PDA

View Full Version : Deus Ex... not a "game experience."



Rindill the Red
25th Aug 2010, 02:30
This a companion thread to my "Twinkle, Twinlke, little... AUGMENTATION" thread.


This is not meant to be a "bash Dugas" thread.


http://n4g.com/news/219734/deus-ex-w...-deus-ex-3-dev



Dugas says the original Deus Ex was “kind of slow”. He added, “There weren’t enough exciting, memorable moments. It was aimed more towards a simulation rather than a game experience.”


Do we agree, yes or no?

Counter here.
Rock Paper Shotgun/ (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/10/23/deux-ex-3-inflammatory-hit-chasing-quote-special/)


Here are my own thoughts on the matter.

Giving Deus Ex more of an action "game experience" quality doesn't necessarily mean that the greatness of Deus Ex is destroyed.

If you went back to the original game, and gave your character takedown animations... it's not that different from smacking a guy in the back of the head with a crowbar... that was still an animation, just not a very long or flashy one.

So long as the developers don't focus on "delivering an experience" to the detriment of the true virtues of Deus Ex, then things will be good.

I think the best games are the ones that mix the simulation aspect with the "game experience" aspect in a balanced manner.

Simulations provide greater gameplay and immersiveness through the creation and fleshing out of the world.

"Game experiences" provide greater (sometimes cheap) thrills and the "cool factor".

So long as the "game experience" aspects are skillfully woven into the simulation... even better to the point where they basically are part of the simulation (arise from the existing game environment rules), then yes, I think that it can work to provide a better experience.

The best analogy I can pull here is Star Wars.

Episodes IV, V, VI were really great, and I bet the most memorable and exciting parts of those movies weren't "flashy and spectacular".

Episdoes I and II fell somewhat flat because they focused too much on being flashy and exciting (not memorable).

Episode III I actually thought did a better but still sub-par job of balancing "spectacular" effects versus content and soul.

So long as the developers don't fall for the Star Wars prequel syndrome, then things should be okay.

pha
25th Aug 2010, 02:49
It's no surprise that Dugas is badmouthing DX as a slow, boring simulation instead of a supposedly "fun" game with flashy cool moments, because DX was the exact opposite of what they intend to do to their own DX installment to market it to teens and casuals. Or maybe he's just butthurt, because he knows his talented studio can never deliver a game which is remotely close to DX's success and caliber.

Sabretooth1
25th Aug 2010, 02:58
I'm pretty sure that I've read/heard often from either Spector or Smith or both, that Deus Ex represented the 'first-person simulation' genre back in the late 90s, with games like Thief, Operation Flashpoint, etc. falling into the mix. Their basic idea being to create as comprehensive a world as possible that essentially became a sandbox for the player, so that the player can go about completing objectives in any way they wished. Spector at least, lamented about the lack of simulation games like that, while Smith came up with some amazing speculation on how a simulation game can be today, even if it will never be approved by publishers.

The entire problem here isn't Dugas' fault, it's the industry's. D'Astous infamously commented on how the gaming industry has matured: he was right. The industry has matured in that there are now tons of trade terms, conventions, a sense of conformity and minimal risk. With three major, highly-proliferated consoles, publishers get a much, much higher revenue than they ever did before. The games themselves, have had to be dumbed down and devolved from being complex engineering marvels to simply 'whatever works'. They lack an inner core of direction and end up taking the best parts of old games and hastily patching them up together to work, but without an idea of what they're trying to accomplish with the game itself.

Dugas, are you trolling us or something?

Marses
25th Aug 2010, 03:12
If played as a shooter, I wholeheartedly agree. Otherwise, I wholeheartedly disagree.

InGroove2
25th Aug 2010, 03:28
This a companion thread to my "Twinkle, Twinlke, little... AUGMENTATION" thread.

In it this disturbing piece of information came up.

http://n4g.com/news/219734/deus-ex-w...-deus-ex-3-dev



Do we agree or disagree?

Is Dugas' version of a "game experience" really what gamer's want... what you want?

Was Deus Ex "kinda slow"... aka "boring".

Do exciting moments really translate to memorable?

Was Deus Ex more a "simulation" than a game?

What's the difference between a simulation and a game experience, don't all video games simulate something?

Does the inclusion of more frequent exciting memorableness decrease the overall quality of each moment?

Is a highly scripted visual event more memorable and exciting than a game world spontaneous simulated event or storyline high point?

Is the virtue of video games interaction (the thing that sets them apart from other media... their defining attribute), and should developers constantly be working to perfect and advance this virtue, or should video games be more about delivering an "experience"?


i just have to take issue with the idea that 'kinda slow' equates to 'boring'. Eyes Wide Shut is a slow movie, but i would never call it boring...its amazing.

DX is kinda slow... but a great game. i've always taken that quote from an objective stand point... not the subjective, reactionary one.

this poll reeks.

i mean... IW is dumbed down, but waaay slower than DX.

Rindill the Red
25th Aug 2010, 03:35
i just have to take issue with the idea that 'kinda slow' equates to 'boring'. Eyes Wide Shut is a slow movie, but i would never call it boring...its amazing.

DX is kinda slow... but a great game. i've always taken that quote from an objective stand point... not the subjective, reactionary one.

this poll reeks.

i mean... IW is dumbed down, but waaay slower than DX.

Alright... fixed.

What I meant was that he makes it sound that Deus Ex being "kinda slow" was something that needed to be changed to make the game better.

ArcR
25th Aug 2010, 04:36
Dugas obviously picked the Run Silent Aug.

H.D.Case
25th Aug 2010, 05:15
It has to be slow! Especially at the beginning. They have to introduce the other characters, make you know more about them and like or hate them, it has to take some time. And then BAM!!! Something happens. If they die, you bother. If they have trouble, you bother. Would you care about defending Paul so much in the original game, if the first time you had met him was at the hotel, without prior knowledge of his existence? Or hate Navarre if she hadn't annoyed you before. Or care about Jock's death if he was just a nameless pilot that gets you from one place to the other? NOOOO! That was the way it was in DX:IW. You met some characters that you knew ***** about and then you could decide about their fate. Did you care about them, seriously? No, they were just talking heads, some of the many in the game. Even the girl agent from the IW trailer was highly marginalized. She was just assigned to a faction. The character I cared most in the game was, ironically, the hologram singer (even though it was not used sufficiently). Devs, the game has to be a simulation, you have to create some history between characters, or the game won't be powerful enough to attract or stay in memory for longer even! I guess the screaming scientist woman from one trailer suggests such motives, but when I hear gaming experience is not a simulation, I start to think it may go wrong - space invaders were gaming experience. You still have time, listen to us, nagging and ungrateful punks, and get the job done right! :D You have my support.
BTW. what are we doing here anyway, quarreling over meanings of words :mad2:

mouse
25th Aug 2010, 07:15
^^ I totally agree with you. I love the way the story develops.

Btw, how to I get access to the full article? When I click the link, I just get ads. I would prefer to read the original statements before hating on the guy. ;)

Red
25th Aug 2010, 07:41
Yeah, the whole interview seems hard to find... Maybe it's archived somewhere, I don't know, don't have time right now to search for it.

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 07:48
Correct link here:
http://n4g.com/news/219734/deus-ex-was-andquot-kinda-slowandquot-says-deus-ex-3-dev

Remember, kids, don't copy links by highlighting.

Red
25th Aug 2010, 08:01
That's not the whole interview. The original interview on Edge is missing.

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 08:10
It is the link Rindill tried to post though.

mad825
25th Aug 2010, 08:11
theres an article from CVG (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=200006)however the full article is in the Edge magazine from what I understand.

why has this taken 2 years to find out?

Eidos Montreal would not attempt to dumb down the much-loved RPG-shooter franchise
Epic...

Red
25th Aug 2010, 08:15
It hasn't.

We've already raged about that here 2 years ago. Check the forum history.

It's the newfa- ..ahem... New people on these boards that started the rage all over again because they didn't know about it before.

Xenoc
25th Aug 2010, 08:22
Well since Douchegas has worked on these ****ty titles:

Far Cry: Instincts - Evolution (2006), Ubisoft, Inc.
Far Cry: Instincts - Predator (2006), Ubisoft, Inc.
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas (2006), Ubisoft, Inc.
Far Cry: Instincts (2005), Ubisoft, Inc.
Speed Challenge: Jacques Villeneuve's Racing Vision (2002), Ubi Soft Entertainment Software
F1 Racing Championship (2000), Video System Co., Ltd.
F1 Racing Simulation (1997), Ubi Soft Entertainment Software

I would say he does not know what the **** he is talking about! So Douchegas STFU already!!!

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 08:27
It's the newfa- ..ahem... New people on these boards that started the rage all over again because they didn't know about it before.

This becomes a bit funny when you realize Rindill registered a few months before you did :P

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 08:33
@Xenoc Just a heads-up: the devs are oversensitive to name-based puns, this can get you banned in no time flat.

Xenoc
25th Aug 2010, 08:40
@Xenoc Just a heads-up: the devs are oversensitive to name-based puns, this can get you banned in no time flat.

Thanks for the heads up, but if they ban me IDRC

APostLife
25th Aug 2010, 09:14
Dugas is totally wrong and what is says is complete fail. It's obvious that they would aim for a game that delivers on the so called "game experience" rather than simulation but that was the point of DX - its a simulation rather than a hyped up shooter game that has no point or purpose.

Please God, don't let this happen to DX3 - There are so many rubbish games out there that I have no hope in at all in finding the real reason where decent people play for meaning. That was the whole point of DX being 'slow' - sigh - Dugas you got it all wrong and they shouldn't of let you be the lead designer or whatever role that is. Guess the role didn't suited you, eh?

Let's just pray...

JCpies
25th Aug 2010, 09:20
'There weren't enough memorable moments'

What like the 'I wanted Orange' scene
and the 'what a shame' scene
and the 'A bomb' moment
and the plane, that was great.

Deus Ex didn't need to be amazingly exciting, what made it great was the subtle moments which peiced together like a puzzle to form the story of... DEUS EX!

Red
25th Aug 2010, 10:07
This becomes a bit funny when you realize Rindill registered a few months before you did :P

Eh, maybe he wasn't active from the start...

I know I've missed a year here, stopped frequenting a year ago or something like that. Now I'm here again and you people will just have to put up with it. (Or add me to the Ignore list :P )

JackShandy
25th Aug 2010, 11:03
Talk about a leading question.

That inflamatory quote was specifically chosen and taken out of context by Edge in order to provoke the most outrage it possibly could.

We all like Rock Paper Shotgun, right? Agree with their opinion? (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/10/23/deux-ex-3-inflammatory-hit-chasing-quote-special/)

Here's a quote of them calling edge out, for those who can't be bothered clicking the link:


It’s a self-stated teaser of a much larger feature in the magazine, which shows much more light and shade. Hell, there’s material enough to be inflamatory in completely the opposite away. Edit the following quote down and you have a “Deus Ex 3 Lead Designer calls out Warren Spector and Harvey Smith quote”…

“They tried to console-ise it, but their way of doing this was to drop a lot of stuff and cut out a lot of the tactical management of the game… "

In fact, even later in the tiny snippet, they include the bit that folllows that quote: “At this point we don’t know exactly which platforms we’re going to be out on. The PC, we’ll be there for sure. But for us, console-isation isn’t about dumbing down features. If we’re to go console we will want to keep the complexity alive. We want the menu interface and controller to feel simple without risking any of their potential”.

But no-one’s picked up on that bit, partially because it’s a bit fluffy, but mainly because of the title line being so deliberately inflammatory to immediately turn the calmest gentlefolk into Angry Internet Men before they even think of looking at the second paragraph.


...One of the current devices which almost all the major sites use is teasing a forthcoming feature piece with a news story, taking a quote out of context. The concept's simple – they get two bites at the hits, one with one of the best quotes which may get linked by itself, the other of the feature is proper.

It’s possible to make this work – think simple confirmations of formats or features – but, in all too many cases, it’s games journalism of the lowest, most sickening order.


...The feature itself, while it includes more than enough elements to make you worry or believe in Deus Ex 3, is a complete and fair entity. The teaser isn’t.

Edge has taken an inflammatory headline against Deus Ex 3, and you've lapped it up because you want something to prove Deus Ex 3 is going to suck. No-one's posting threads labelled "DUGAS:“They tried to console-ise it, but their way of doing this was to drop a lot of stuff and cut out a lot of the tactical management of the game… "- IS HE RIGHT!?", the second quote RPS mentions. You haven't even linked to the full article. Everyone's ignoring those sort of quotes or labelling them as marketing BS, while jumping eagerly on every instance of the first kind of quote they can find as empirical evidence that they're trying to dumb it down.

Again: What are we, a cheap tabloid?

Red
25th Aug 2010, 11:14
Look, if you'd been here since 2007, you'd see all this EM farce as it is. Now, you're just clinging on some remote hope of some promises becoming fact. You'll get where we are in some time, don't worry. We've been let down more times than <insert a witty metaphor here>, so it isn't just about some quote out of context. It's just a sum of ****-ups one after another, beginning with "kinda slow" and (not yet) ending with "show off cool moves in 3rd person".

Ashpolt
25th Aug 2010, 11:29
@JackShandy: Dugas may have said other, more positive things - such as the quotes about consolisations you posted, which I'll get on to in a minute - but that doesn't detract from the fact that he did make the statement about Deus Ex being "kinda slow", and that that statement is a massive facepalm to most Deus Ex fans. Yes, that quote is taken out of context, but bringing that up is only a valid counterpoint if the context of the article did anything to justify that quote - which it didn't. (Sadly, the article seems to have gone now, but I read it when it was originally posted, and there was nothing in there to justify Dugas' quote.) I have no love for Edge whatsoever, and agree that using that as the headline was a cheap way to gain hits, but that doesn't mean that the point itself is suddenly invalid. All you're doing is criticising the article - which is perfectly fine - without invalidating the quote itself.

And as for those consolisation quotes?


They tried to console-ise it, but their way of doing this was to drop a lot of stuff and cut out a lot of the tactical management of the game…


At this point we don’t know exactly which platforms we’re going to be out on. The PC, we’ll be there for sure. But for us, console-isation isn’t about dumbing down features. If we’re to go console we will want to keep the complexity alive. We want the menu interface and controller to feel simple without risking any of their potential.

Let's look at DXHR:

Health resource management? Gone.
Lockpicks? Multitools? Gone.
Skill points? Gone / rolled into augs, but still they've cut one of two systems in favour of putting everything in one.
Shadow-based stealth? Gone (again, they've taken two complementary systems and used just one.)
Melee combat (i.e. not one-hit instakills)? Gone.
Lean keys? Gone.

If you're going to bring up a quote like that as an argument in favour of DXHR - or at least as a counter to an argument against it - then you need to take a page out of your own book and look at it in the wider context. If EM were actually making the game more complex, or even just leaving its complexity intact, then this would be a valid counterpoint. But as Dugas is saying one thing, but his team are doing another, the quote becomes void.

And as RPS pointed out - and you quoted, though chose to ignore the point - the other problem with those quotes is that they're very fluffy, they don't actually tell you anything specific, they just make vague promises without any detail about how they'll deliver on them. On the other side, the things people are complaining about - in this specific instance, Dugas' quote about Deus Ex being slow, but on a general level health regen, third person cover, etc etc - are more hard, clear cut facts: Dugas has said this, these aspects are in the game, etc. EM do this a hell of a lot, actually: in their interviews, they'll mention in reasonable detail design decisions which make some of us groan, but then will respond with a very vague, fluffy comment such as "it's still as much of an RPG as the original Deus Ex" which will go contrary to what they've previously said / what we previously knew about the game, but they won't offer any evidence or examples to back it up.

Ilves
25th Aug 2010, 11:48
How hard is it to admit that it was just an infinitely stupid, stupid thing to say.

JackShandy
25th Aug 2010, 12:01
Yes, Ashpolt, I see, you've countered my list of good news with a list of some bad news about the game. And then said that the good news doesn't excuse the bad news.

We could have a news war here. I could attack back with a list all the bits and peices that say they're adding complexity, then you could counter-strike with a list of the things they're taking away, and then I could talk about that mine template thing they're doing, and then you could talk about the third person, and etc etc etc and we all sit here typing until we're blue in the face.

Look, here: (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/21/gamescom-10-report-day-3/)


I was expecting just about anything from Human Revolution except for it to be more demanding than the original Deus Ex. I couldn’t be happier. When was the last time you saw a great PC game being adapted to consoles and becoming more complex in the process?

But honestly, although I personally believe there's more good news than bad, the ratio of good/bad news isn't the issue here. The fact is, most of the people here only seem to care about the bad news. Your reply kind of confirms it: "Yes, Dugas said some good things, but listen to these bad things he said!" Everyone's making threads like this, headed with inflamatory Dugas comments, while dismissing the good comments out of hand. Everyone seems pre-disposed against Deus Ex 3. Super negative, even in the face of glowing previews. You can say that Deus Ex 3 is going to be terrible enough to justify all the negativity, but don't try to deny that this is a ridiculously glass-half-empty forum.

(PS: god please don't make me actually quote all the added RPG mechanics/ stuff where people compliment the complexity of the game. We've all read it. No-one seems to listen/care.)

(EDIT: It was a really stupid thing to say, though.)

Red
25th Aug 2010, 12:07
The complexity compared to what? Bioshock? -.-

beastrn
25th Aug 2010, 12:12
I don't think it was a stupid thing to say. He was just being honest. He legitimately thinks Dues Ex was "kinda slow" and that's being reflected in the new game.

Also, as Ashpolt said - there's no 50/50 good news bad news ratio here. The bad news is always very clear and obvious and explained - yet the "good" news is always a comment in passing with no detail to contrast all the consoley-type discussion that the interviews always inspire.

And Red makes a good point. Bringing up some Console-Gen journalist's opinion is hardly solid proof of good news. And certainly not a counter to the game's lead designer saying DX1 wasn't exciting enough for him.

Ashpolt
25th Aug 2010, 12:47
Yes, Ashpolt, I see, you've countered my list of good news with a list of some bad news about the game. And then said that the good news doesn't excuse the bad news.

No, what I actually said was that facts trump vague, non-defined statements of intent. If EM were saying "we've added this feature, that feature, etc and here is how they actually compliment the game and add to the complexity" and then someone else was saying "but it's going to be rubbish" without backing it up, I'd be on EM's side. Instead, what we have is almost the opposite: EM are going "we're taking out systems x, y and z" (or "we're adding in systems a and b," where a and b are things the fanbase largely doesn't like - i.e. third person, health regen etc) - giving us hard facts about these areas - and then saying "but it's going to be great!" without actually saying how they're improving. On the rare occasion they do try to justify an unpopular decision, it's rubbish - "we forced health regen to stop people scrounging for medkits" (a, no one ever did that in DX1, and b, that doesn't stop you offering players the choice) or the even more laughable "we put third person in to reward the players" (do you even need me to point out why that's pathetic?) But the point is, even those weak statements are a rarity: normally it's just "DXHR will be as much of an RPG as Deus Ex" with no attempt to justify that statement, despite the wealth of evidence to the contrary.


We could have a news war here. I could attack back with a list all the bits and peices that say they're adding complexity,


(PS: god please don't make me actually quote all the added RPG mechanics/ stuff where people compliment the complexity of the game. We've all read it. No-one seems to listen/care.)

No, sorry, you're going to have to do it if you want to validate your point. The only two things I can think of that could even be considered as adding complexity are:

a) The hacking minigame - what that RPS quote was referring to (again, context!) - and I'll give you this, but with the note that it's an area that doesn't need complexity, and may actually end up being annoying after you do it dozens of times throughout the game.

b) The "conversation fights" - though to be honest, this sounds like a PR spin on what was already there to me.

Even if we give EM both of those, they're both minor examples compared to what's been cut / dumbed down / plain screwed up. I could cope with a bad hacking system if the combat was done well (i.e. not third person) and if the skill system was intact, but not the other way around. So if you have some information on other ways that they've added to the depth and complexity of the game which I'm unaware of, please by all means share. (And no, areas in which they simply equal the original Deus Ex - such as multi-path solutions, inventory etc - don't count. That's not good news, it's an absence of bad news.)


But honestly, although I personally believe there's more good news than bad, the ratio of good/bad news isn't the issue here. The fact is, most of the people here only seem to care about the bad news. Your reply kind of confirms it: "Yes, Dugas said some good things, but listen to these bad things he said!" Everyone's making threads like this, headed with inflamatory Dugas comments, while dismissing the good comments out of hand. Everyone seems pre-disposed against Deus Ex 3. Super negative, even in the face of glowing previews. You can say that Deus Ex 3 is going to be terrible enough to justify all the negativity, but don't try to deny that this is a ridiculously glass-half-empty forum.

We're not a glass half empty forum, we're just a forum that's been handed a bunch of clear bad news and some vague indefined promises of goodness, and who refuse to take the vague over the clear. If we seem to only care about the bad news, that's why. If EM were to come out with some solid information about ways in which the game is deeper than the original DX tomorrow, you bet your arse we'd be discussing it.

As for the glowing previews: Most previews are positive. And even ignoring that, these are being written by the same people (by and large) who gave Modern Warfare 2 and Halo 3 universally high scores, and who would be happy to see Deus Ex turned into a clone of those games. Games journalism is a weak joke. (The RPS preview is, I will grant you, an exception to this, but if you actually read what it says it's just "x, y and z equal the standards set by Deus Ex, and the hacking game is more complex" - and read my comments above for a response to that.)

xsamitt
25th Aug 2010, 13:45
Deus EX is unlike any other title out there.It should be designed to make it's own rules.
In the beginning there was Deus EX.And God saw and look it was good,very good.

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 13:47
Unfortunately it looks like we got banished from that paradise and can never return :/

JackShandy
25th Aug 2010, 14:03
Ok, ok. I guess I have to. alright. Let's set the goal posts. Sorry for the ridiculous amount of text. I didn't really want to write it.

We are relying on Previews to give us an idea of what Deus Ex is going to be like. None of us have played the game, and as such, we must rely on primary and secondary sources, like we're ancient historians. Except unlike historians, we're trying to judge an opinion, instead of trying to uncover an objective fact. So: We are attempting to judge what our opinion on this game will be, based on the second-hand evidence of those in direct contact with the game.

Talk of Facts is ridiculous here. This is about opinions. And an opinion cannot be communicated by a simple list of the features of the game. We've all played games that were great on paper, terrible to play, and vise/versa. Simply citing a feature cannot be used as objective proof for or against the game.

In making a judgement here, then, we must get the opinion of the most honest, informed source possible- and, in addition, their idea of what would make a "Good Deus Ex game" must align with ours.

Eidos themselves are the most informed about the game, but as a primary source, they're ridiculously biased. We can't take their word that the game would be good: It's their game. Scratch them off the list.

So, we must look to the secondary sources- people who have not directly played the game, but have seen the game being played. The various gaming websites are currently more educated as to the particulars of this game than the general public, having seen a few recent previews that Eidos hasn't released to the public yet. They're also, (we assume) unafliated with Eidos in any way. Therefore, they are, at this moment in time the most informed and unbiased source available.

So, the third criteria is deciding whether or not the opinion of these gaming websites correlates to our own. As you say, many websites have a large console focus, may not have enjoyed the original Deus Ex, and don't seem to understand what made the original great. So, although they've given largely positive previews across the board, we can't be sure that they like it for the right reasons.

So, we arrive to the point at last: Out of the entire sea of gaming news sites, Rock Paper Shotgun stands out. You CANNOT say that they do not understand what Deus Ex stands for, or that their idea of a good Deus Ex game would not align with the general idea put forth by these forums. They devoted an entire week to Deus Ex nostalgia on its birthday, interviewing a large group of developers to find out how Deus Ex influenced them. Here's their retrospective. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/06/22/the-rps-verdict-deus-ex/) Here is Kieron Gillen's original review (http://gillen.cream.org/wordpress_html/?page_id=16), possibly the most popular Deus Ex review written, and the only one featured in "The Nameless Mod". These are people who understand Deus Ex.

Keeping all this in mind, their opinion is:


In short, I think they’ve got the mechanics of the original Deus Ex down pat.


In brief, it is now my most wanted game currently in development.


This and Guild Wars 2 were the only games at the show that had me forgoing academic and factual note-taking for just writing “YES” and “YESSSS” in my notebook over and over.

It’s not just that Human Revolution offers multiple paths. It offers more of exactly what Deus Ex offered. The detail in the environments, the chance to talk to an idle population of civilians, the option of nosing through emails- that sense that you’re not just playing through a level but roleplaying a very cool guy in a very long black coat in a very absorbing world.

Ok. That was a very long spiel. The end result of all that waffle is this:

When Rock Paper Shotgun likes a Deus Ex sequel, I ****ing listen.

Kodaemon
25th Aug 2010, 14:14
When Rock Paper Shotgun likes a Deus Ex sequel, I ****ing listen.

When Kieron Gillen writes a ridiculous defense of Bioshock, I ****ing stop listening.

xsamitt
25th Aug 2010, 14:21
By now, people will be describing Deus Ex as a hybrid of several genres. A mistake in logic. Deus Ex doesn’t merge the play-mechanics of singular genres. It just includes them as options. The primary character of a hybrid game is the demands you to perform tasks that were previously separate, while Deus Ex is about personal inclination and - this is the important one - freedom. The traditional relationship between gamer and game is one where the latter dictates to the former what it will do to have fun, a dictatorial axis that, more than anything in the history of our artform, Deus Ex destroys. Look everyone! Genuine Interactive Entertainment.

I don't see this as much as I want to with HR.I know I'm not alone.

WildcatPhoenix
25th Aug 2010, 14:27
Talk of Facts is ridiculous here. This is about opinions. And an opinion cannot be communicated by a simple list of the features of the game. We've all played games that were great on paper, terrible to play, and vise/versa. Simply citing a feature cannot be used as objective proof for or against the game.


It is an opinion to say that 3rd person cover, regenerating health, cutscenes, etc will be bad for the game. It is not an opinion to say that DXHR will include these elements.

Ashpolt is saying that we have hard evidence (trailers, screenshots, leaked footage, developer statements) of massive changes to gameplay mechanics, including but potentially not limited to:

-3rd person cover system
-No melee weapons, replaced by 3rd person hand-to-hand instakill "takedowns"
-Scripted, non-interactive mid-mission cutscenes
-3rd person ladder climbing
-Hacking mini-game
-Skills/augs rolled into one system
-No multitools or lockpicks
-Regenerating health
-No shadow stealth

This is the so-called "bad news," which is of course, an opinion. But it's an opinion based on facts- these changes have been made. They are in the game. The developers are not shy about telling us so.

Now let's consult the (again, opinion) "good news" statements:

-The experience will be the same on PC, Xbox, and PS3
-DXHR will have as much complexity as the original game
-The game will feature as many RPG elements as the original
-Combat is much more intense and based on player skill
-Storyline is as deep and complex as the original

These are all vague, unsubstantiated claims by PR types. Some of them may be true. Others already have evidence presented to the contrary! (ex: DXHR is still as much an RPG as the original Deus, yet they have reduced the skills vs. augs balance and taken away skill point based aiming?). What evidence do we have to support these claims? To me, it seems Eidos Montreal and Square Enix have dedicated themselves to the mantra of "if we say it enough times, that makes it true."

But I don't buy it. Not until I see something to prove me wrong.

Pretentious Old Man.
25th Aug 2010, 14:50
When Kieron Gillen writes a ridiculous defense of Bioshock, I ****ing stop listening.

Post of the millenium. Thank you for making my life a little bit sweeter.

Fluffis
25th Aug 2010, 15:52
When Kieron Gillen writes a ridiculous defense of Bioshock, I ****ing stop listening.

That post is made of own and win.

InGroove2
25th Aug 2010, 15:53
It is an opinion to say that 3rd person cover, regenerating health, cutscenes, etc will be bad for the game. It is not an opinion to say that DXHR will include these elements.

Ashpolt is saying that we have hard evidence (trailers, screenshots, leaked footage, developer statements) of massive changes to gameplay mechanics, including but potentially not limited to:

-3rd person cover system
-No melee weapons, replaced by 3rd person hand-to-hand instakill "takedowns"
-Scripted, non-interactive mid-mission cutscenes
-3rd person ladder climbing
-Hacking mini-game
-Skills/augs rolled into one system
-No multitools or lockpicks
-Regenerating health
-No shadow stealth

This is the so-called "bad news," which is of course, an opinion. But it's an opinion based on facts- these changes have been made. They are in the game. The developers are not shy about telling us so.

Now let's consult the (again, opinion) "good news" statements:

-The experience will be the same on PC, Xbox, and PS3
-DXHR will have as much complexity as the original game
-The game will feature as many RPG elements as the original
-Combat is much more intense and based on player skill
-Storyline is as deep and complex as the original

These are all vague, unsubstantiated claims by PR types. Some of them may be true. Others already have evidence presented to the contrary! (ex: DXHR is still as much an RPG as the original Deus, yet they have reduced the skills vs. augs balance and taken away skill point based aiming?). What evidence do we have to support these claims? To me, it seems Eidos Montreal and Square Enix have dedicated themselves to the mantra of "if we say it enough times, that makes it true."

But I don't buy it. Not until I see something to prove me wrong.


while i get what you're trying to point out... your actual argument is kind of a nonsequitor. I think what he was actually trying to point out is that there are facts like the ones you listed which engender opinions.

but then there are reviews written by people who have experienced more "facts" about the game than there mere list you have produced. and those facts, obviously more rich, expansive, specific and cohesive have engendered opinions which these writers have written about.

based on all of this... he has reason to be positive.

personally. that list you made is off putting. and i think i can safely say that unless they have domne something totally unexpected with the 3rd person take downs... that is unequivocally the worste decision one could have made for this game.

other than that, the facts you present offer vcery little as to the reality of what the game will be like. we can, of course compare it to other games with those similar or equal components and derrive an opinion... but thewre is just as much evidence to suggest that the imlementation of those things might be different than the norm.

for example, i used to be adminantly against health regen... but hearing about it more and getting some opinions on it... i really am mot in the least worried about it considering the depth of the game (as far as can be seen).

having been converted from AGAINST to OK WITH health regen, i'm then open to the idea that maybe some of the other things aren't that offensive in practice. this is open until we get more info.

again, though... having seen the 3rd person take downs... i mean... it took my interest in this game from a 10 to a 6... it's just completely off putting.

i even can stomach some 3rd person-stealth since i can understand the reasoning behind it... however unappealing that reasoning is. the take downs are pure hollywood though... seriously... it offends me to the core.

Nyysjan
25th Aug 2010, 16:32
-Combat is much more intense and based on player skill

This should not be listed in the good news, as some of us disagree (i liked weapon skills, and skills in general).

WildcatPhoenix
25th Aug 2010, 16:39
I see what you're saying, InGroove, but I think you missed the point: I am not saying there is no factual evidence to back these claims by EM about "complexity" and whatnot. I'm saying that we don't have access to any evidence. We haven't seen anything. Not yet.

I haven't given up all hope that I'm completely off-base about this game. I sincerely hope it is a spectacular sequel to Deus Ex, or at the very least, a great game in its own right.

I just don't see any evidence to support those hopes yet, and I see quite a lot of evidence indicating disaster.

DeusWhatever
25th Aug 2010, 17:49
Well, i wonder when this multi-genre-crap will end. I mean shure you can optimize your game for a maximum-target-group. Still as in every other economic system the system wont work if everybody is forcing into the same market, ignoring any niches in the market.

Still, just replace the project leader with this guy:
BmUJrKGN3C0

At least he makes no sissy mainstream-games ^^
(funny thing, even though this is comedy, the starting quote is pretty "realistic", by making a game that does not ******* suck, wil automatically create your own market ^^ )

Pretentious Old Man.
25th Aug 2010, 23:12
^^^ If only Borderlands were actually anywhere near that good. I want to be Randy Pitchford or whatever his name is, and I want to make a game that's actually good.

mad_red
26th Aug 2010, 00:28
Heck, I'd settle for being his Win Boomerang of Ownage +9 (ego item). I'd run for presidency, and I would Win and OWN.

luminar
26th Aug 2010, 00:44
'There weren't enough memorable moments'

What like the 'I wanted Orange' scene
and the 'what a shame' scene
and the 'A bomb' moment
and the plane, that was great.

Deus Ex didn't need to be amazingly exciting, what made it great was the subtle moments which peiced together like a puzzle to form the story of... DEUS EX!


It has to be slow! Especially at the beginning. They have to introduce the other characters, make you know more about them and like or hate them, it has to take some time. And then BAM!!! Something happens. If they die, you bother. If they have trouble, you bother. Would you care about defending Paul so much in the original game, if the first time you had met him was at the hotel, without prior knowledge of his existence? Or hate Navarre if she hadn't annoyed you before. Or care about Jock's death if he was just a nameless pilot that gets you from one place to the other? NOOOO! That was the way it was in DX:IW. You met some characters that you knew ***** about and then you could decide about their fate. Did you care about them, seriously? No, they were just talking heads, some of the many in the game. Even the girl agent from the IW trailer was highly marginalized. She was just assigned to a faction. The character I cared most in the game was, ironically, the hologram singer (even though it was not used sufficiently). Devs, the game has to be a simulation, you have to create some history between characters, or the game won't be powerful enough to attract or stay in memory for longer even! I guess the screaming scientist woman from one trailer suggests such motives, but when I hear gaming experience is not a simulation, I start to think it may go wrong - space invaders were gaming experience. You still have time, listen to us, nagging and ungrateful punks, and get the job done right! :D You have my support.
BTW. what are we doing here anyway, quarreling over meanings of words :mad2:

Absolutely correct friends! This was quoted from the rock paper shotgun article. I think these are definetly the most important elements.

-Auto health regen (although we haven’t been told exactly how this will work…)
-Stealth to line-of-sight and sound instead of darkness
-Contextual third person elements

Maybe even just a slight change to one of these is a deal-breaker for you and I can’t change that so I’m sorry. However, if you think DX1 is much more than these three elements, then you will be happy:

-Different ways to solve any objective depending on your play style (social, hacking, stealth, or action)
-Customization of your character (augmentations) and weapons
-Deep story with a strong consipracy
-Lots of social interaction with numerous characters
-Consequences to your actions that affect things down the line
-A near future (Cyberpunk) setting
-Open levels with limited load times (think DX1 not IW)
-Random explorable elements with earned experience points
-Global travel
-More stuff I’m forgetting

Rindill the Red
26th Aug 2010, 01:44
Absolutely correct friends! This was quoted from the rock paper shotgun article. I think these are definetly the most important elements.

-Auto health regen (although we haven’t been told exactly how this will work…)
-Stealth to line-of-sight and sound instead of darkness
-Contextual third person elements

Maybe even just a slight change to one of these is a deal-breaker for you and I can’t change that so I’m sorry. However, if you think DX1 is much more than these three elements, then you will be happy:

-Different ways to solve any objective depending on your play style (social, hacking, stealth, or action)
-Customization of your character (augmentations) and weapons
-Deep story with a strong consipracy
-Lots of social interaction with numerous characters
-Consequences to your actions that affect things down the line
-A near future (Cyberpunk) setting
-Open levels with limited load times (think DX1 not IW)
-Random explorable elements with earned experience points
-Global travel
-More stuff I’m forgetting

I think that that first line...


-Different ways to solve any objective depending on your play style (social, hacking, stealth, or action)

Should not be a direct design goal in and of itself... rather the result of designing for this (which includes more varied options than just play-styles...
"Harvey Smith: I want to be able to fully explore and interact with an environment in as immersive, self-expressive way possible. If something occurs to me in the game world, I want to be empowered to try it. And I want the results of the action, even if they are not always what I expected, to be interesting and plausible."

Cronstintein
26th Aug 2010, 02:02
^^^^

I agree 100%.
Having stealth road, shooter road, convo road is just as empty and meaningless as any corridor shooter.
Where as having options to use all 3 to get through an area at your whim is much more interesting. (Harvey's quote is still much better :/)

JackShandy
26th Aug 2010, 02:37
"Harvey Smith: I want to be able to fully explore and interact with an environment in as immersive, self-expressive way possible. If something occurs to me in the game world, I want to be empowered to try it. And I want the results of the action, even if they are not always what I expected, to be interesting and plausible."


It’s not just that Human Revolution offers multiple paths. It offers more of exactly what Deus Ex offered. The detail in the environments, the chance to talk to an idle population of civilians, the option of nosing through emails- that sense that you’re not just playing through a level but roleplaying a very cool guy in a very long black coat in a very absorbing world.

WildCatPhoenix: I, personally, think you can't fully understand a game through bullet points alone. That's what I was trying to say. What seems like a good bullet point in theory can be revealed as terrible in practice, and vise-versa. Games are more than the sum of their parts.

I think that the opinions of those who have seen the game as a coherent whole give us a better look at what the game's going to be like than dot-points; and of the people who have seen the game played whole, rock-paper-shotgun seem the most Deus-ex loving/Pc-oriented/people who know what they're talking about when they talk about Deus Ex.

Apparently even they're not good enough, though. If they're just being satisfied by a consolised dumbed-down shoot-em-up than I guess we can't trust anyone.

WildcatPhoenix
26th Aug 2010, 03:30
I think that the opinions of those who have seen the game as a coherent whole give us a better look at what the game's going to be like than dot-points; and of the people who have seen the game played whole, rock-paper-shotgun seem the most Deus-ex loving/Pc-oriented/people who know what they're talking about when they talk about Deus Ex.

Apparently even they're not good enough, though. If they're just being satisfied by a consolised dumbed-down shoot-em-up than I guess we can't trust anyone.

Do you remember when Invisible War was coming out? Almost all press previews were positive. All the changes were made to "streamline" the supposedly inefficient mechanics of the original game. I remember how excited I was, how I read every single article, preview, etc. No one had anything negative to say...and then the game released.

I put about as much stock in demo impressions or gaming press releases as I do in political campaign promises.

Sure, you have a point, JackShandy, about a game being more than the sum of its parts. The point I am trying to make is that we have a rapidly mounting list of evidence that Jean-Francois Dugas and his team do not truly understand what made Deus Ex so special. One, or two, or maybe even three of the complaints on that bullet list might not sink the game overall. But the "hits just keep on coming," so to speak. It's reached the point (to me) where I can no longer trust that the franchise is in qualified hands.

WildcatPhoenix
26th Aug 2010, 03:48
To follow up, here are some examples of previews for Invisible War:

Gamespot, after E3 demo:
"It has fantastic graphics, cool characters, and a compelling conspiracy thriller story that you don't need to be a sci-fi fan to love."
...
"Ion Storm has said that Invisible War won't be as long as the rather drawn-out first game, but while the new levels won't be quite as large, they're said to be much more densely populated with mission challenges and characters to interact with. Since the levels will be smaller, you won't be required to hike from one side of town to the other, which should keep the game's pacing somewhat more constant."

Ugh. Do I even need to comment?

IGN
"Harvey explained that the new game will merge the skill system in with the bio-mods this time around. Rather than presenting the player with endless lists and stats, the new game allows for many of the same skills and abilities under the bio-mod heading. Things like hacking are now replaced by the neural interface bio-mod."

Sound familiar?

"The rag doll physics are simply the best we've seen."

Wow.

Gamespy

"The original Deus Ex was rich in gameplay, but pretty average technically. With Invisible War, Ion Storm is going for the whole enchilada, and the end result should be one of the most technically stunning games of 2003."

Nope, wrong again.

"Looking back, Spector is aghast at the interface that was devised for the original Deus Ex. "I wanted an interface that looked organic ... like it was burned into the guy's eye. I failed completely to convey that to the team." The result was several layers of menus, and numerous sub-interfaces that served, in Spector's estimation, to disconnect players from the flow of the action. Those problems have been solved, because in Invisible War, "These guys nailed it." The new UI resurrects the "eye" concept, and combines the resultant round shapes with the idea of rotation. Imagine a transparent series of rings, one within the other, that rotate to different "notches" at your command. Each notch is another menu item, and selecting one item or another will cause different pieces of information to swivel into view on the inner rings. It's hard to describe, so you'll just have to take my word that it looks awfully slick and clever. More importantly, it will eliminate the need for non-standard interfaces (remember the ATMs from the first game?) that interrupt the flow of gameplay."

Interrupted the flow of gameplay? This is getting sad.

Just a small sample of why I don't listen to any sort of preview about a game that has yet to release.

Rindill the Red
26th Aug 2010, 04:07
To follow up, here are some examples of previews for Invisible War:

Gamespot, after E3 demo:
"It has fantastic graphics, cool characters, and a compelling conspiracy thriller story that you don't need to be a sci-fi fan to love."
...
"Ion Storm has said that Invisible War won't be as long as the rather drawn-out first game, but while the new levels won't be quite as large, they're said to be much more densely populated with mission challenges and characters to interact with. Since the levels will be smaller, you won't be required to hike from one side of town to the other, which should keep the game's pacing somewhat more constant."

Ugh. Do I even need to comment?

IGN
"Harvey explained that the new game will merge the skill system in with the bio-mods this time around. Rather than presenting the player with endless lists and stats, the new game allows for many of the same skills and abilities under the bio-mod heading. Things like hacking are now replaced by the neural interface bio-mod."

Sound familiar?

"The rag doll physics are simply the best we've seen."

Wow.

Gamespy

"The original Deus Ex was rich in gameplay, but pretty average technically. With Invisible War, Ion Storm is going for the whole enchilada, and the end result should be one of the most technically stunning games of 2003."

Nope, wrong again.

"Looking back, Spector is aghast at the interface that was devised for the original Deus Ex. "I wanted an interface that looked organic ... like it was burned into the guy's eye. I failed completely to convey that to the team." The result was several layers of menus, and numerous sub-interfaces that served, in Spector's estimation, to disconnect players from the flow of the action. Those problems have been solved, because in Invisible War, "These guys nailed it." The new UI resurrects the "eye" concept, and combines the resultant round shapes with the idea of rotation. Imagine a transparent series of rings, one within the other, that rotate to different "notches" at your command. Each notch is another menu item, and selecting one item or another will cause different pieces of information to swivel into view on the inner rings. It's hard to describe, so you'll just have to take my word that it looks awfully slick and clever. More importantly, it will eliminate the need for non-standard interfaces (remember the ATMs from the first game?) that interrupt the flow of gameplay."

Interrupted the flow of gameplay? This is getting sad.

Just a small sample of why I don't listen to any sort of preview about a game that has yet to release.

Wow. You just succeeded in dampening my spirit even more.

beastrn
26th Aug 2010, 06:06
Oh god.

pringlepower
26th Aug 2010, 06:40
To follow up, here are some examples of previews for Invisible War:
"Looking back, Spector is aghast at the interface that was devised for the original Deus Ex. "I wanted an interface that looked organic ... like it was burned into the guy's eye. I failed completely to convey that to the team." The result was several layers of menus, and numerous sub-interfaces that served, in Spector's estimation, to disconnect players from the flow of the action. Those problems have been solved, because in Invisible War, "These guys nailed it." The new UI resurrects the "eye" concept, and combines the resultant round shapes with the idea of rotation. Imagine a transparent series of rings, one within the other, that rotate to different "notches" at your command. Each notch is another menu item, and selecting one item or another will cause different pieces of information to swivel into view on the inner rings. It's hard to describe, so you'll just have to take my word that it looks awfully slick and clever. More importantly, it will eliminate the need for non-standard interfaces (remember the ATMs from the first game?) that interrupt the flow of gameplay."

Interrupted the flow of gameplay? This is getting sad.

Just a small sample of why I don't listen to any sort of preview about a game that has yet to release.

Well the last quote is by Warren Spector, AKA Jesus. That's right fellas, Jesus does not believe Deus Ex is built on piles of menus.

Fluffis
26th Aug 2010, 06:51
Well the last quote is by Warren Spector, AKA Jesus. That's right fellas, Jesus does not believe Deus Ex is built on piles of menus.

Is it 2003 again? I have to warn the airlines about that Icelandic volcano! :p

pringlepower
26th Aug 2010, 07:04
Is it 2003 again? I have to warn the airlines about that Icelandic volcano! :p

You know what really caused that eruption: the Illuminati.

DeusWhatever
26th Aug 2010, 10:10
You know what really caused that eruption: the Illuminati.

Oh, comon ... vulcanoe = underground = mole people... i thought that would be obious :rolleyes:

WildcatPhoenix
26th Aug 2010, 13:18
Well the last quote is by Warren Spector, AKA Jesus. That's right fellas, Jesus does not believe Deus Ex is built on piles of menus.

At first I wanted to absolve Warren for the debacle of IW and pin it all on Harvey Smith, but there is no denying that Spector is just as much to blame as anyone else for the bad decisions they made with that game.

xsamitt
26th Aug 2010, 17:43
At first I wanted to absolve Warren for the debacle of IW and pin it all on Harvey Smith, but there is no denying that Spector is just as much to blame as anyone else for the bad decisions they made with that game.
Your right....Warren isn't free from blame with regard to IW.

pringlepower
26th Aug 2010, 23:07
At first I wanted to absolve Warren for the debacle of IW and pin it all on Harvey Smith, but there is no denying that Spector is just as much to blame as anyone else for the bad decisions they made with that game.

Although IW was executed poorly, he does have a point - needlessly complex menu-systems do ruin immersion as well. Here, streamling - the RIGHT streamlining - definitely makes the whole thing smoother. We'll have to see what HR does.

luminar
27th Aug 2010, 00:31
Although IW was executed poorly, he does have a point - needlessly complex menu-systems do ruin immersion as well. Here, streamling - the RIGHT streamlining - definitely makes the whole thing smoother. We'll have to see what HR does.

Yeah streamlining can be good! I mean they should have streamlined inventory in me2 not eliminate it.