. Because you've still yet to respond to any of the other points I raised beyond your usual childish name calling. You've gone off on a complete tangent and wasted about 2 hours on nothing but a semantic technicality.

So congrats. Have a cookie.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 09:51
I never once used health regen in DX. In all my playthroughs, not once. A lot of people here didn't use it as a general rule. So your point fails either way.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 10:01
I ALREADY POINTED OUT THAT YOU SAID THERE WERE HEALTH REGEN AUGS IN DX1

Ding ding ding! There we have it! A minor miracle!


At no point did I ever say that you didn't except in the truncated post that you edited

Mods, admins, feel free to copy + paste all my edited posts here. Since they have all been spelling or grammatical corrections I wouldn't want him to get all huffy thinking something was kept secret or that I somehow tried to go back in time to make him look silly. Not that he didn't do a great job of that anyway :thumb:

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:03
vBulletin DB doesn't store old versions of posts. It simply overwrites the old one and adds "edited by" message.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 10:11
vBulletin DB doesn't store old versions of posts. It simply overwrites the old one and adds "edited by" message.

It depends, there's plenty of hacks to make that happen, on a forum this big I'd assume they would have added the functionality. I just don't want him to go to bed thinking '..what if' is all. He sounds like he needs a good nights sleep.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:13
I really doubt this place is that well maintained. It's more about getting rid of posts without leaving evidence than keeping track of changes, you know?

Though, there haven't been any particularly interesting incidents in a while. And you didn't get b&. I was surprised, actually.

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 10:23
Yeh what was I thinking, taking a forum designed for discussion & debating and making something of it. Just stop everyone, find one point and agree on it because arguing back and forth was NOT vBulletins intention. Better yet can we have one rule dictating what we should believe / think? Better yet, I'm sure Ubersuntzu could tell us. Thanks.

There is a difference between having a opinion and having a konstructive reason to defend it.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 10:32
There is a difference between having a opinion and having a konstructive reason to defend it.

I cannot imagine what would be more 'c'onstructive than defending a game that exemplified everything great about gaming, in contrast to something that epitomizes everything wrong with gaming, as a prequel. Maybe it's just me.

Brockxz
21st Jun 2010, 10:32
What's wrong with you people? Now I see why Eidos treat us like they are doing till now. You just saw leaked footage of pre-alpha or whatever gameplay that showed system how works that and that and what they want to achieve. It is clear that there is god mode on, all augs on and maxed etc etc that in final release it won 't be like that but all I hear is *****ing all over the thread. Once again, what's wrong with you people? Now read all this thread and think why developer don 't want to show anything to you that's not already final. I'm really don 't understand any of you what you are trying to achieve with this. Shame on you.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 10:33
That is your opinion and you are right to have one but calling people retards because they disagree on you is uncool.

ZakKa89
21st Jun 2010, 10:37
Maybe it's just me.

/thread

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 10:38
lol

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:40
That is your opinion and you are right to have one but calling people retards because they disagree on you is uncool.
I'm pretty sure he called people retards not for disagreeing with his opinion, but because they were unable to defend theirs.

If your opinion is just an opinion, keep it to yourself. If you wish to voice your opinion, be prepare to defend it. If your defense consists of, "no, you're wrong, because I'm right," you deserve to be called a retard.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 10:41
That is your opinion and you are right to have one but calling people retards because they disagree on you is uncool.

If I wanted to appear cool I'd be going with the grain and applauding this monstrosity. It looks good, okay. It plays alright, fine. It might even be game of the year. It can be all of that but it still isn't Deus Ex, if you think the opinion of 40 million 360 players is going to change that then you're wrong. If they have shown us anything it's that originality and innovation doesn't sell, but cheap gimmicks and easy game play in it's place.

I miss when gaming wasn't 'cool' or 'mainstream'. You see back then they made games for gamers, not for the intelligence of 4 year olds or pre-pubescent teens on forums trying to be funny, that's pretty much the entire mentality.

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 10:42
/thread

My last paragraph, case in point. Present an argument, and idiocy brings it down.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 10:46
If I wanted to appear cool I'd be going with the grain and applauding this monstrosity. It looks good, okay. It plays alright, fine. It might even be game of the year. It can be all of that but it still isn't Deus Ex, if you think the opinion of 40 million 360 players is going to change that then you're wrong. If they have shown us anything it's that originality and innovation doesn't sell, but cheap gimmicks and easy game play in it's place.

I miss when gaming wasn't 'cool' or 'mainstream'. You see back then they made games for gamers, not for the intelligence of 4 year olds or pre-pubescent teens on forums trying to be funny, that's pretty much the entire mentality.


So you miss when games were a super sekrit group of nerds and not a large demographic of people. You hate that fact and, when something made in the "good ol days" gets a sequel or in this case prequel you attack it out of some misplaced nostalgia.

I'm in the ballpark eh?

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:47
You see back then they made games for gamers
That's the part I really miss.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 10:48
Just think we only have months of this yet before the game comes out.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 10:48
and after it

remmus
21st Jun 2010, 10:48
I cannot imagine what would be more 'c'onstructive than defending a game that exemplified everything great about gaming, in contrast to something that epitomizes everything wrong with gaming, as a prequel. Maybe it's just me.

Arguing over gameplay mechanics thats already implemented in the game is far from construktive, it only adds to the image your some fanatic fanboy.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:49
So you miss when games were a super sekrit group of nerds and not a large demographic of people. You hate that fact and, when something made in the "good ol days" gets a sequel or in this case prequel you attack it out of some misplaced nostalgia.

I'm in the ballpark eh?
Again, I'd like to make comparison to pop music. It's crap. All of it. But it appeals to majority, because that's the only thing it's designed to do.

Something that's designed to cover the largest possible audience cannot be good.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 10:51
Again, I'd like to make comparison to pop music. It's crap. All of it. But it appeals to majority, because that's the only thing it's designed to do.

Something that's designed to cover the largest possible audience cannot be good.



there is good pop music like....


some 80s stuff .....


and Coldplay might be considered pop they are pretty good.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 10:55
80's pop is not real pop. It was practically techno, and mostly for the geeks by the geeks. It only started getting popular by the end of the 80's, which is when it really started being pop music, and started going really bad.

But really, what you're doing is comparing Jonas Brothers' latest album to Beethoven's 6th, and claiming that former is better because more people listen to it.

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 10:58
243 replys and only 55 votes, Im gonna go out on a limb and say we've drifted off topic :D

Manho221
21st Jun 2010, 11:00
80's pop is not real pop. It was practically techno, and mostly for the geeks by the geeks. It only started getting popular by the end of the 80's, which is when it really started being pop music, and started going really bad.

But really, what you're doing is comparing Jonas Brothers' latest album to Beethoven's 6th, and claiming that former is better because more people listen to it.


But Michael Jackson was 80's and he was the king of pop no ? God I cannot believe I entered this conversation :D

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 11:02
I'm... not even sure how to respond to that. You're still not going to compare Jackson to Beethoven, I hope?

Philljc
21st Jun 2010, 11:02
Arguing over gameplay mechanics thats already implemented in the game is far from construktive, it only adds to the image your some fanatic fanboy.

GOOD! I AM A FANBOY, I LIKE THINKING AND USING MY BRAIN. *SHOCK FCKING HORROR*


So you miss when games were a super sekrit group of nerds and not a large demographic of people. You hate that fact and, when something made in the "good ol days" gets a sequel or in this case prequel you attack it out of some misplaced nostalgia.

I'm in the ballpark eh?

No, you're not. Typically, again. Take smart people, or nerds as you just called them, try selling them the idea of Modern Warfare 2 when graphics weren't all pretty. What would it's selling point be? 7 games of the same thing backing it up? You'd be left with a stale piece of sht nobody wants to play. Try selling them an RPG FPS with skill trees, a decent story, great dialogue, lots of people to interactive with, open maps, an entire sub plot of conspiracies + whatever else. Guess which one they want to play? The problem with the macho male power fantasy bullsht in most FPS games is that it is the same crap again and again. Now even MOH is taking a shot at it.

Hurr hurr, I'm Adam, I kan mekk holez thru wallz LOL MA AUGS KILLZ SHT

If anyone here is from the Halo generation it is you, I can smell it, so I wouldn't expect you to agree which is why your opinion on anything means less to me than that of the turd I flushed at lunchtime.

Great_Ragnarok
21st Jun 2010, 11:03
If I wanted to appear cool I'd be going with the grain and applauding this monstrosity. It looks good, okay. It plays alright, fine. It might even be game of the year. It can be all of that but it still isn't Deus Ex, if you think the opinion of 40 million 360 players is going to change that then you're wrong. If they have shown us anything it's that originality and innovation doesn't sell, but cheap gimmicks and easy game play in it's place.

I miss when gaming wasn't 'cool' or 'mainstream'. You see back then they made games for gamers, not for the intelligence of 4 year olds or pre-pubescent teens on forums trying to be funny, that's pretty much the entire mentality.

alright then what would you have liked to see?
and don't tell me increased difficulty because it's confirmed by sites like "PC gamer",
that god mode was on and that 4 bullets can normally kill you.
also that infinite charge was on so he could spam takedowns.

hem dazon 90
21st Jun 2010, 11:03
what is this "halo generation" you speak of?


And I enjoy old games but unlike you I give newer games a chance before going down on them.

7h30n
21st Jun 2010, 11:03
On topic ... I'm gonna probably buy it, but since there is no such option in the poll, I'll vote "still on the fence"