PDA

View Full Version : Games™ #99: Jean Francis Dugas & Jonathan Jacques Belletete Interview



Esnuk
6th Aug 2010, 19:35
Deus Ex: Human Revolution.blogspot.com has just updated the site with an interesting interview (http://deusex-humanrevolution.blogspot.com/2010/08/games-99-jean-francis-dugas-jonathan.html) with new content about DXHR!

Anasumtj
6th Aug 2010, 19:55
On takedowns:

"I think it's one of the greatest parts of the game... People have reacted so well to them."

Haha, what the ****, no. diaf

Corpus
6th Aug 2010, 19:58
On takedowns:

"I think it's one of the greatest parts of the game... People have reacted so well to them."

Haha, what the ****, no. diaf

We're not the only people who have seen this game.

Why is this article talking about multiplayer.

Anasumtj
6th Aug 2010, 20:01
Everybody else who has seen this game is a tit.

Corpus
6th Aug 2010, 20:10
Everybody else who has seen this game is a tit.

Yes lets hate on everyone who differs in opinion :hmm:

WildcatPhoenix
6th Aug 2010, 20:21
Move along, people. Nothing to see here.

Okay yeah, there are a few small morsels of what could be generously described as "new information." But it's basically the same PR bullsh.it about "the incredible challenge of following a masterpiece...core gaming concepts...bla bla bla."

I'd honestly be okay with never reading another word out of Dugas or Belletete at this point. :hmm:

Ashpolt
6th Aug 2010, 20:26
On takedowns:

"I think it's one of the greatest parts of the game... People have reacted so well to them."

Haha, what the ****, no. diaf

This proves, once and for all, that they truly do listen to their fans. Bravo, EM, bravo.

For the window-licking among you, yes, that was sarcasm.

Anyone else really dislike the fact that Dugas says "there will be dialogue sections you have to contend with"? (Italics are mine.) It sounds like he considers the whole "non-shooting" side of the game as just holding up the parts where you get to shoot people. Which, given his background and what he's said in other interviews, seems about bang on.

Laughed when I got to the bit about the bungie augmentation. So you just renamed the tentacle aug then, huh? :lol: (That said, the way he describes it sounds a lot like the Icarus landing system: not exactly what I'd call a "bungie" aug.)

"If it's cereberal you're after then look no further than Human Revolution's story and dialogue." Really, don't look any further than that, because if you do, you'll get to the gameplay.... :nut:

What's with the bit about "confusion about the engine?" I'd never even heard the rumour that it was being developed using the Crystal Engine (FFXIII) before, never mind considered it might be true. Was that really worth a boxout?

Other than the points above, it's exactly the same as almost every other preview, including the same (now) boring police station example. Is it bad that I can predict these articles almost verbatim now?

Corpus
6th Aug 2010, 20:29
I say from now on don't bother posting an article unless you know for sure it has new info in :hmm:
Though we'll probably be doing it once a month or longer at that rate.

Kodaemon
6th Aug 2010, 20:40
Scans don't load for me, getting an infinife spinny loading thing.

Corpus
6th Aug 2010, 20:43
Note the two demo shots on page 25.
I'm expecting them to release footage of the E3 demo at gamescom. Kind of a let down since it was leaked, I feel bad for watching it now.

St. Mellow
6th Aug 2010, 20:44
This proves, once and for all, that they truly do listen to their fans. Bravo, EM, bravo.

For the window-licking among you, yes, that was sarcasm.

Or maybe they're in a deep state of denial.

Corpus
6th Aug 2010, 20:52
;1466535']Or maybe they're in a deep state of denial.

If you had to choose whether to tell a magazine "we've upset a lot of our fans" or "people have had good reactions" you would choose the former unless you wanna lose your job and decrease potential sales.

If they said we weren't too happy with it potential new audiences that like the new stuff are gonna think we're dumb and have been asking for things that they would hate. (assuming they said they upset us) The fact they've tried to keep it to the original as much as they can is gonna convince new audiences that the original sucked and so will this.

Always keep in mind we're not the only group people who have seen this and we're certainly not the majority in said amount of people.

Mindmute
6th Aug 2010, 21:01
If you had to choose whether to tell a magazine "we've upset a lot of our fans" or "people have had good reactions" you would choose the former unless you wanna lose your job and decrease potential sales.

(...)

Always keep in mind we're not the only group people who have seen this and we're certainly not the majority in said amount of people.

First, they could've said nothing, kept their design decision and not touched the issue in that manner by simply saying they were performing tweaks to it (even if they weren't).

Now regarding the second bit, this *is* however the official forum. If anything it acts ( or should act) like a sample of the opinions of those interested. The fact that they kept saying that many members of the team read these forums on a regular basis and then pull comments like this out of their hats is ridiculous, no matter how you want to look at it.

Anasumtj
6th Aug 2010, 21:05
Yes lets hate on everyone who differs in opinion :hmm:

I don't hate anybody.

I just hate their opinions!

/smartass

Absentia
6th Aug 2010, 21:26
Deus Ex had 4:3 screens, Today we use 16:9 screens, THE FUTURE IS HERE

Oh my God. Shut up, already.

WildcatPhoenix
6th Aug 2010, 22:00
Oh my God. Shut up, already.

I noticed that, too. I am convinced Belletete lives in his own strange little world, one completed divorced from our reality. When people complained about the overly futuristic appearance of the game, was anyone actually referring to the aspect ratio of the television screens??

How about VTOL airships that look lifted out of Star Wars: Episode I? Or huge, sprawling cities built on top of other cities? Or everyone's clothes resembling something out of The Fifth Element?

There is a serious disconnect here that is just...bizarre, if you ask me. No other word for it.

Bono
6th Aug 2010, 22:01
On takedowns:
"I think it's one of the greatest parts of the game... People have reacted so well to them."


Oh God...
*facepalm*
These people are hopeless.

Pinky_Powers
6th Aug 2010, 23:04
Sounds like hideous PR nonsense the whole way through.

Love the bit about the takedowns.

Always act like you've won... even if you've lost.

However, it is rather encouraging that they hold their story and dialog in such high esteem. Let us hope there is reason for it.

Spyhopping
6th Aug 2010, 23:39
Some guys taking this pretty hard. It'll all be ok. We can get through this. ;-)

I actually enjoyed reading the article. Alright- it's not exactly critical, and nothing particularly new is said by Dugas or Belletete but it's quite well written, a few interesting takes on things from the magazine. I've read about the scenario before in less detail, but I like the sound of the interaction with the guy at the morgue. Sounds like they are making the consequences of social interaction quite complex and unpredictable, without there being a clear cut good/bad result. Though we'll all know which buttons to press when we get to that part of the game now!

It's unfortunate that they seem to have sidestepped the direct question of whether the third person auto takedowns are reducing player control and interaction in a trade for more action



"For us it was important to see the character in action during these moments. I wouldn't say that the game is less cerebral, but when there is some action we want it to be as rewarding as possible."

Sounds like a game/movie trade off to me.



During firefights... "You won't hear him shouting 'Come get some!' like Duke Nukem, for example."

Aww dammit.


I noticed that, too. I am convinced Belletete lives in his own strange little world, one completed divorced from our reality. When people complained about the overly futuristic appearance of the game, was anyone actually referring to the aspect ratio of the television screens??

Was a kind of dorkish quote, but I dunno... no need to lynch him for it!

St. Mellow
7th Aug 2010, 00:17
If you had to choose whether to tell a magazine "we've upset a lot of our fans" or "people have had good reactions" you would choose the former unless you wanna lose your job and decrease potential sales.

I would choose the former no matter what, if it was the truth. Principles. The difference is that, in his position, I would say something along the lines of: "Many fans have reacted negatively to the idea of takedowns. But it is something we believe in and, hopefully, when they play the game, will change their minds." If they really had faith in their work, they'd also say something like this. Personally, I'm pretty skeptic about the takedowns.

EDIT: I think you got mixed up in your post. Don't you actually mean "latter" instead of "former"?

jtr7
7th Aug 2010, 00:18
@spyhopping: You think the lynching is over only a single quote rather than a pattern formed over many months? You'd realize people aren't taking this, and only this, that hard, if you remembered this has been going on and on for quite awhile.

WildcatPhoenix
7th Aug 2010, 03:08
;1466665']I would choose the former no matter what, if it was the truth. Principles. The difference is that, in his position, I would say something along the lines of: "Many fans have reacted negatively to the idea of takedowns. But it is something we believe in and, hopefully, when they play the game, will change their minds." If they really had faith in their work, they'd also say something like this.


Precisely!

It all comes down to the presentation. If EM came out and said, "Yes, we realize the design decisions we've made have really upset a lot of fans of the original game, but here are some solid reasons we believe these decisions will make the game better," then I would be much more willing to give them some credit. But instead, all we get is "everyone is loving these ideas" and "Eidos Montreal has taken on the challenge of making a sequel bla bla bla..." ad infinitum.

If they sincerely think these changes will make a better game, then let them take their shot. But I have a very strong feeling these decisions are being made to improve sales, not gameplay.

Pinky_Powers
7th Aug 2010, 03:38
Precisely!

It all comes down to the presentation. If EM came out and said, "Yes, we realize the design decisions we've made have really upset a lot of fans of the original game, but here are some solid reasons we believe these decisions will make the game better," then I would be much more willing to give them some credit. But instead, all we get is "everyone is loving these ideas" and "Eidos Montreal has taken on the challenge of making a sequel bla bla bla..." ad infinitum.

If they sincerely think these changes will make a better game, then let them take their shot. But I have a very strong feeling these decisions are being made to improve sales, not gameplay.

Here lies a good measure of my own feelings on the matter, as well. There's no honor in shying away from confrontation and pretending everyone agrees with you and loves your controversial decisions.

But they're French Canadians, so can we honestly expect more from them?

FrankCSIS
7th Aug 2010, 04:47
But they're French Canadians, so can we honestly expect more from them?

That's it Pinky, now it's war!

Pinky_Powers
7th Aug 2010, 05:06
http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/flame-insults/5/Flame-Bring_it_on_(Darth_Vader).jpg

Marses
7th Aug 2010, 21:35
Anyone else really dislike the fact that Dugas says "there will be dialogue sections you have to contend with"? (Italics are mine.) It sounds like he considers the whole "non-shooting" side of the game as just holding up the parts where you get to shoot people. Which, given his background and what he's said in other interviews, seems about bang on.
Could you be any more biased? There's nothing questionable about saying contend. He's talking about the rock/paper/scissor dynamic being its own struggle, its own puzzle, just like dealing with enemies or finding a secondary entrance.

jtr7
7th Aug 2010, 23:59
Oh...so it was a poor choice of words, and not intended to connote striving?

Invictus Sol
8th Aug 2010, 00:05
Could you be any more biased? There's nothing questionable about saying contend. He's talking about the rock/paper/scissor dynamic being its own struggle, its own puzzle, just like dealing with enemies or finding a secondary entrance.

Yeah, that was my impression, too. He definitely didn't mean dialogue would be a chore to be completed before getting back to the action. I really don't understand how it could be read that way unless one is actively looking to criticize the game. A fuller version of the quote is:


It's really about letting the players figure out how they want to play the experience, the adventure. At the same time, some players might be the shooter guy and they have the tools to play that way. They won't be able to run around like headless chickens, just shooting away, but they will be able to lean more towards a traditional style of play. There will always be dialogue sequences that you will have to contend with though, so it's a real blend.

I.e., you cannot play it as a run and gun and will be forced to participate in possibly thorny conversations. How that quote could be construed as 'the devs see conversations as a hinderance to action' is beyond me. I understand having some issues with the devs' decisions, but most of the negatives raised in this thread are nitpicks and outright distortions (like the griping about monitor aspect ratios being used as an example -- it obviously wasn't meant to be taken so literally) of what was quoted in the article.

Ashpolt
8th Aug 2010, 00:26
I.e., you cannot play it as a run and gun and will be forced to participate in possibly thorny conversations. How that quote could be construed as 'the devs see conversations as a hinderance to action' is beyond me.

I said nothing about the devs in general, I was talking about Dugas in specific. And to follow your example and take quotes in full, I did mention in my previous post that it was fitting with previous comments he's made - i.e. that I wasn't judging based on that quote alone.

Also, I don't think dialogue in the game will be a chore - just that I get the impression that it will be for Dugas, and the fact that he's lead designer for this game gives me cause for concern.

As for the 4:3 / widescreen thing (even though it wasn't me that made that point in the first place): Absentia and WildcatPhoenix were right to pick up on it. If you're going to talk about people's concerns, talk about their actual concerns: don't pick the tiniest, most insignificant example you can of a broader concern, address that, and then act like you've addressed the entire issue. "My client stands accused of murder, manslaughter, drug trafficking, terrorism, treason, and jaywalking. I have here proof that he is innocent of jaywalking. I consider this case to be closed."

And what you call nitpicking the rest of us call reading between the lines. Criticise it if you like, but we've been pretty accurate so far.

Deus_Ex_Machina
8th Aug 2010, 00:34
Here lies a good measure of my own feelings on the matter, as well. There's no honor in shying away from confrontation and pretending everyone agrees with you and loves your controversial decisions.

But they're French Canadians, so can we honestly expect more from them?

That's EXACTLY what Codemasters did when they were marketing Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising, and the final product looked like this :

http://www.manandhisbaby.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/poop1.gif

Jerion
8th Aug 2010, 00:53
Forewarning: I haven't read this interview. I've stopped reading the interviews. I find it helps.



Also, I don't think dialogue in the game will be a chore - just that I get the impression that it will be for Dugas, and the fact that he's lead designer for this game gives me cause for concern.

Revel in your concern, for you seem to have plenty of it!

I do think it looks like you're almost looking for reasons for something to be wrong here though.



As for the 4:3 / widescreen thing (even though it wasn't me that made that point in the first place): Absentia and WildcatPhoenix were right to pick up on it. If you're going to talk about people's concerns, talk about their actual concerns: don't pick the tiniest, most insignificant example you can of a broader concern, address that, and then act like you've addressed the entire issue. "My client stands accused of murder, manslaughter, drug trafficking, terrorism, treason, and jaywalking. I have here proof that he is innocent of jaywalking. I consider this case to be closed."

Well, uh, Belletete is an art guy. What's he gonna talk about besides aspect ratios? Metal walls? More of his temporary love affair with gold, black and green? :scratch:

Ashpolt
8th Aug 2010, 01:42
Well, uh, Belletete is an art guy. What's he gonna talk about besides aspect ratios? Metal walls? More of his temporary love affair with gold, black and green? :scratch:

Well he could talk about the broader concern of the technology being more advanced in this game than in DX1, rather than picking one specific example of that (which I don't think I've ever seen anyone on this forum mention). The whole thing is art related, so his area.

atLaNt1s
8th Aug 2010, 05:01
IF theres nothing we can do about changing the parts of the game we dont like at this point then all we can do is wait for it to come out and judge the whole, no point in keep arguing

avenging_teabag
8th Aug 2010, 07:30
Well he could talk about the broader concern of the technology being more advanced in this game than in DX1, rather than picking one specific example of that
I think there's no such concern - it's a new game, made by a new company 10 years after the original. They paid tribute to the first game, they made the main char a mech. EM has both in-game (the plot being set at the time of relative economic prosperity, unlike the DE) and meta (better technical means to implement their design decisions with) reasons to make in-game tech LOOK more advanced than in the original, and I think that's quite enough. Deus Ex is a great game, but please excuse me, it's no Lord of the Rings with regards to its timeline and canon, to be in any way concerned about their integrity.

I didn't read the interview btw, I heard that there's a spoiler in there somewhere, and I'm terrified of spoilers. I just look at teh pretteh.

jtr7
8th Aug 2010, 07:55
So...what makes it a Deus Ex game to you, rather than a game with an augmented protagonist?

avenging_teabag
8th Aug 2010, 08:33
So...what makes it a Deus Ex game to you, rather than a game with an augmented protagonist?
What *would* make it a Deus Ex game? Level design, mostly. Scope of the world, its interactivity and reponsiveness. Different ways to develop your character (and that is what worries me the most in this new game). Moody setting and overall seriousness of the tone - no in-jokes for me, please! Oh, and conspiracies. There's quite a lot that can go wrong, but continuity? Don't think so.

Mindmute
8th Aug 2010, 11:39
What *would* make it a Deus Ex game? Level design, mostly. Scope of the world, its interactivity and reponsiveness. Different ways to develop your character (and that is what worries me the most in this new game). Moody setting and overall seriousness of the tone - no in-jokes for me, please! Oh, and conspiracies.

I'm going to quote this part of your post, just because it's awsome.



As far as continuity goes, I'd rate it as important aswell, however I *do* realise that it has been 10 years since the launch of DX. Things looked more technologically backwards than they should by necessity. It was hard back then to make a believable futuristic world with those ressources and I think that if DX were developed today, other than the Renassaince theme, it wouldn't differ that much from DX:HR's visuals.

Kodaemon
8th Aug 2010, 13:20
Forewarning: I haven't read this interview. I've stopped reading the interviews. I find it helps.

Ignorance is bliss.

rokstrombo
8th Aug 2010, 14:07
I didn't really expect any new information out of this lone interview. I don't think there is much more that can be said about the game without potentially spoiling the player's experience. Eidos Montreal already have the attention of the gaming press, and they already have the attention of the fans. These isolated interviews are probably intended to increase familiarity with the Deus Ex brand amongst unfamiliar gamers.

Pinky_Powers
8th Aug 2010, 17:19
So...what makes it a Deus Ex game to you, rather than a game with an augmented protagonist?

I'd like to answer this for myself as well. And I shall to it with my favorite Pinky Quote.


For me, the Deus Ex experience consisted of a few key elements: Firstly, Cyberpunk universe. Open, multi-path environments. Multi-solution obstacles. A crowded, living world of NPCs that you can talk to. Player driven conversations that carried the story. Lots to do; side quests and exploration of the environments. The ability to truly play as I prefer; talk my way in, shoot my way in, hack my way in, or sneak my way in. Lived-in environments with books, datacubes and emails that flesh out the reality of the world, characters and story. Choices that affect the story. Unknowable alliances of everyone you meet. World travel to real locations. And of course... conspiracies.

As such, despite Human Revolutions flaws, I still see it as a solid Dues Ex game that I can't wait to get my hands on.

WildcatPhoenix
8th Aug 2010, 18:20
As far as continuity goes, I'd rate it as important aswell, however I *do* realise that it has been 10 years since the launch of DX. Things looked more technologically backwards than they should by necessity. It was hard back then to make a believable futuristic world with those ressources and I think that if DX were developed today, other than the Renassaince theme, it wouldn't differ that much from DX:HR's visuals.

I've heard this argument used before. What, pray tell, looked so technologically backwards in the original game?

FrankCSIS
8th Aug 2010, 18:33
As such, despite Human Revolutions flaws, I still see it as a solid Dues Ex game that I can't wait to get my hands on.

I think I've found a new analogy which helps me understand how I feel about the whole ordeal.

Sports cars, while far more impressive than they were before, have lost a certain edge, an x factor, in the trade for a more civilised ride. The machine is more sophisticated, the driving itself has lost a lot of its complexity. All for the better for everyday cars, and for the amount of rich people who can't possibly drive but can easily afford an exotic car, but a bit of a shame for people on a budget looking for a good thrill when on the road. Paying for 2011 Camaro SS, or Challenger SRT-8, won't find you the same inherent experience.

And for once, no one can accuse me of clinging to the past out of nostalgia. I wasn't born when people stormed the streets in 68 Fastbacks. I just happen to have test-driven quite a few cars, and felt the raw difference.

And so game enthusiasts should find a lot of fun in HR, but I'm unconvinced we'll find a similar experience, despite whatever core values are maintained. Admitably, I'm being close-minded by saying all of this, and perhaps selfish when expecting to receive the same experience from a different product. I guess it's just that DX provided me with a gaming experience which I've tremendously enjoyed, and have yet to re-live. I don't mind new experiences, but the title on this box brings back longing and expectations left unfulfilled over the years! As well as dreams of games I would have wanted to contribute to, but never will, because they will never be produced.

deus ex fan
8th Aug 2010, 19:12
i want to point out some things about timeline and what seem to be or not too futuristic in the deus ex world.

in first deus ex time setting is 2052.....

world seem too futuristic in science with "nano-augmentation" but visually is grounded to earth.Cities and landmarks seem like nowadays settings without something reminding the near-future-earth as cyberpunk fiction depicts.

the year is 2027......

in Human Revolution devs approach more clearly what cyberpunk fiction depicts.Gloomy metropolises,gritty,dark,gloomy tones,nightmarish and desperate world,urban decay,
technology domination,anarchism everywhere,totalitarian governments with rioting and all these things that cyberpunk contains.

WildcatPhoenix
8th Aug 2010, 19:52
in Human Revolution devs approach more clearly what cyberpunk fiction depicts.Gloomy metropolises,gritty,dark,gloomy tones,nightmarish and desperate world,urban decay,
technology domination,anarchism everywhere,totalitarian governments with rioting and all these things that cyberpunk contains.

Oh yeah, there definitely wasn't any urban decay, totalitarian governments, rioting, or other cyberpunk themes in the original Deus Ex. *rolls eyes*

Ilves
8th Aug 2010, 20:20
I'm not really troubled by the obvious hitches in continuity in art design, tech or state of the world between the original DX and HR.

What is increasingly bugging me is the continuity between current real life events and the future painted by HR.

It's easy to see today's world slide into DX's dark dystopia. Somehow the notion of a renaissance seems strangely, forcefully inserted. I guess it all comes down to the writing and presentation, but right now I'm having a hard time imagining a (new) age of prosperity happening anytime before the collapse.

deus ex fan
8th Aug 2010, 20:35
Oh yeah, there definitely wasn't any urban decay, totalitarian governments, rioting, or other cyberpunk themes in the original Deus Ex. *rolls eyes*

i did not said that.....i say that these elements are increased in Human Revolution...

Fluffis
8th Aug 2010, 20:58
Ignorance is bliss.

"If ignorance is bliss, then knock the smile off my face..."

deus ex fan
8th Aug 2010, 22:00
I'm not really troubled by the obvious hitches in continuity in art design, tech or state of the world between the original DX and HR.

What is increasingly bugging me is the continuity between current real life events and the future painted by HR.

It's easy to see today's world slide into DX's dark dystopia. Somehow the notion of a renaissance seems strangely, forcefully inserted. I guess it all comes down to the writing and presentation, but right now I'm having a hard time imagining a (new) age of prosperity happening anytime before the collapse.

i havent problem with Human Revolution's cyberpunk dystopia.I'm ok with how Human Revolution paint the future...:)

pringlepower
8th Aug 2010, 22:09
I'm not really troubled by the obvious hitches in continuity in art design, tech or state of the world between the original DX and HR.

What is increasingly bugging me is the continuity between current real life events and the future painted by HR.

It's easy to see today's world slide into DX's dark dystopia. Somehow the notion of a renaissance seems strangely, forcefully inserted. I guess it all comes down to the writing and presentation, but right now I'm having a hard time imagining a (new) age of prosperity happening anytime before the collapse.

You're just a pessimist :)

TrickyVein
9th Aug 2010, 00:48
Don't call Ilves a pessimist.

Invictus Sol
9th Aug 2010, 00:55
I said nothing about the devs in general, I was talking about Dugas in specific. And to follow your example and take quotes in full, I did mention in my previous post that it was fitting with previous comments he's made - i.e. that I wasn't judging based on that quote alone.

Right, you said:


Anyone else really dislike the fact that Dugas says "there will be dialogue sections you have to contend with"? (Italics are mine.) It sounds like he considers the whole "non-shooting" side of the game as just holding up the parts where you get to shoot people. Which, given his background and what he's said in other interviews, seems about bang on.


Also, I don't think dialogue in the game will be a chore - just that I get the impression that it will be for Dugas, and the fact that he's lead designer for this game gives me cause for concern.

Well, it sounds to me that you're saying that Dugas considers dialogue to be a "chore" as opposed to being integral to the game and unavoidable even for the most determined run 'n' gunners. Maybe there's something I'm not getting here, but I've read everything there is to read about DX:HR and I haven't gotten that impression from Dugas.

I'm also having difficulty understanding your argument that the lead designer -- whom I'm assuming is responsible for the vast amount of dialogue that we already know will be in the game -- is unconsciously working against himself by being against the dialogue that he has delegated to others to include? Unless that's someone else's responsibility and Dugas is working against their vision/playstyle, then I don't really get the logic of your criticism in this instance.



As for the 4:3 / widescreen thing (even though it wasn't me that made that point in the first place):

I never implied that you made this argument directly, only that your criticisms in this case were just as trivial.



Absentia and WildcatPhoenix were right to pick up on it. If you're going to talk about people's concerns, talk about their actual concerns: don't pick the tiniest, most insignificant example you can of a broader concern, address that, and then act like you've addressed the entire issue. "My client stands accused of murder, manslaughter, drug trafficking, terrorism, treason, and jaywalking. I have here proof that he is innocent of jaywalking. I consider this case to be closed."

I disagree. He was using the aspect ratio of the monitor as a very broad example to illustrate that the original DX was nowhere near to being an accurate representation of the world in 53 years time. As I've said in another thread, DX doesn't even come close to the world we know today, so long as we're considering the exclusion of things like Hong Kong harbour or the fact that they couldn't even incorporate the twin towers in the distant skyline in NY (obviously not knowing then what we know now). While I wouldn't argue that DX:HR is an accurate reflection of things in ~20 years time, it will probably be more accurate than DX is of the future ~50 years hence. At any rate, fidelity to DXs vision in this regard doesn't matter a whole lot to me. I'm not itching to play a crippled version of Denton but a more visceral version of Anna and Gunther, who were severely underpowered in DX, to the point of not even being a credible threat.



And what you call nitpicking the rest of us call reading between the lines. Criticise it if you like, but we've been pretty accurate so far.

We have different expectations of the game. It's apparent to me that it's almost sure to be better by far than the abysmal IW but maybe not as revelatory as the original DX (not an impossible goal, but not realistic, either, IMO).

jjc
9th Aug 2010, 02:04
Does it really matter, all this **** about aspect ratios and continuity and precisely how advanced technology should be and VTOLs (by the way, we've had Harrier jump jets for a few years now)?

Chrono Cross completely changed all of the systems of Chrono Trigger, making it nearly unrecognizable as a sequel, and convoluted the story and continuity beyond belief. Yet, in my opinion, it's the superior game.

Why are we all caught up on playing a game that's completely like the original, especially when the series is, as of now, only two installments deep? IW, which I actually enjoyed, tried out different things. According to the fans, by and large it failed. OK. Moving on. HR is going to try new things. Who cares if it's different, so long as the makers look at the name Deus Ex, acknowledge the greatness inherent in the title, and strive to fulfill the promise a sequel carrying that name entails?

Jerion
9th Aug 2010, 02:16
Does it really matter, all this **** about aspect ratios and continuity and precisely how advanced technology should be and VTOLs (by the way, we've had Harrier jump jets for a few years now)?

Chrono Cross completely changed all of the systems of Chrono Trigger, making it nearly unrecognizable as a sequel, and convoluted the story and continuity beyond belief. Yet, in my opinion, it's the superior game.

Why are we all caught up on playing a game that's completely like the original, especially when the series is, as of now, only two installments deep? IW, which I actually enjoyed, tried out different things. According to the fans, by and large it failed. OK. Moving on. HR is going to try new things. Who cares if it's different, so long as the makers look at the name Deus Ex, acknowledge the greatness inherent in the title, and strive to fulfill the promise a sequel carrying that name entails?

I'm gonna jump in with Ashpolt here, and explain that one of the reasons for the criticisms of HR is that the promise of DX- which to many was the ability to Play Your Own Way- should be so much more. A lot of us are happy with this being a title that strives to match the ideals of the original (which in many respects it does!). If this is the title that also finally sets gaming on that path then a lot of us will be even happier. Ten years on though it shouldn't just be four paths available, it should be sixteen. This should be Deus Ex, Squared.

All the nitpicking on tiny details and stuff is pointless and silly though. I agree with you completely there.

Fluffis
9th Aug 2010, 02:17
HR is going to try new things. Who cares if it's different, so long as the makers look at the name Deus Ex, acknowledge the greatness inherent in the title, and strive to fulfill the promise a sequel carrying that name entails?

If we could actually be certain of that, there would be no problem.

Unfortunately there is a severe lack of info, and until there is solid proof of them actually doing this, you'll see people being (justifiably) sceptic.

And it's not about wanting HR to be exactly like DX. It's about wanting it to be something that is not Deus Ex in name only.

Ashpolt
9th Aug 2010, 09:26
Well, it sounds to me that you're saying that Dugas considers dialogue to be a "chore" as opposed to being integral to the game and unavoidable even for the most determined run 'n' gunners. Maybe there's something I'm not getting here, but I've read everything there is to read about DX:HR and I haven't gotten that impression from Dugas.

It's not just previous interviews, but also his work history - in particular, Rainbow Six Vegas, which was a Rainbow Six game that stripped away pretty much everything except the bits where you got to shoot people.

I also admit there may be a bit of personal bias here. As pretty much every bit of bad news and every stupid quote since the start of development of this game has come from Dugas, I'm willing to admit I have a pretty low opinion of him.


I'm also having difficulty understanding your argument that the lead designer -- whom I'm assuming is responsible for the vast amount of dialogue that we already know will be in the game -- is unconsciously working against himself by being against the dialogue that he has delegated to others to include? Unless that's someone else's responsibility and Dugas is working against their vision/playstyle, then I don't really get the logic of your criticism in this instance.

Dugas is lead designer. The impression I get is that Dugas would like this game to be even more run 'n' gun than it is, but the fact that it's a Deus Ex sequel is "constraining" him, and stopping him from doing that, so we'll end up with a halfway house - in the same way that Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising was a halfway house between being a proper sequel (a sim) and a run 'n' gun shooter, and in trying to please everybody, pleased nobody.

Again, this is my own personal feeling based on Dugas' work history and the impression he's given every time he's opened his mouth with regards to DXHR. I don't claim it as fact.


I never implied that you made this argument directly, only that your criticisms in this case were just as trivial.

Never implied that you implied that. :P Just wanted to point out that I was jumping into the middle of another discussion.


I disagree. He was using the aspect ratio of the monitor as a very broad example to illustrate that the original DX was nowhere near to being an accurate representation of the world in 53 years time. As I've said in another thread, DX doesn't even come close to the world we know today, so long as we're considering the exclusion of things like Hong Kong harbour or the fact that they couldn't even incorporate the twin towers in the distant skyline in NY (obviously not knowing then what we know now). While I wouldn't argue that DX:HR is an accurate reflection of things in ~20 years time, it will probably be more accurate than DX is of the future ~50 years hence. At any rate, fidelity to DXs vision in this regard doesn't matter a whole lot to me. I'm not itching to play a crippled version of Denton but a more visceral version of Anna and Gunther, who were severely underpowered in DX, to the point of not even being a credible threat.

What you and the game designers need to remember though is that Deus Ex does not take place in the real world. It's a world very like our own, sure, but it's not ours. In creating Deus Ex, Warren Spector et al created their own universe with its own history, and that is the universe in which DXHR should take place. Imagine Russia invades and conquers the US in, let's say, 2015: when they're making Deus Ex 4 in 2020 (ignoring the problems this would cause with development!) should that reflect this change? No, because we know that in the Deus Ex universe, the US was not conquered by Russia.

Or, to put it another way, if 2052 rolls around and we haven't all got the grey death, do we criticise DX for being unrealistic? :lol:


We have different expectations of the game. It's apparent to me that it's almost sure to be better by far than the abysmal IW but maybe not as revelatory as the original DX (not an impossible goal, but not realistic, either, IMO).

And, jumping in with what Mr. K said above, why's that enough? We shouldn't be looking for something to just match Deus Ex now, we should be looking for something to take advantage of today's technology and improve on it tenfold. Saying "it'll be better than a seven year old game and not quite as good as a ten year old one" is not good enough by a long shot.

xsamitt
9th Aug 2010, 13:12
It's not just previous interviews, but also his work history - in particular, Rainbow Six Vegas, which was a Rainbow Six game that stripped away pretty much everything except the bits where you got to shoot people.

I also admit there may be a bit of personal bias here. As pretty much every bit of bad news and every stupid quote since the start of development of this game has come from Dugas, I'm willing to admit I have a pretty low opinion of him.



Dugas is lead designer. The impression I get is that Dugas would like this game to be even more run 'n' gun than it is, but the fact that it's a Deus Ex sequel is "constraining" him, and stopping him from doing that, so we'll end up with a halfway house - in the same way that Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising was a halfway house between being a proper sequel (a sim) and a run 'n' gun shooter, and in trying to please everybody, pleased nobody.

Again, this is my own personal feeling based on Dugas' work history and the impression he's given every time he's opened his mouth with regards to DXHR. I don't claim it as fact.



Never implied that you implied that. :P Just wanted to point out that I was jumping into the middle of another discussion.



What you and the game designers need to remember though is that Deus Ex does not take place in the real world. It's a world very like our own, sure, but it's not ours. In creating Deus Ex, Warren Spector et al created their own universe with its own history, and that is the universe in which DXHR should take place. Imagine Russia invades and conquers the US in, let's say, 2015: when they're making Deus Ex 4 in 2020 (ignoring the problems this would cause with development!) should that reflect this change? No, because we know that in the Deus Ex universe, the US was not conquered by Russia.

Or, to put it another way, if 2052 rolls around and we haven't all got the grey death, do we criticise DX for being unrealistic? :lol:



And, jumping in with what Mr. K said above, why's that enough? We shouldn't be looking for something to just match Deus Ex now, we should be looking for something to take advantage of today's technology and improve on it tenfold. Saying "it'll be better than a seven year old game and not quite as good as a ten year old one" is not good enough by a long shot.

We must have been brothers in a past life.Your a very reasonable bloke.:thumb:

Icky6
9th Aug 2010, 15:29
"If ignorance is bliss, then knock the smile off my face..."

I love the guitar solo in that song.

WildcatPhoenix
9th Aug 2010, 17:44
Right, you said:

As I've said in another thread, DX doesn't even come close to the world we know today, so long as we're considering the exclusion of things like Hong Kong harbour or the fact that they couldn't even incorporate the twin towers in the distant skyline in NY (obviously not knowing then what we know now). While I wouldn't argue that DX:HR is an accurate reflection of things in ~20 years time, it will probably be more accurate than DX is of the future ~50 years hence.


That's it? Not having the Twin Towers in the skyline = "doesn't even come close to the world we know today?"

I want someone to tell me, what fantastic, amazing technology do we have today that isn't represented in Deus Ex? What is so drastically misrepresented in the original game?

avenging_teabag
9th Aug 2010, 17:54
And so game enthusiasts should find a lot of fun in HR, but I'm unconvinced we'll find a similar experience, despite whatever core values are maintained.
I think it's safe to say that we won't, and it has as much to do with us, as with the game itself. That initial experience is, I think, is unseparatable from the people that we were when we first played the original - that experience, that state of mind. And that, for many, was 10 years ago. You can't enter the same river twice.

Fluffis
9th Aug 2010, 18:29
I think it's safe to say that we won't, and it has as much to do with us, as with the game itself. That initial experience is, I think, is unseparatable from the people that we were when we first played the original - that experience, that state of mind. And that, for many, was 10 years ago. You can't enter the same river twice.

Herakleitos of Ephesos was wrong. You can enter the same river twice. It's just not the same "You" that's doing it.

avenging_teabag
9th Aug 2010, 19:00
Herakleitos of Ephesos was wrong. You can enter the same river twice. It's just not the same "You" that's doing it.
Yeah, but why the hell did they nix the skill system, huh?

pringlepower
9th Aug 2010, 19:01
Yeah, but why the hell did they nix the skill system, huh?

What they should've done is add a Cooking skill, which at Master level makes bags of chips and cookies heal MORE than medpacks.

As well as an Alcoholism skill that made wine and beers give you damage resistance.

avenging_teabag
9th Aug 2010, 19:10
As well as an Alcoholism skill that made wine and beers give you damage resistance.
Pop a forty, soak bullets. The Witcher has something like that implemented, actually - there was a skill that allowed Geralt to deal more damage when sloshed. Never had much use for it, but the animations were hilarious.

Hm, not a bad idea at all.

Fluffis
9th Aug 2010, 19:30
Pop a forty, soak bullets. The Witcher has something like that implemented, actually - there was a skill that allowed Geralt to deal more damage when sloshed. Never had much use for it, but the animations were hilarious.

Hm, not a bad idea at all.

Something like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv6VdLREz2I)?

avenging_teabag
9th Aug 2010, 19:41
Yeah, only in third person isometric :)

Shralla
9th Aug 2010, 21:29
We literally haven't gotten any new information since before E3. Every single time anybody talks to the devs, everything they say is just repeating everything that was said about the E3 demonstration, even before E3. Even the example they use to explain the changing game world, trying to get into the city morgue, is EXACTLY THE SAME as it was before E3. They talk about the SAME THINGS in every single article, and use the exact same instances of the game to represent it.

Yes, I realize that they don't want to show off too much of the storyline this early, but somehow I don't think that talking about a DIFFERENT five-minute segment in an 18+ hour game is going to ruin everything.

Gamescom better have something sweet.

Corpus
9th Aug 2010, 21:48
We literally haven't gotten any new information since before E3. Every single time anybody talks to the devs, everything they say is just repeating everything that was said about the E3 demonstration, even before E3. Even the example they use to explain the changing game world, trying to get into the city morgue, is EXACTLY THE SAME as it was before E3. They talk about the SAME THINGS in every single article, and use the exact same instances of the game to represent it.

Yes, I realize that they don't want to show off too much of the storyline this early, but somehow I don't think that talking about a DIFFERENT five-minute segment in an 18+ hour game is going to ruin everything.

Gamescom better have something sweet.

I anticipate just the E3 footage, I'm not too hopeful for it :(

On the bright side, I would finally get to hear that awesome combat music. I've listened to McCann's other stuff and its brilliant.

Invictus Sol
10th Aug 2010, 03:55
Just skipping the Dugas portion since there's little point debating it.


What you and the game designers need to remember though is that Deus Ex does not take place in the real world. It's a world very like our own, sure, but it's not ours. In creating Deus Ex, Warren Spector et al created their own universe with its own history, and that is the universe in which DXHR should take place. Imagine Russia invades and conquers the US in, let's say, 2015: when they're making Deus Ex 4 in 2020 (ignoring the problems this would cause with development!) should that reflect this change? No, because we know that in the Deus Ex universe, the US was not conquered by Russia.

Or, to put it another way, if 2052 rolls around and we haven't all got the grey death, do we criticise DX for being unrealistic? :lol:

Sure, but by the same logic, one could argue that Deus Ex did not represent a certain future that prequels need regard as canon so much as one of many possible futures, some of which may be influenced by events in games such as HR. Regardless, it seems pointless to think that future games should be artificially contrained by hardware/engine limitations of past games just so that the few people who actually played DX feel that the continuity is perfect.



And, jumping in with what Mr. K said above, why's that enough? We shouldn't be looking for something to just match Deus Ex now, we should be looking for something to take advantage of today's technology and improve on it tenfold. Saying "it'll be better than a seven year old game and not quite as good as a ten year old one" is not good enough by a long shot.

I agree in principle, but how likely is it that any actual dev would pull a "Deus Ex squared" out of their sleeve? Not at all or one in a million? In which case I need to make do with what's plausible.

Jerion
10th Aug 2010, 04:13
I agree in principle, but how likely is it that any actual dev would pull a "Deus Ex squared" out of their sleeve? Not at all or one in a million? In which case I need to make do with what's plausible.

If the customers demanded it, it would happen sooner rather than never.

Nyysjan
10th Aug 2010, 05:34
If the customers demanded it, it would happen sooner rather than never.

That's very optimistic of you.
The basic option here is that either we buy what they give us, or we do not buy it and scream how the game sucks for not being what we want it to be, if we buy it, they won't have any incentive to improve it (it sold, why take the changes), and if we don't, they, again, won't have any incentive to improve it (as there won't be a sequel).

Invictus Sol
10th Aug 2010, 05:43
If the customers demanded it, it would happen sooner rather than never.

I'm in the X-Files I want to believe camp when it comes to what you're proposing. Nyysjan effectively shot the idea down, though.

neoWilks
10th Aug 2010, 06:38
Just skipping the Dugas portion since there's little point debating it.
Sure, but by the same logic, one could argue that Deus Ex did not represent a certain future that prequels need regard as canon so much as one of many possible futures, some of which may be influenced by events in games such as HR. Regardless, it seems pointless to think that future games should be artificially constrained by hardware/engine limitations of past games just so that the few people who actually played DX feel that the continuity is perfect.

Can anyone claiming this provide any evidence? I've never seen any article claiming Deus Ex' level design/vision was gimped or changed due to hardware limitations. I have seen an article where they stated they had to cut a large scale battle because they couldn't render as many characters as they needed, but never anything saying "We would have gone more futuristic, the tech just didn't allow it."

On the contrary, from interviews and dev reflections it seems the setting and aesthetics of the world were pretty intentional. So either I've been missing out on some pretty major info or people are just making **** up.

Jerion
10th Aug 2010, 07:36
Can anyone claiming this provide any evidence? I've never seen any article claiming Deus Ex' level design/vision was gimped or changed due to hardware limitations. I have seen an article where they stated they had to cut a large scale battle because they couldn't render as many characters as they needed, but never anything saying "We would have gone more futuristic, the tech just didn't allow it."

On the contrary, from interviews and dev reflections it seems the setting and aesthetics of the world were pretty intentional. So either I've been missing out on some pretty major info or people are just making **** up.

A lot of it is speculation. When I think about it though, I have to wonder if they weren't being more ambitious because they were thinking about what the newest tech was back then and what could be done with it.

Ashpolt
10th Aug 2010, 08:56
Sure, but by the same logic, one could argue that Deus Ex did not represent a certain future that prequels need regard as canon so much as one of many possible futures, some of which may be influenced by events in games such as HR. Regardless, it seems pointless to think that future games should be artificially contrained by hardware/engine limitations of past games just so that the few people who actually played DX feel that the continuity is perfect.

That's not the same logic at all. By calling it Deus Ex: Human Revolution and claiming it to be a prequel to the original Deus Ex, they have announced firmly that this is set in the Deus Ex universe which, like it or not, means it's susceptible to continuity. And the original game's level of tech wasn't constrained by hardware or the engine, it was constrained because the devs wanted to go for a "day after tomorrow" feel rather than an all-out sci-fi feel. It doesn't necessarily require better hardware / a better engine to show better tech! :lol: Look at WipeOut - that managed to show some pretty futuristic high-tech stuff on the PS1. Or hell, Metroid.

And like others have, you mention the idea that only a few people playing this will have played the original Deus Ex - well, that being the case (which I don't think it is, but regardless) why make a sequel / prequel? Why not make a new IP?


I agree in principle, but how likely is it that any actual dev would pull a "Deus Ex squared" out of their sleeve? Not at all or one in a million? In which case I need to make do with what's plausible.

Even if they can't do Deus Ex squared, they could at least aim to match or slightly exceed the original. Pretty much every one of us on this forum (and, indeed, pretty much every preview so far) is saying "it's very unlikely to stand up to the original" - but given we're ten years down the line from the first game, and given the technological advances in that time, there is no reason that it can't at least match the original.

Delever
10th Aug 2010, 11:50
Oh come on, first DX certainly WAS constrained by technology.

Ashpolt
10th Aug 2010, 11:56
Oh come on, first DX certainly WAS constrained by technology.

Yes, but that's not what I said. Read it again.

WildcatPhoenix
10th Aug 2010, 12:56
I don't see any evidence that Warren and co. wanted to portray huge double-decker cities or highly advanced technology but couldn't. Every single article I've read conveyed a deliberate focus on plausibility, realism, grit and grime. They didn't want Star Trek. They didn't even want Blade Runner (which, from a visual standpoint, is what DX:HR seems to be aiming for).

The engine limitations of Deus Ex were in the areas of AI and character animation. Ion Storm had a lot of grandiose ideas in the beginning about mission scripting, and unfortunately they weren't able to implement everything they had in mind. But Warren has stated in numerous interviews that he saw Deus Ex as a pioneer effort, something that would spark a new direction for all games to follow. Warren admitted that DX wasn't everything he wanted it to be, but he was certain there would be developers who would pick up the mantle and expand on Deus' core principles.

Sadly, that just didn't happen. :hmm:

Bono
10th Aug 2010, 13:18
I don't see any evidence that Warren and co. wanted to portray huge double-decker cities or highly advanced technology but couldn't. Every single article I've read conveyed a deliberate focus on plausibility, realism, grit and grime. They didn't want Star Trek. They didn't even want Blade Runner (which, from a visual standpoint, is what DX:HR seems to be aiming for).

Absolutely. One of the greatest problems with DXHR is that it feels so much detached.

pringlepower
10th Aug 2010, 13:22
I don't see any evidence that Warren and co. wanted to portray huge double-decker cities or highly advanced technology but couldn't. Every single article I've read conveyed a deliberate focus on plausibility, realism, grit and grime. They didn't want Star Trek. They didn't even want Blade Runner (which, from a visual standpoint, is what DX:HR seems to be aiming for).

The engine limitations of Deus Ex were in the areas of AI and character animation. Ion Storm had a lot of grandiose ideas in the beginning about mission scripting, and unfortunately they weren't able to implement everything they had in mind. But Warren has stated in numerous interviews that he saw Deus Ex as a pioneer effort, something that would spark a new direction for all games to follow. Warren admitted that DX wasn't everything he wanted it to be, but he was certain there would be developers who would pick up the mantle and expand on Deus' core principles.

Sadly, that just didn't happen. :hmm:

No, nothing highly advanced. Just a copter that could go from New York to Hong Kong in less than a day.

Pretentious Old Man.
10th Aug 2010, 13:51
No, nothing highly advanced. Just a copter that could go from New York to Hong Kong in less than a day.

Well, it was a highly advanced military helicopter. It sounds do-able by the 2050s to me.

pringlepower
10th Aug 2010, 14:03
Well, it was a highly advanced military helicopter. It sounds do-able by the 2050s to me.

A supersonic helicopter seems dangerous somehow. And that's 14x faster than a Boeing.

Invictus Sol
10th Aug 2010, 14:38
That's not the same logic at all. By calling it Deus Ex: Human Revolution and claiming it to be a prequel to the original Deus Ex, they have announced firmly that this is set in the Deus Ex universe which, like it or not, means it's susceptible to continuity.

I agree it should be suseptible in a broad sense, but it doesn't matter to me whether HR or a series of DX games lead perfectly to the DX we know. I'm OK with certain details not merging perfectly so long as they don't totally break it.



And the original game's level of tech wasn't constrained by hardware or the engine, it was constrained because the devs wanted to go for a "day after tomorrow" feel rather than an all-out sci-fi feel. It doesn't necessarily require better hardware / a better engine to show better tech! :lol: Look at WipeOut - that managed to show some pretty futuristic high-tech stuff on the PS1. Or hell, Metroid.

Sure it was. One of reasons I've said that Deus Ex didn't even match the world we know is because of how limited the scope is in regards to locations (no Times Square/Hong Kong harbour type locations because the engine is incapable of rendering it -- it doesn't have to be a double-decker city or anything, just real life locales that we're all familiar with) and population (everywhere you go is deserted). I understand that the devs were going for a gritty, realistic setting, but I find it very hard to believe that they wouldn't have rendered more visually diverse, populated locales if they had had an engine capable of it and a consumer hardware base capable of rendering it. I don't see why DX not showing (to belabour my example further) Times Square means to some of you that it doesn't exist in the DX world. HR is simply showing more of what exists instead of returning to the same barren landscapes we're already familiar with.



And like others have, you mention the idea that only a few people playing this will have played the original Deus Ex - well, that being the case (which I don't think it is, but regardless) why make a sequel / prequel? Why not make a new IP?

Because this IP is a great one, even if the original game is for all intents and purposes dead. Personally, I'm OK with them trying to reanimate DX's rotting corpse, just to have another game in that universe, even if it won't quite match DX's greatness. Who knows, if the IP gets re-established, maybe it will be the second or third in the series that finally measures up. Basically this just gives us somewhere to start.



Even if they can't do Deus Ex squared, they could at least aim to match or slightly exceed the original. Pretty much every one of us on this forum (and, indeed, pretty much every preview so far) is saying "it's very unlikely to stand up to the original" - but given we're ten years down the line from the first game, and given the technological advances in that time, there is no reason that it can't at least match the original.

I agree that's a reasonable expectation.

neoWilks
10th Aug 2010, 14:41
EDIT: Oops, my internet didn't load these replies after Delevar, I think I'm being redundent now... :/


Oh come on, first DX certainly WAS constrained by technology.
Only in the sense that they were unable to make things as detailed as they may have wanted. For example a Hong Kong market that felt more alive, or the aforementioned battle that was cut (set to take place in Austin, if I'm remembering right). Nothing to suggest the Devs really wanted a world with double decker cities or high-tech looking airships or Mechs that look sexy rather than monstrous, but the hardware just wasn't there yet.

And considering the devs (Spector et al) have been pretty open about why they did what with the game, what they had to cut, and the overall progress from start to finish. I'd expect them to have mentioned somewhere these amazingly futuristic locales they had planned that just couldn't make the cut. So the question again is, any proof? Or are you just making things up?


I agree it should be suseptible in a broad sense, but it doesn't matter to me whether
Sure it was. One of reasons I've said that Deus Ex didn't even match the world we know is because of how limited the scope is in regards to locations (no Times Square/Hong Kong harbour type locations because the engine is incapable of rendering it -- it doesn't have to be a double-decker city or anything, just real life locales that we're all familiar with) and population (everywhere you go is deserted). I understand that the devs were going for a gritty, realistic setting, but I find it very hard to believe that they wouldn't have rendered more visually diverse, populated locales if they had had an engine capable of it and a consumer hardware base capable of rendering it. I don't see why DX not showing (to belabour my example further) Times Square means to some of you that it doesn't exist in the DX world. HR is simply showing more of what exists instead of returning to the same barren landscapes we're already familiar with.

Has anyone said they'd be upset if Times Square was a location in a Deus Ex game? I'd have no problem with it, could make for an interesting mission to defuse some sort of terrorist plot. But Times Square isn't a double-decker city. Unless they made it into "FUTURE! Time Square 2027", then there's really nothing wrong with the location.

The problem is I'm seeing stuff in this sequel that looks like it could have been in the Jetsons. Something I don't expect or want in a Deus Ex game.


Because this IP is a great one, even if the original game is for all intents and purposes dead. Personally, I'm OK with them trying to reanimate DX's rotting corpse, just to have another game in that universe, even if it won't quite match DX's greatness. Who knows, if the IP gets re-established, maybe it will be the second or third in the series that finally measures up. Basically this just gives us somewhere to start.

But that's the thing, it's not in the Deus Ex universe. It's in some other one, mix between Blade Runner and Neuromancer with some sprinklings of Deus Ex.

pringlepower
10th Aug 2010, 14:55
EDIT: Oops, my internet didn't load these replies after Delevar, I think I'm being redundent now... :/


Only in the sense that they were unable to make things as detailed as they may have wanted. For example a Hong Kong market that felt more alive, or the aforementioned battle that was cut (set to take place in Austin, if I'm remembering right). Nothing to suggest the Devs really wanted a world with double decker cities or high-tech looking airships or Mechs that look sexy rather than monstrous, but the hardware just wasn't there yet.

And considering the devs (Spector et al) have been pretty open about why they did what with the game, what they had to cut, and the overall progress from start to finish. I'd expect them to have mentioned somewhere these amazingly futuristic locales they had planned that just couldn't make the cut. So the question again is, any proof? Or are you just making things up?

Honestly Shanghai is the one city that has the double-decker thing, and it's perfectly reasonable if you look at Shanghai today, and Shanghai 50 years ago. Detroit looks just fine.

And there are plenty of things that Deus Ex looked over art-wise. For example, Anna and Gunther's augs are ridiculous and don't really make a lot of sense.

Nothing wrong with sexy. Predator drones are pretty sleek and stylish, and monstrous when they hit you.

Invictus Sol
10th Aug 2010, 14:56
EDIT: Oops, my internet didn't load these replies after Delevar, I think I'm being redundent now... :/


Only in the sense that they were unable to make things as detailed as they may have wanted. For example a Hong Kong market that felt more alive, or the aforementioned battle that was cut (set to take place in Austin, if I'm remembering right). Nothing to suggest the Devs really wanted a world with double decker cities or high-tech looking airships or Mechs that look sexy rather than monstrous, but the hardware just wasn't there yet.

And considering the devs (Spector et al) have been pretty open about why they did what with the game, what they had to cut, and the overall progress from start to finish. I'd expect them to have mentioned somewhere these amazingly futuristic locales they had planned that just couldn't make the cut. So the question again is, any proof? Or are you just making things up?

I don't recall anyone arguing that Warren et al. were aiming for Blade Runner and what we got instead was DX. What I have said is basically the same as what you've said yourself in your first paragraph, above. They probably were aiming to be able to show, for example, a vibrant, bustling, visually diverse HK market reminisent of the HK that we all know exists today, but didn't even come close, and their representation is 50 years in the future? Maybe a double-decker Shanghai is overkill, but the new devs have the right to go with their vision instead of being constrained by what was visible in DX.

I agree that the mechs have been over stylized for my tastes. I would've preferred Adam starting off as a handsome human and slowly trading-off his looks and humanity for functionality (similar to what the two NSF guards were debating about in regards to Gunther). At the moment, it doesn't appear that there's any trade-off. Adam can pass for unaltered as long as he wears his trenchcoat (aside from maybe some eye augs) and his basic physical profile is as sleek as an athlete.

WildcatPhoenix
10th Aug 2010, 15:02
One of reasons I've said that Deus Ex didn't even match the world we know is because of how limited the scope is in regards to locations (no Times Square/Hong Kong harbour type locations because the engine is incapable of rendering it -- it doesn't have to be a double-decker city or anything, just real life locales that we're all familiar with) and population (everywhere you go is deserted). I understand that the devs were going for a gritty, realistic setting, but I find it very hard to believe that they wouldn't have rendered more visually diverse, populated locales if they had had an engine capable of it and a consumer hardware base capable of rendering it. I don't see why DX not showing (to belabour my example further) Times Square means to some of you that it doesn't exist in the DX world. HR is simply showing more of what exists instead of returning to the same barren landscapes we're already familiar with.


Locales we're all familiar with? Liberty Island is almost an exact recreation of the island! Same with Battery Park! Those monuments with all the names are actually there. That eagle statue is actually there. Just because JC doesn't stroll down Wall Street or chase NSF through Central Park (admittedly, that would've been cool) doesn't mean New York doesn't feel like New York.

In Deus Ex the rich have quite literally fortified themselves against the poor. JC's missions take him through the slums, the warehouse districts, the sewers. I was perfectly okay with this, and maybe it's just blind faith but I don't really feel like this was done just because the engine couldn't handle downtown NYC. The story demands it, the pacing, the atmosphere, everything about the plot fits better in a broken down and borderline anarchic back-alley hellhole than some swank Manhattan condominium.

I do wish they'd been able to fit more NPCs on the maps, especially in Hong Kong. This is especially noticeable in the nightclubs. Maybe you can use the curfew as an excuse for Le Porte d'Enfer being so empty, but the Lucky Money Club in Hong Kong should've been wall-to-wall people. THAT is where engine limitations come in, not the architecture or setting.

neoWilks
10th Aug 2010, 15:19
EDIT: I forgot to finish my first thought. I'm not awake right today...


Honestly Shanghai is the one city that has the double-decker thing, and it's perfectly reasonable if you look at Shanghai today, and Shanghai 50 years ago. Detroit looks just fine.

No, not perfectly reasonable. Most buildings in shanghai, from a little research seemed to have taken a couple to several years to complete. Same with buildings in Dubai. Stuff like the Marina Bay Sands skypark in Singapore are still undergoing final touches after several years, if I'm not mistaken.

What you are suggesting is that in seventeen years, there will be a large enough economic boom on one island that they will so quickly run of construction space it become necessary to construct a second level. Beyond the fact that it would probably be infinitely cheaper to simply build taller buildings or purchase property elsewhere, we are looking at least at ten years to fill a smallish island if every single land owner is building like effing mad.

Then when they run out of space, they need to reconstruct the buildings they plan to support the second level (or build the supports from scratch, but I think they said existing buildings provided the supports). Buildings aren't predesigned to prop up a whole new city, so we're talking about pretty extensive construction. On top of that there are going to be further support structures built and existing structures reinforced when the weight of the upper city grows.

So, please explain how this is at all a potentiality. Pictures of Shanghai cityscape with colorful lights at night do not make for compelling arguments.


And there are plenty of things that Deus Ex looked over art-wise. For example, Anna and Gunther's augs are ridiculous and don't really make a lot of sense.

The skull gun? That was mostly just a joke, yeah? What other augmentations did they have that really differed from your own? I can't remember the specifics.


Nothing wrong with sexy. Predator drones are pretty sleek and stylish, and monstrous when they hit you.
In a Deus Ex game, in the Deus Ex universe: yeah, there is something wrong with sexy Mechs.

I don't recall anyone arguing that Warren et al. were aiming for Blade Runner and what we got instead was DX.

Well, that's what Delevar seemed to be saying (as well as others, in this thread and elsewhere). If he wasn't referring to the world design and vision, then he was arguing something no one disagreed with.


What I have said is basically the same as what you've said yourself in your first paragraph, above. They probably were aiming to be able to show, for example, a vibrant, bustling, visually diverse HK market reminisent of the HK that we all know exists today, but didn't even come close, and their representation is 50 years in the future? Maybe a double-decker Shanghai is overkill, but the new devs have the right to go with their vision instead of being constrained by what was visible in DX.

If their vision doesn't fit with the vision and scope of the original then they don't really. I mean, legally, sure. But if the aim is to create a successor worthy of the Deus Ex name, then no.

If all they wanted was some cyberpunk game with options they should have made there own IP. They could have called it Mechus Rex or something. Bioshock did pretty okay, right?


I agree that the mechs have been over stylized for my tastes. I would've preferred Adam starting off as a handsome human and slowly trading-off his looks and humanity for functionality (similar to what the two NSF guards were debating about in regards to Gunther). At the moment, it doesn't appear that there's any trade-off. Adam can pass for unaltered as long as he wears his trenchcoat (aside from maybe some eye augs) and his basic physical profile is as sleek as an athlete.
I super agree.

Delever
10th Aug 2010, 15:27
I do wish they'd been able to fit more NPCs on the maps, especially in Hong Kong. This is especially noticeable in the nightclubs. Maybe you can use the curfew as an excuse for Le Porte d'Enfer being so empty, but the Lucky Money Club in Hong Kong should've been wall-to-wall people. THAT is where engine limitations come in, not the architecture or setting.

Well, you would be surprised then to read about original Warren Spector ambitions and how they had to cut them down, including the setting, to match game engine capabilities. That is by no means bad approach. I am just saying, not really arguing. It is better to gave top-down vision and then constrain it by technology than start with possible environment and then constrain the story and setting by that. Again, just theorising. Maybe not. Who knows for sure :P

WildcatPhoenix
10th Aug 2010, 15:30
Well, you would be surprised then to read about original Warren Spector ambitions and how they had to cut them down, including the setting, to match game engine capabilities. That is by no means bad approach. I am just saying, not really arguing. It is better to gave top-down vision and then constrain it by technology than start with possible environment and then constrain the story and setting by that. Again, just theorising. Maybe not. Who knows for sure :P

Show me one quote where he says they had to cut down the setting due to engine capabilities.

pringlepower
10th Aug 2010, 15:48
EDIT: I forgot to finish my first thought. I'm not awake right today...


No, not perfectly reasonable. Most buildings in shanghai, from a little research seemed to have taken a couple to several years to complete. Same with buildings in Dubai. Stuff like the Marina Bay Sands skypark in Singapore are still undergoing final touches after several years, if I'm not mistaken.

What you are suggesting is that in seventeen years, there will be a large enough economic boom on one island that they will so quickly run of construction space it become necessary to construct a second level. Beyond the fact that it would probably be infinitely cheaper to simply build taller buildings or purchase property elsewhere, we are looking at least at ten years to fill a smallish island if every single land owner is building like effing mad.

Then when they run out of space, they need to reconstruct the buildings they plan to support the second level (or build the supports from scratch, but I think they said existing buildings provided the supports). Buildings aren't predesigned to prop up a whole new city, so we're talking about pretty extensive construction. On top of that there are going to be further support structures built and existing structures reinforced when the weight of the upper city grows.

So, please explain how this is at all a potentiality. Pictures of Shanghai cityscape with colorful lights at night do not make for compelling arguments.

The skull gun? That was mostly just a joke, yeah? What other augmentations did they have that really differed from your own? I can't remember the specifics.

In a Deus Ex game, in the Deus Ex universe: yeah, there is something wrong with sexy Mechs.



Eh, they've taken artistic license with it, but what the hell, looks nice. Deus Ex didn't exactly have a well-defined art style. And hey, they built the Empire State Building in 13 months, so who knows eh? Use your imaginations people!

And well, there's this: http://www.businessinsider.com/shanghai-1990-vs-2010-2010-6

Imagination!

Well if you look at their arms, they just stuck a bunch of tubes, wires, and a shaft, imbedded in the flesh. What the hell is that supposed to do, other than be really painful and cause infection? And Gunther's just got a metal plate on the top of his head that does who knows what.

Delever
10th Aug 2010, 23:58
Show me one quote where he says they had to cut down the setting due to engine capabilities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTWvsGA77T4, near the end. Also there was an article with more technical details which mentioned stuff like White House, I can probably fish that out too with good search if you want.

WildcatPhoenix
11th Aug 2010, 00:16
And did you proceed to watch Part 2, where Smith goes on to say, "Part of it was due to the limit of technology, but it's also that a story is really about a handful of people...it is more personal and more intimate" to limit the scope?

So I guess both of us have a point.

pringlepower
11th Aug 2010, 00:19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTWvsGA77T4, near the end. Also there was an article with more technical details which mentioned stuff like White House, I can probably fish that out too with good search if you want.

Wait Warren Spector's early story draft had Austin being invaded by Russians and Mexicans?

Delever
11th Aug 2010, 00:42
And did you proceed to watch Part 2, where Smith goes on to say, "Part of it was due to the limit of technology, but it's also that a story is really about a handful of people...it is more personal and more intimate" to limit the scope?

So I guess both of us have a point.

Yeah, of course I watched both parts.

I really don't have any arguing point other than to state obvious: technology always imposes limits, even current technology. So I fished out that article after all: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3114/postmortem_ion_storms_deus_ex.php?page=3. And I completely agree about people having consistent, finished stories.

(BTW, quite good read if you are interested in game design)

Who knows what really could have happened if they could do what they planned. At some point, design and change has to stop and game needs to be finished.

What strikes me most about these kind of articles is how fragile and undetermined game design actually is. Or maybe was. I would like that Eidos could tell us more, but it seems that now everything is isolated and divided into "best practices", like PR done in safe and professional way. Maybe more organic process helped DX become what it was.

FrankCSIS
11th Aug 2010, 01:36
I would like that Eidos could tell us more, but it seems that now everything is isolated and divided into "best practices", like PR done in safe and professional way.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v197/FrankDePasquale/eidos.jpg

JackShandy
13th Aug 2010, 13:15
View Post
On takedowns:
"I think it's one of the greatest parts of the game... People have reacted so well to them."

Guys, he's not talking about this forum, obviously. He's talking about the reactions they got from the playtesters. The ones that have actually played the game.

EDIT: Old argument, apparently. Oh well.

Are we back on the technology/deus ex canon angle? Personally, I'm glad they're doing their own thing. Have you ever played Bioshock 2? A different company makes the sequel, and was so reverent to the first one that we ended up with a bioshock 1.5 with none of the style and verve of the original. Bioshock, like Deus Ex, was cool because it was original. Sticking reverently to the same canon, without the people who wrote the first, would give us a stale copy-paste of Deus Ex's plot without any of the life Spector put in.

See, hiring a guy and telling him "Make something EXACTLY like the thing this other guy before you made" is a recipe for bland copy-pasted disaster. (Again, I cite BS 2.) Letting him put his own spin on the general ideas that other guy was going for is much better. Everyone's got something different to offer, and you should let them offer that instead of constraining them to someone else's creation. Gets you something with a lot more life, character, etc etc.

I'm just talking about plot and style there, mind. I know a lot of people are hanging out for a copy-paste of Deus Ex's gameplay, and were disappointed by the linearity of BS.

WildcatPhoenix
13th Aug 2010, 13:54
See, hiring a guy and telling him "Make something EXACTLY like the thing this other guy before you made" is a recipe for bland copy-pasted disaster. (Again, I cite BS 2.) Letting him put his own spin on the general ideas that other guy was going for is much better. Everyone's got something different to offer, and you should let them offer that instead of constraining them to someone else's creation. Gets you something with a lot more life, character, etc etc.

I'm just talking about plot and style there, mind. I know a lot of people are hanging out for a copy-paste of Deus Ex's gameplay, and were disappointed by the linearity of BS.

No one here (at least no one that I've seen) is asking for a direct copy/paste of Deus Ex. Most of the "hardcore" fans who are upset by what we've seen of DX:HR will happily admit there were a lot of rough edges to the original game.

Yes, the gunplay was awkward.
Yes, the shadow detection was inconsistent.
Yes, the AI was laughable at times.
Yes, there was still more linearity than Warren and co. were aiming for originally.
Yes, the final missions became somewhat repetitive.

I would love to see a Deus Ex sequel improve on these things. I'm even okay with meeting entirely new characters, visiting entirely different locales, and witnessing entirely new events at a different stage in the DX timeline.

But all of this can be done without changing the style, perspective, and design "philosophy" of Deus Ex. Examples:

Why take out skills? The skill vs. aug balance was a huge part of the RPG/FPS hybrid model.
Why eliminate lockpicks and multitools?
Why so much damn third-person camera?
Why scripted cutscenes?
Why no melee weapons?

These aren't nitpicky little details, these are huge changes to the series. It's not copy/paste to ask a 1st person shooter to remain in 1st person, or to ask for melee weapons to remain instead of mandatory 3rd person takedowns.

Red
13th Aug 2010, 15:15
+ Health regen, no localised damage.

Ashpolt
13th Aug 2010, 15:21
No one here (at least no one that I've seen) is asking for a direct copy/paste of Deus Ex.

This has been said enough times on this forum that I have a feeling JackShandy knows it already and is just trolling. But thanks for typing a response that said pretty much exactly what I would've done, but in a much more succint manner than my style!

JackShandy
13th Aug 2010, 22:00
Guys, guys:


I'm just talking about plot and style there, mind.

I wasn't talking about the gameplay. I'm just talking about everyone wanting the game to stay strictly within the Deus Ex canon/storyline.

Ashpolt
13th Aug 2010, 23:34
I wasn't talking about the gameplay. I'm just talking about everyone wanting the game to stay strictly within the Deus Ex canon/storyline.

If it can't do that, it shouldn't be presenting itself as a prequel (or sequel.) Even if we can argue that the gameplay mechanics are flexible to change significantly (which I don't agree with at all, but for the sake of making a point...) storyline continuity and adherence to canon is vital, especially in a story-heavy series like Deus Ex. I wouldn't make a new Fallout and say "we've changed it so the bombs now dropped in the 1980s, and everything is now nu-wave and rap themed." I wouldn't make a new Mass Effect and say "actually humans were the first species in space, and first to discover the citadel." I wouldn't make a new Half-Life and say "actually Gordon and Barney worked for Aperture Science, and the resonance cascade was caused by an anonymous scientist." I wouldn't....etc etc.

They're changing the gameplay mechanics significantly, and they're disregarding established canon, though "may" drop in a few character cameos here and there....in what way, exactly, is this a successor then? It seems to me that if anything, this will be the Bioshock to Deus Ex's System Shock*. At least there Irrational Games had the decency to make a new franchise.

*Actually even less so, at least that was made by a large chunk of the same team.

JackShandy
14th Aug 2010, 12:15
Half Life's kind of a bad example there, Ashpolt. Half Life 2 had an extremely different style to HL1, and reworked a lot of the plot elements into a different shape (Condensing all the generic security guards and scientists into two distinct characters, for an example). HL1 and 2 are really, really different - swap the names and you'd have an unrecognisable new franchise.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. I'm glad valve went into an entirely new direction with this weird sci-fi orwell-style plot instead of trying to clone the first. It was definetly still a Successor, and I don't think anyone's arguing that it's not a Half Life game just because the whole thing doesn't take place in an underground facility. Same thought for Deus Ex. I'm amazed at the courage these guys have in taking this in their own direction, the new art style, everything. Putting in a cover system takes some balls.

Of course the argument then is that they shouldn't even have called it Deus Ex, but I dunno. It's clearly a Deus Ex style game set in a Deus Ex style world. It's got a subtitle instead of a number, so they're distancing themselves a bit while still immediatly showing everyone their intentions. Putting Deus Ex in the title just immediately lets everyone know what kind of game they're trying to make here. Cashing in on the franchise? Well, maybe.

Ashpolt
15th Aug 2010, 10:58
Half Life's kind of a bad example there, Ashpolt. Half Life 2 had an extremely different style to HL1, and reworked a lot of the plot elements into a different shape (Condensing all the generic security guards and scientists into two distinct characters, for an example). HL1 and 2 are really, really different - swap the names and you'd have an unrecognisable new franchise.

The key point though is that it didn't contradict anything from the original Half-Life. It may have been different, sure, but it was all in keeping with canon and what could conceivably have happened as a result of the first game. The concern with DXHR is not that it'll be too different in and of itself, but that this level of technology could not have existed during this time period in canon.

xsamitt
15th Aug 2010, 11:58
The key point though is that it didn't contradict anything from the original Half-Life. It may have been different, sure, but it was all in keeping with canon and what could conceivably have happened as a result of the first game. The concern with DXHR is not that it'll be too different in and of itself, but that this level of technology could not have existed during this time period in canon.

I feel that the technology point you raise does have some validity to it.But I;m more concerned with immersion because I can accept that there is technology in the world right now that ordinary folks no nothing about.So I would expect that in 20 years or so it will be no different.I also don't mind using my imagination to invision things that are not yet.But even with my liberal view and sort of in contradiction to what I just said,the original DX, though set even further ahead in time,tried to keep the weapons more present day,which I would have liked to see in this iteration of DX.
I believe it's a mistake even with a DX title to take us into Fantasy this or that,to me DX was so much more than toy pow pow of the week.

And I pray that we are given the choice to 1st person.Because no matter how talented the team may be or any team for that matter,going back and forth between 1st and 3rd Person perspective is disorienting.I believe that DX should never attempt style over substance.

Ilves
15th Aug 2010, 12:41
And I pray that we are given the choice to 1st person. [...] going back and forth between 1st and 3rd Person perspective is disorienting.

I'd love optionality, but if you think about it it's not that straightforward. Given the way the game mechanics appear to be working at the moment I just can't imagine going through the (more elaborate) takedowns and cover rolls in 1rst person without suffering seizures.

The only way optional 1rst person would work is if it came with streamlining and simplification of player movement and takedown animations. I doubt if EM are willing to butcher their pet elements like that.

xsamitt
15th Aug 2010, 12:48
I'd love optionality, but if you think about it it's not that straightforward. Given the way the game mechanics appear to be working at the moment I just can't imagine having to go through the (more elaborate) takedowns and cover rolls in 1rst person without suffering seizures.

The only way optional 1rst person would work is if it came with streamlining and simplification of player movement and takedown animations. I doubt if EM are willing to butcher their pet element like that.

I doubt it as well.They seem to have made up their minds a long time ago about many things about this 3rd iteration.I guess i was thinking out-loud.:(

Ilves
15th Aug 2010, 12:55
^ DX:HR official boards, Thinking Out Loud since 2007. :rolleyes: ;)

Dr_Bob
15th Aug 2010, 23:27
Examples:

[QUOTE=WildcatPhoenix;1471134]Why take out skills? The skill vs. aug balance was a huge part of the RPG/FPS hybrid model.

Skills are manifested in augmentations now.

They were removed, as an independent part of the game, because they conflicted with what the developers wanted to do with the augmentations.


Why eliminate lockpicks and multitools?

Oh the joys of staring at a door or an electronic device to pick it or hack it, respectively.


Why so much damn third-person camera?

To show you what Jensen is capable of doing.


Why scripted cutscenes?

This seems more "casual gamer".


Why no melee weapons?

I loved repeatedly clicking my mouse button to awkwardly hit someone!

The takedowns in DX1 were awkward, too.

I'm glad Eidos Montreal have opted for automatic takedowns.

xsamitt
15th Aug 2010, 23:48
[QUOTE=WildcatPhoenix;1471134]Examples:



Skills are manifested in augmentations now.

They were removed, as an independent part of the game, because they conflicted with what the developers wanted to do with the augmentations.



Oh the joys of staring at a door or an electronic device to pick it or hack it, respectively.



To show you what Jensen is capable of doing.



This seems more "casual gamer".



I loved repeatedly clicking my mouse button to awkwardly hit someone!

The takedowns in DX1 were awkward, too.

I'm glad Eidos Montreal have opted for automatic takedowns.

DX3 ...A ton of options you don't have access to.:flowers:

Ashpolt
15th Aug 2010, 23:50
I feel that the technology point you raise does have some validity to it.But I;m more concerned with immersion because I can accept that there is technology in the world right now that ordinary folks no nothing about.So I would expect that in 20 years or so it will be no different.I also don't mind using my imagination to invision things that are not yet.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, the "level of technology" issue is definitely one of my lesser concerns with this game, it's not something I'm personally massively bothered about, but I totally understand those who are. The gameplay mechanics, particularly - as you mentioned - the 3rd person elements concern me a lot more, but if they could get that side of things right, I could forgive some (not massive*) canon errors.

*By this I mean things like the level of technology issue could be forgiven, stuff like "Paul is JC's father! Manderley used to be the head of the Triad!" would still be stupid.

xsamitt
16th Aug 2010, 00:03
Yeah, don't get me wrong, the "level of technology" issue is definitely one of my lesser concerns with this game, it's not something I'm personally massively bothered about, but I totally understand those who are. The gameplay mechanics, particularly - as you mentioned - the 3rd person elements concern me a lot more, but if they could get that side of things right, I could forgive some (not massive*) canon errors.

*By this I mean things like the level of technology issue could be forgiven, stuff like "Paul is JC's father! Manderley used to be the head of the Triad!" would still be stupid.

Hi Ashpolt...Yes we clearly are on the same page.I have not the greatest hope for DX3 but as I'm an eternal optimist I will give you my opinion after I've played the game and will fill you in....That's what friends do right.:thumb:

mad825
16th Aug 2010, 01:42
We see Human Revolution as an brand new game even though it's part of the Deus Ex franchise, it's kinda of a reboot, we think alot of gamers today don't know about it. For us we see it as a new game, it's new chactors, it's a new storyline, so you don't need to know the old Deus Ex games to appreciate it......obliviously will pay a nudge to the old one...
sound familiar?

as Jean said in laymans, don't expect too much nostalgia and don't expect it to coincide with the old Deus Ex story because we need to entertain new players as well but we'll be keeping the familiar feel of the game

in this case, we can expect inconsistency with the story...in other interviews I can quote him saying along the the lines a of re-make

Pretentious Old Man.
16th Aug 2010, 01:48
sound familiar?

as Jean said in laymans, don't expect too much nostalgia and don't expect it to coincide with the old Deus Ex story because we need to entertain new players as well but we'll be keeping the familiar feel of the game

in this case, we can expect inconsistency with the story...in other interviews I can quote him saying along the the lines a of re-make

I don't see how mentioning old characters would alienate new players. After all, they wouldn't know would they? They'd just think "Gunther Hermann, cool name, must be German".

Corpus
16th Aug 2010, 01:52
sound familiar?

as Jean said in laymans, don't expect too much nostalgia and don't expect it to coincide with the old Deus Ex story because we need to entertain new players as well but we'll be keeping the familiar feel of the game

in this case, we can expect inconsistency with the story...in other interviews I can quote him saying along the the lines a of re-make

Its risky relating back to the story in a prequel especially if you didn't create the original (I say this because there could have been extra plot ideas and back stories that were never explained like Manderely). Heck even if you did you can mess it up, GSC had a rather sloppy story for the prequel to stalker.

mad825
16th Aug 2010, 01:58
I don't see how mentioning old characters would alienate new players. After all, they wouldn't know would they? They'd just think "Gunther Hermann, cool name, must be German".

It would be like watching Twelve Monkeys backwards plot/story wise or talking to Barney in HL2 without playing HL/BlueShift , "new" people wouldn't be able to relate to the character and just wouldn't care and makes the experience lesser compared to those who have played DX 1,2.

Its risky relating back to the story in a prequel especially if you didn't create the original. Heck even if you did you can mess it up, GSC had a rather sloppy story for the prequel to stalker.
I'm not judging if this is going to be good or bad however people (old players) expect it "make sense" what I'm trying to say is that "just forget 1 and 2 because the 'prequel' is not going to bother and try to make sense of it all"

Corpus
16th Aug 2010, 02:04
It would be like watching Twelve Monkeys backwards plot/story wise or talking to Barney in HL2 without playing HL/BlueShift , "new" people wouldn't be able to relate to the character and just wouldn't care and makes the experience lesser compared to those who have played DX 1,2.

I'm not judging if this is going to be good or bad however people (old players) expect it "make sense" what I'm trying to say is that "just forget 1 and 2 because the 'prequel' is not going to bother and try to make sense of it all"

They've acknowledged there will be references in there. My major concern is justifying the tech, even though I'm fully happy with what they have put in :confused:. It would just help me understand the world better.

mad825
16th Aug 2010, 02:08
They've acknowledged there will be references in there. My major concern is justifying the tech, even though I'm fully happy with what they have put in :confused:. It would just help me understand the world better.
as I said "just forget 1 and 2 because the 'prequel' is not going to bother and try to make sense of it all"

yes they may add references for the fan based players however this game was never intended to be accurate and we may well be having a squabble as the Fallout 1,2 fans did to fallout 3

pringlepower
16th Aug 2010, 02:31
It would be like watching Twelve Monkeys backwards plot/story wise or talking to Barney in HL2 without playing HL/BlueShift , "new" people wouldn't be able to relate to the character and just wouldn't care and makes the experience lesser compared to those who have played DX 1,2.

I'm not judging if this is going to be good or bad however people (old players) expect it "make sense" what I'm trying to say is that "just forget 1 and 2 because the 'prequel' is not going to bother and try to make sense of it all"

I related the Barney without playing HL at all, because he was a perfectly nice guy with a sense of humour.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Aug 2010, 03:13
Skills are manifested in augmentations now.

They were removed, as an independent part of the game, because they conflicted with what the developers wanted to do with the augmentations.


And how exactly do these developers plan to reward players for exploring, completing sidequests, or taking on tough challenges? The skill points were given to encourage just such a thing. By making everything centered around augs they are eliminating this extra motivation...unless they plan to drop an aug upgrade from the sky like in Mario 3 when a player goes exploring.


Oh the joys of staring at a door or an electronic device to pick it or hack it, respectively.

Deus Ex was all about resource management. Augs, lockpicks, multitools- everything came down to this core element. "Would I rather trade 2 lockpicks to get inside here, or should I use my one remaining LAM to blow the door open? Do I risk alerting the guards?" The complexity was what made it beautiful. Now we are simply reducing options- everything is tied to the hacking aug, and the only resource to balance is your bioenergy (which to some degree is going to automatically recharge anyway!)


To show you what Jensen is capable of doing.

This is just weak.


I loved repeatedly clicking my mouse button to awkwardly hit someone!

This is like saying "I think it's stupid that I have to click a mouse button to fire a weapon." You have to click your mouse/joystick/button/whatever to activate the takedown, too. If you're not close enough, guess what? You'll have to click it again!


The takedowns in DX1 were awkward, too.

I'm glad Eidos Montreal have opted for automatic takedowns.

I'm sure you'll love the 3rd person ladder climbing and cover system too.

pringlepower
16th Aug 2010, 03:23
And how exactly do these developers plan to reward players for exploring, completing sidequests, or taking on tough challenges? The skill points were given to encourage just such a thing. By making everything centered around augs they are eliminating this extra motivation...unless they plan to drop an aug upgrade from the sky like in Mario 3 when a player goes exploring.

They can reward players for exploring, completing sidequests, and taking on tough challenges by... giving them skill points. To upgrade the augs. Which they're doing. Really. They are. They really are. Really.

And didn't Deus Ex give you aug upgrades for exploring?

Pinky_Powers
16th Aug 2010, 05:03
They can reward players for exploring, completing sidequests, and taking on tough challenges by... giving them skill points. To upgrade the augs. Which they're doing. Really. They are. They really are. Really.

And didn't Deus Ex give you aug upgrades for exploring?

Quite true. There were a number of Aug Canisters that could only be found by exploration.

You made a really good point above. The incentives for discovering everything HR has to offer is just as potent as was found in Deus Ex. In the end, it will come down to level design and general content to determine if this facet of the game compares well to the original.

WildcatPhoenix
16th Aug 2010, 05:08
No, he did not, Pinky. Aug upgrades were relatively rare in the original game, while skillpoints could be obtained for completing just about any quest or assignment, not just in exploration.

I have not read anywhere that general skill points will be awarded and available for application toward the player's augs in DXHR. If someone can point me to an article or interview that says so, I will retract my position on this.

Even so, how is this "streamlining" of skills and augs not simply another case of simplification? Reducing options? Reducing complexity?

NKD
16th Aug 2010, 05:24
I thought this was the official forum for DXHR. Instead I seem to have stepped into the official Anti-DXHR forums.

Jerion
16th Aug 2010, 05:49
No, he did not, Pinky. Aug upgrades were relatively rare in the original game, while skillpoints could be obtained for completing just about any quest or assignment, not just in exploration.

I have not read anywhere that general skill points will be awarded and available for application toward the player's augs in DXHR. If someone can point me to an article or interview that says so, I will retract my position on this.

Even so, how is this "streamlining" of skills and augs not simply another case of simplification? Reducing options? Reducing complexity?

Give this a read:

http://deusex-humanrevolution.blogspot.com/2010/06/pc-gamer-july-2010-issue-cyberpunk.html

"Consolidation" (note: different from "consolization") is the word you're looking for here.

Pinky_Powers
16th Aug 2010, 06:42
No, he did not, Pinky. Aug upgrades were relatively rare in the original game, while skillpoints could be obtained for completing just about any quest or assignment, not just in exploration.

It doesn't matter if Aug canisters were rare, the mere fact of them is enough to drive most to explore every nook and cranny.

And I've read in a number of articles that exploration in HR will be rewarded on many levels, with skill points and other goodies.

ThePrecursor
16th Aug 2010, 11:21
They mention XP-points, not skill points. But yeah, it's virtually the same thing, except that none of these points can be attributed to actual skills (as we know them in DX1 at least).

mad825
16th Aug 2010, 12:02
I thought this was the official forum for DXHR. Instead I seem to have stepped into the official Anti-DXHR forums.

hmm, I believe we have still yet to feel the full wraith of Anti-DXHR.

I would call this a warming-up period as the arguments are still purely theoretical and within a non-trolling manner.

Ashpolt
16th Aug 2010, 12:23
I thought this was the official forum for DXHR. Instead I seem to have stepped into the official Anti-DXHR forums.

We're not anti-DXHR, we're just the people who want DXHR to be more than a generic action game with very mild RPG elements.

You must be the other guy.

Dr_Bob
16th Aug 2010, 13:05
And how exactly do these developers plan to reward players for exploring, completing sidequests, or taking on tough challenges? The skill points were given to encourage just such a thing. By making everything centered around augs they are eliminating this extra motivation...unless they plan to drop an aug upgrade from the sky like in Mario 3 when a player goes exploring.

With experience points to upgrade your augs.

Sound familiar?

Hint: the skills system has been embedded in the augs and you now get "experience points" instead of "skill points".


Deus Ex was all about resource management. Augs, lockpicks, multitools- everything came down to this core element. "Would I rather trade 2 lockpicks to get inside here, or should I use my one remaining LAM to blow the door open? Do I risk alerting the guards?" The complexity was what made it beautiful. Now we are simply reducing options- everything is tied to the hacking aug, and the only resource to balance is your bioenergy (which to some degree is going to automatically recharge anyway!)

You win this one, but I still don't think staring at a door or an electronic device is fun.


This is just weak.

I understand why they want to do it.

I think it's pretty cool, actually.


This is like saying "I think it's stupid that I have to click a mouse button to fire a weapon." You have to click your mouse/joystick/button/whatever to activate the takedown, too. If you're not close enough, guess what? You'll have to click it again!

No, it's nothing like that.

The melee system in DX1 was awful, I don't want to see a repeat of it in HR.

About the takedowns: yes, but it's not quite the same as the melee system, is it?

I don't see why you're trying to use the fact that missing a takedown will make you try again, it just seems like a weak argument to try and avoid acknowledging that takedowns are better than a poor melee combat system.


I'm sure you'll love the 3rd person ladder climbing and cover system too.

The 3rd-person ladder climbing seems unnecessary, but it will be useful to see when is the right time to climb up, when there are enemies patrolling.

The cover system allows me to see how much of my body is exposed.

As a result, it is instantly more useful than the 1st-person leaning in DX1.


Admit it: you want Human Revolution to play and feel just like DX1.

You don't want the developers to put their own work into it, you just want a rehash of DX1.


I thought this was the official forum for DXHR. Instead I seem to have stepped into the official Anti-DXHR forums.

Hear hear.

xsamitt
16th Aug 2010, 13:37
Quote:Deus Ex was all about resource management. Augs, lockpicks, multitools- everything came down to this core element. "Would I rather trade 2 lockpicks to get inside here, or should I use my one remaining LAM to blow the door open? Do I risk alerting the guards?" The complexity was what made it beautiful. Now we are simply reducing options- everything is tied to the hacking aug, and the only resource to balance is your bioenergy (which to some degree is going to automatically recharge anyway!)


I couldn't agree more.As much as I hate to admit it,EM have have simplified a title that needs the extra complexity as it is part and parcel of the experience.I bet Warren Spector is turning over in his grave,LOl and the man is still alive or at least i hope he is.Warren....we need you baby.Don't ever forget it.

Ashpolt
16th Aug 2010, 13:37
Admit it: you want Human Revolution to play and feel just like DX1.

You don't want the developers to put their own work into it, you just want a rehash of DX1.

You're going to make loads of friends here Dr. Bob!

No-one wants DX1 with better textures. What we do want, however, is a game that takes Deus Ex as a basis and improves on it - and no, "streamlining" is not improving in this case. What I'd settle for, personally, is a game that is recognisably the same genre as the original, i.e. an FP-RPG, not an FP/TPS.

pringlepower
16th Aug 2010, 14:04
It doesn't matter if Aug canisters were rare, the mere fact of them is enough to drive most to explore every nook and cranny.

And I've read in a number of articles that exploration in HR will be rewarded on many levels, with skill points and other goodies.

I remember having 4 copies of the arm aug canister by the game's end. It sorta helped that VersaLife had about 50 bajillion aug canisters (which made sense but come on.... not exactly rewarding those who took the time to explore early now are we).

Anyways I vaguely remember an article that more or less says "we give xp points for sneaking".

WildcatPhoenix
16th Aug 2010, 14:28
You're going to make loads of friends here Dr. Bob!

No-one wants DX1 with better textures. What we do want, however, is a game that takes Deus Ex as a basis and improves on it - and no, "streamlining" is not improving in this case. What I'd settle for, personally, is a game that is recognisably the same genre as the original, i.e. an FP-RPG, not an FP/TPS.

Lol feels like we've been fighting this same battle for years now, doesn't it, Ashpolt?

The last thing I want to do is pay $60 for the same game I've played 100 times. I've already stated in multiple threads that I don't care if DXHR doesn't feature a single character or location from the original game. All I want is a story that fits logically into the existing universe of Deus Ex and a gameplay experience that builds upon the incredible foundation of its predecessor.

Deus Ex was great (in my opinion, the greatest), but it was just a first-step in the direction I would like to see games progressing towards. Instead, we've gone backwards. And to me it looks like DXHR is continuing that backward trend.

I could be wrong. I sure hope I am! But based off of the limited information I have, I don't see much progress in terms of complexity, non-linearity, or resource balance. What I see are the same regenerating health, regenerating resources, scripted non-interactive cutscenes, boss fights, and 3rd person "cinematic" cameras being touted by almost every other generic 1st person shooter out there.

Dr_Bob
16th Aug 2010, 14:39
Lol feels like we've been fighting this same battle for years now, doesn't it, Ashpolt?

The last thing I want to do is pay $60 for the same game. I've already stated in multiple threads that I don't care if DXHR doesn't feature a single character or location from the original game. All I want is a story that fits logically into the existing universe of Deus Ex and a gameplay experience that builds upon the incredible foundation of its predecessor.

Deus Ex was great (in my opinion, the greatest), but it was just a first-step in the direction I would like to see games progressing towards. Instead, we've gone backwards. And to me it looks like DXHR is continuing that backward trend.

I could be wrong. I sure hope I am! But based off of the limited information I have, I don't see much progress in terms of complexity, non-linearity, or resource balance. What I see are the same regenerating health, regenerating resources, scripted non-interactive cutscenes, boss fights, and 3rd person "cinematic" cameras being touted by almost every other generic 1st person shooter out there.

Looks like we will see when this game comes out February 2011.

xsamitt
16th Aug 2010, 15:05
Lol feels like we've been fighting this same battle for years now, doesn't it, Ashpolt?

The last thing I want to do is pay $60 for the same game I've played 100 times. I've already stated in multiple threads that I don't care if DXHR doesn't feature a single character or location from the original game. All I want is a story that fits logically into the existing universe of Deus Ex and a gameplay experience that builds upon the incredible foundation of its predecessor.

Deus Ex was great (in my opinion, the greatest), but it was just a first-step in the direction I would like to see games progressing towards. Instead, we've gone backwards. And to me it looks like DXHR is continuing that backward trend.

I could be wrong. I sure hope I am! But based off of the limited information I have, I don't see much progress in terms of complexity, non-linearity, or resource balance. What I see are the same regenerating health, regenerating resources, scripted non-interactive cutscenes, boss fights, and 3rd person "cinematic" cameras being touted by almost every other generic 1st person shooter out there.

Sadly....and regrettably....I have to agree.

Pretentious Old Man.
16th Aug 2010, 15:35
(Ronnie Corbett voice) Can I just pipe up at this point and say that I actually wouldn't mind DX1 re-graphicked with a new plot?

Red
16th Aug 2010, 15:57
No.

Pretentious Old Man.
16th Aug 2010, 16:09
No.

Oui.

xsamitt
16th Aug 2010, 16:24
(Ronnie Corbett voice) Can I just pipe up at this point and say that I actually wouldn't mind DX1 re-graphicked with a new plot?

I can only imagine how good that would be.Be still my beating heart.:thumb:

Pinky_Powers
16th Aug 2010, 16:48
It's always been a terrible and searing clarity that both Deus Ex and Human Revolution were in dire need of a kind of GTA dialysis. Those grim cockers Denton and Jensen were ever incomplete and should long ago have turned to vehicle thievery in some grand sandbox setting.

Pretentious Old Man.
16th Aug 2010, 17:10
It's always been a terrible and searing clarity that both Deus Ex and Human Revolution were in dire need of a kind of GTA dialysis. Those grim cockers Denton and Jensen were ever incomplete and should long ago have turned to vehicle thievery in some grand sandbox setting.

Deus Ex: Vice City just doesn't have a very good ring to it. Neither does Deus Ex: San Andreas, or Deus Ex: The ballad of Gay JC Denton.

pringlepower
16th Aug 2010, 17:13
Deus Ex: Vice City just doesn't have a very good ring to it. Neither does Deus Ex: San Andreas, or Deus Ex: The ballad of Gay JC Denton.

GTA: Heng Sha, starring Tong Se Hong. "He's just looking out for you."

Pinky_Powers
16th Aug 2010, 17:35
Deus Ex: Vice City just doesn't have a very good ring to it. Neither does Deus Ex: San Andreas, or Deus Ex: The ballad of Gay JC Denton.

You're simply not taking it far enough.

Deus Ex - Cyberpunk Low-Rider

From such a title only a golden blooming of unbridled genital arousal could occur; a fiery lust frenzy of international proportions.

Red
16th Aug 2010, 17:49
Well, I think a dancing in the club minigame would be awesome in DX :)

In Lucky Money with that Aussie chick. Hell, if you paid her so she could get in, atleast you should be able to get some XP points for dancing awesomely. Also, as the receptionist chick says (can't find it in youtube videos):
DOOR GIRL:
Perfect. I order you to stand in the spotlight and growl at the women like a dog
who needs a master.

Pinky_Powers
16th Aug 2010, 17:55
I think all on these hallowed forums would agree that Adam Jensen breaking into a powerful Napoleon Dynamite dance fiend would be a pleasure not all-together safe in excess portions.

Pretentious Old Man.
16th Aug 2010, 18:08
Or we could have that hit JC Denton dance (the "Heil Hitler!") return...

WildcatPhoenix
16th Aug 2010, 18:12
Lol...JC Denton, back on the scene with the crouch and lean. :lol:

Dr_Bob
16th Aug 2010, 18:47
Lol...JC Denton, back on the scene with the crouch and lean. :lol:

:lmao:

ercpkr
16th Aug 2010, 23:24
I can't say I'm a fan of Square Enix, they're, in my opinion, a company that focuses entirely on visual appeal to lure and win over customers, and judging by what I've seen, it only adds fuel to my suspicions.

To start, it's telling to me that they haven't shown any videos showing even a full second of gameplay before cutting to a prerendered cutscene, and that the feel and tone of the world doesn't fit into the continuity of a Deus Ex prequel. The "renaissance-style" costumes are out of the blue, and very characteristic of Square Enix's final fantasy series, and the world doesn't look like it would be something out of Deus Ex's past... in Deus Ex we see architecture resembling today's, but the skyscrapers are gigantic, built to accomodate an overcrowded world, but also rotten, collapsing and condemned due to societal decay and plague outbreak. Logically, the cities in a DX prequel would appear like the cities of today, but with more of a focus on skyscrapers. But it isn't, it's a completely different architecture style. It seems like Deus Ex is nothing more to them than a bastard hybrid of final fantasy and modern fps, that their developers want to make the series their intellectual property with total disregard for what came before it.

Also, I'm very concerned about the pre-animated "take downs". If I'm near a guard, I want to knock him out quickly then duck behind cover again to escape the notice of the next guard, or taking him out before he can sound the alarm; and remaining in control of my character this whole time in order to be able to make these decisions when necessary. I'm worried I'll instead be forced to repeatedly watch the same animation over and over, losing control of my character each time and being impotently denied my chance to respond while the next guard walks into the room, sees me and sounds the alarm or puts a bullet in my character's head (which I hope is still lethal on the higher difficulty settings).

pringlepower
16th Aug 2010, 23:41
I can't say I'm a fan of Square Enix, they're, in my opinion, a company that focuses entirely on visual appeal to lure and win over customers, and judging by what I've seen, it only adds fuel to my suspicions.

To start, it's telling to me that they haven't shown any videos showing even a full second of gameplay before cutting to a prerendered cutscene, and that the feel and tone of the world doesn't fit into the continuity of a Deus Ex prequel. The "renaissance-style" costumes are out of the blue, and very characteristic of Square Enix's final fantasy series, and the world doesn't look like it would be something out of Deus Ex's past... in Deus Ex we see architecture resembling today's, but the skyscrapers are gigantic, built to accomodate an overcrowded world, but also rotten, collapsing and condemned due to societal decay and plague outbreak. Logically, the cities in a DX prequel would appear like the cities of today, but with more of a focus on skyscrapers. But it isn't, it's a completely different architecture style. It seems like Deus Ex is nothing more to them than a bastard hybrid of final fantasy and modern fps, that their developers want to make the series their intellectual property with total disregard for what came before it.

Also, I'm very concerned about the pre-animated "take downs". If I'm near a guard, I want to knock him out quickly then duck behind cover again to escape the notice of the next guard, or taking him out before he can sound the alarm; and remaining in control of my character this whole time in order to be able to make these decisions when necessary. I'm worried I'll instead be forced to repeatedly watch the same animation over and over, losing control of my character each time and being impotently denied my chance to respond while the next guard walks into the room, sees me and sounds the alarm or puts a bullet in my character's head (which I hope is still lethal on the higher difficulty settings).

Pfffft

TrickyVein
16th Aug 2010, 23:59
I can't say I'm a fan of Square Enix, they're, in my opinion, a company that focuses entirely on visual appeal to lure and win over customers, and judging by what I've seen, it only adds fuel to my suspicions...It seems like Deus Ex is nothing more to them than a bastard hybrid of final fantasy and modern fps...

Here I agree with you. I've always disliked AJ's hair and visual appeal because of how closely it speaks to me of overly-stylized, Japanized (or actually Japanese) games like Final Fantasy. Which make me want to wretch.

The style of the game - it's color scheme and where it draws its influences from pseudo-Renaissance themes was decided on before the game itself was finished in terms of story. This isn't necessarily a bad design decision, but it's one that I think can make many elements seem forced and out of place in the final product - when ideas have changed and diverged from the original artistic vision of black and gold cyberpunk Renaissance for instance.

NKD
17th Aug 2010, 09:30
We're not anti-DXHR, we're just the people who want DXHR to be more than a generic action game with very mild RPG elements.

You must be the other guy.

DXHR is already what it is going to be. There is no changing it at this stage. If you are unhappy with where the game is at, there's little point in remaining.

Daedalus Ciarán
17th Aug 2010, 10:44
DXHR is already what it is going to be. There is no changing it at this stage. If you are unhappy with where the game is at, there's little point in remaining.

There's still roughly five months of production, and it's not like they can't push back the date an extra few months on top of that. Hell DX1 added an extra six months onto its development at the end in order to add more story and character encounters which affected the story, so no, DXHR is not beyond being changed. The only thing that would stop it being changed is the developers, and that's it.

Ashpolt
17th Aug 2010, 11:54
DXHR is already what it is going to be. There is no changing it at this stage. If you are unhappy with where the game is at, there's little point in remaining.

This is most likely true, but by that logic there's also no point in being here if you're just going to say everything is sunshine and roses. Also, if we're talking strictly about "point," no one is going to stop posting here just because of what you say, so there's little point in you making these posts.

I, and at a guess the rest of the "complainers", am here because I'm still keen to discuss new info on the game, in the hope that they actually come out with some good news - such as substantiating their claims that this will be as much of an RPG as the first game, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

xsamitt
17th Aug 2010, 11:56
Here I agree with you. I've always disliked AJ's hair and visual appeal because of how closely it speaks to me of overly-stylized, Japanized (or actually Japanese) games like Final Fantasy. Which make me want to wretch.

The style of the game - it's color scheme and where it draws its influences from pseudo-Renaissance themes was decided on before the game itself was finished in terms of story. This isn't necessarily a bad design decision, but it's one that I think can make many elements seem forced and out of place in the final product - when ideas have changed and diverged from the original artistic vision of black and gold cyberpunk Renaissance for instance.

I can't say I Dig the Finial Fantasy style hair either.J.C Denton was so normal looking but the voice really helped to bring him to life.No one can sound as serious as our beloved J.C.But of course everyone knows that.It's J.C Denton after all.:wave:

WildcatPhoenix
17th Aug 2010, 13:47
Actually, Adam's voice is one of the things I like the most about DXHR so far. And I'm definitely in the skeptic camp.

From an aesthetic standpoint Adam does look a little stylized for my taste, but he still comes across as someone capable of holding his own in a firefight. I have a much bigger problem with the cyber-Renaissance clothing of other NPCs (although complaining about this is clearly a losing battle at this point).

pringlepower
17th Aug 2010, 13:52
I can't say I Dig the Finial Fantasy style hair either.J.C Denton was so normal looking but the voice really helped to bring him to life.No one can sound as serious as our beloved J.C.But of course everyone knows that.It's J.C Denton after all.:wave:

JC Denton: emotions are for suckers.

xsamitt
17th Aug 2010, 14:16
Actually, Adam's voice is one of the things I like the most about DXHR so far. And I'm definitely in the skeptic camp.

From an aesthetic standpoint Adam does look a little stylized for my taste, but he still comes across as someone capable of holding his own in a firefight. I have a much bigger problem with the cyber-Renaissance clothing of other NPCs (although complaining about this is clearly a losing battle at this point).

I agree...At least A.J sounds believable.I've give him that.

Jerion
17th Aug 2010, 16:25
The main difference is that most of the first half of the leaked footage was actual gameplay and in first person.


I have a much bigger problem with the cyber-Renaissance clothing of other NPCs (although complaining about this is clearly a losing battle at this point).

Mounting giant heatsinks on powered armor is totally acceptable! :lol:

WildcatPhoenix
17th Aug 2010, 16:30
Mounting giant heatsinks on powered armor is totally acceptable! :lol:

Lol yeah the styrofoam body armor and the "bondage enthusiast w/ the leaf blower" are going to be sources for a lot of unintentional humor, methinks! :rolleyes:

Ilves
17th Aug 2010, 16:44
Mounting giant heatsinks on powered armor is totally acceptable! :lol:

Try for a second to rationalize that contraption. Toast rack?

pringlepower
17th Aug 2010, 16:46
Try for a second to rationalize that contraption. Toast rack?

No, no, no. It's like a B-2 Stealth Bomber. All the sharp angles make him radar-invisible, silly.

Pinky_Powers
18th Aug 2010, 04:12
Try for a second to rationalize that contraption. Toast rack?

If he's capable of providing me with buttered toast, then I'll forgive EM for this hideousness... otherwise...