PDA

View Full Version : Will there be way to turn of the third person mode or play the game without it?



MACGRUBER
9th Nov 2010, 03:24
I like a lot of things about this prequel in the series but the third person perspective for cover and performing ingame actions is something i don't like. Will there be a way to turn third person off or at least play the game without using it. (I know take downs will be done in third person)

Pinky_Powers
9th Nov 2010, 04:10
If we're being honest with ourselves, the answer to this is No. There will be no way of turning it off or avoiding very much of it.

OwlSolar
9th Nov 2010, 04:11
Actually, taking cover is completely optional. Admittedly though, you'll be at a disadvantage if you don't use it.

WildcatPhoenix
9th Nov 2010, 04:18
Actually, taking cover is completely optional. Admittedly though, you'll be at a disadvantage if you don't use it.

It will definitely be interesting to see how viable stealth gameplay is without using any third-person cover or takedowns. Climbing ladders won't bug me much (honestly, after watching my girlfriend fall off the ladder in the Seizure Room/Elevator Shaft in The 'Ton for the 2,000th time, I really came to appreciate how big of a problem Deus Ex's ladder system was). But my initial playthrough is certainly going to be a stealth, minimum force, talk to every NPC approach, and I for damn sure will not be using third-person cover or takedowns....so we shall see.

My kingdom for some lean keys!

OwlSolar
9th Nov 2010, 04:20
It's too bad that you won't be able to shoot while on ladders. :(

K^2
9th Nov 2010, 04:32
Third person is completely optional. All you have to do is not use cover, not use takedowns, avoid certain augmentations, and never climb ladders. All these things are completely optional. :rolleyes:

There might be a way to force first person by intercepting shader calls carrying animation transforms, grabbing the transform for Adam's head, and substituting that for worldview transform. All of this is possible to do with hooks. Might be a little tricky, though. We'll see what can be done about it. If works, though, it should even force first person view through cut scenes and in takedowns. Might have some artifacts, but should be very Mirror's Edge otherwise.

Jerion
9th Nov 2010, 04:34
I'd quite like to see that. :)

Rindill the Red
9th Nov 2010, 04:36
Third person is completely optional. All you have to do is not use cover, not use takedowns, avoid certain augmentations, and never climb ladders. All these things are completely optional. :rolleyes:

There might be a way to force first person by intercepting shader calls carrying animation transforms, grabbing the transform for Adam's head, and substituting that for worldview transform. All of this is possible to do with hooks. Might be a little tricky, though. We'll see what can be done about it. If works, though, it should even force first person view through cut scenes and in takedowns. Might have some artifacts, but should be very Mirror's Edge otherwise.

I figured as such might be possible... I don't know how good it will look though... looking at the back of a poly means you see through it right? And does Adam even have a body in first person? (Like mirror's Edge).

OwlSolar
9th Nov 2010, 04:44
Third person is completely optional. All you have to do is not use cover, not use takedowns, avoid certain augmentations, and never climb ladders. All these things are completely optional. :rolleyes:
Notice that I said that taking cover is optional.

*Refrains from using a sarcastic insult*

K^2
9th Nov 2010, 07:06
looking at the back of a poly means you see through it right?
Depends. It's called face culling, and it can be enabled/disabled for each triangle rendered. Usually, it is enabled, because it saves rendering time. Unfortunately, there will almost certainly be some polygons that will be visible if you place the camera inside Adam's head. So the only solution is going to be to shift the camera forward somewhat. That's not really a problem, though. Once you have a fix on the head, you can do any relative transform you want.

And does Adam even have a body in first person?
Good question. It'd be a bit silly not to, all things considered, but silly decisions seem to be abundant in this project.

Notice that I said that taking cover is optional.
Wasn't really aimed at you. Your post is what triggered the response, but it was aimed more at the official party line.

OwlSolar
9th Nov 2010, 07:11
Sorry. :o

BigBoss
10th Nov 2010, 03:33
Third person is completely optional. All you have to do is not use cover, not use takedowns, avoid certain augmentations, and never climb ladders. All these things are completely optional. :rolleyes:

There might be a way to force first person by intercepting shader calls carrying animation transforms, grabbing the transform for Adam's head, and substituting that for worldview transform. All of this is possible to do with hooks. Might be a little tricky, though. We'll see what can be done about it. If works, though, it should even force first person view through cut scenes and in takedowns. Might have some artifacts, but should be very Mirror's Edge otherwise.

You guys must REALLY hate third person to be willing to do that

Shralla
10th Nov 2010, 03:45
He's being sarcastic and pissy about third-person.

Jerion
10th Nov 2010, 03:59
He's being a bit facetious, but there's no denying that some people can't stand perspective changes in their Deus Ex.

K^2
10th Nov 2010, 04:08
You guys must REALLY hate third person to be willing to do that
I don't like switching back and forward. If this game was entirely 3rd person, like Mass Effect, I probably wouldn't complain nearly as much. I mean, at this point, I'm not really expecting a Deus Ex game, but rather something completely different. Still, a cyberpunk-inspired game with a descent inventory management, an upgrade system, multiple ways to complete objectives, and (hopefully) a good story sounds good to me, so I'm not willing to just give up on it.

Besides, it really doesn't need to be that complex. I'm just lacking a bit in experience with this sort of call intercept. I was trying a very low-tech approach on TRU, but it refuses to work, so there is a good reason to believe that it won't work for HR either. I thought it might have to do with copy protection, but I got it to work with some other games using similar copy protection, so it's probably just Crystal Dynamics devs being extra-paranoid.

I should still be able to get access I need if I build a custom launcher, however. There is no reason I wouldn't be able to intercept the calls then. But this means messing with process memory, and it's exactly the thing I wanted to avoid.

WildcatPhoenix
10th Nov 2010, 04:10
He's being sarcastic and pissy about third-person.


He's being a bit facetious, but there's no denying that some people can't stand perspective changes in their Deus Ex.

Okay, let's put all the "philosophical" discussions about the merits of immersion and whatnot to the side for a moment....


...have you guys seen the leaked footage? Yes, yes, I realize it's pre-alpha footage. But all the perspective switching makes me dizzy! We're constantly popping in and out of cover, 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd and back again and again. Makes me nauseous just watching it. I simply cannot believe that this hybrid system was the best way to go.

Honestly? I'd feel better if the game were entirely in 3rd person (such as in Knights of the Old Republic). I could've adjusted to that much more easily than EM's current approach.

**EDIT**

Lol, K2 beat me to it.

Jerion
10th Nov 2010, 04:16
Okay, let's put all the "philosophical" discussions about the merits of immersion and whatnot to the side for a moment....


...have you guys seen the leaked footage? Yes, yes, I realize it's pre-alpha footage. But all the perspective switching makes me dizzy! We're constantly popping in and out of cover, 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd and back again and again. Makes me nauseous just watching it. I simply cannot believe that this hybrid system was the best way to go.

Honestly? I'd feel better if the game were entirely in 3rd person (such as in Knights of the Old Republic). I could've adjusted to that much more easily than EM's current approach.

**EDIT**

Lol, K2 beat me to it.

I've seen it and a great deal more. It simply doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you. If a FPP mod is put out I'll gladly install it, but I don't throw up my hands in grief because of a camera change.

Pinky_Powers
10th Nov 2010, 04:59
I've seen it and a great deal more. It simply doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you. If a FPP mod is put out I'll gladly install it, but I don't throw up my hands in grief because of a camera change.

This is really what it comes down to. Not only does the switching not disorient me, but it doesn't even jar me... in the least. But here it is: If you cannot stand third-person, or the switching between perspectives, you're doomed. And you'll miss out on a game I'd bet good coin will be truly great.

I know people who cannot play first-person games. My sister gets physically ill and will get terrible headaches from just a little bit of it. If that's how you are with third-person, this game may be something you have to pass on.

Shralla
10th Nov 2010, 19:59
...have you guys seen the leaked footage? Yes, yes, I realize it's pre-alpha footage. But all the perspective switching makes me dizzy! We're constantly popping in and out of cover, 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd to 1st to 3rd and back again and again. Makes me nauseous just watching it. I simply cannot believe that this hybrid system was the best way to go.

I imagine that you must be talking about the newest playthrough they showed off where whoever is playing the demo has a massive boner for the cover system. I found his playthrough somewhat disorienting and off-putting, but at the same time, while watching him play, I realized that I would be using the cover system about half as often as he was, maybe even less. The earlier videos don't really bother me, because they make judicious use of the cover system. The new one was really the only one that I felt went too overboard with it, and you're right. When he did, it was back and forth CONSTANTLY and I really just wanted to slap the controller out of his hand and tell him to just crouch.

Serendipitous
10th Nov 2010, 20:39
It will definitely be interesting to see how viable stealth gameplay is without using any third-person cover or takedowns. Climbing ladders won't bug me much (honestly, after watching my girlfriend fall off the ladder in the Seizure Room/Elevator Shaft in The 'Ton for the 2,000th time, I really came to appreciate how big of a problem Deus Ex's ladder system was). But my initial playthrough is certainly going to be a stealth, minimum force, talk to every NPC approach, and I for damn sure will not be using third-person cover or takedowns....so we shall see.

My kingdom for some lean keys!

I liked Penumbra's ladders. You could climb them without worrying about your legs walking towards whatever you looked at. The interact key got you on and off the ladder, and 'w' and 's' keys made you climb up and down.

imported_D_X
10th Nov 2010, 21:04
This is really what it comes down to. Not only does the switching not disorient me, but it doesn't even jar me... in the least. But here it is: If you cannot stand third-person, or the switching between perspectives, you're doomed. And you'll miss out on a game I'd bet good coin will be truly great.

I know people who cannot play first-person games. My sister gets physically ill and will get terrible headaches from just a little bit of it. If that's how you are with third-person, this game may be something you have to pass on.

I'm not ready to pass on this game just yet but I think you're right, it may come down to the fact of wether I will be able to play it without getting sick from it. And so far from all the game play footage I've seen it's looking more and more likely that may be the case. The interesting thing is that I'm a fan of the MGS series and I had no problem playing them at all, so I guess I have to wait and see how it plays once it's polished.

Happy
10th Nov 2010, 21:15
I've seen it and a great deal more. It simply doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you. If a FPP mod is put out I'll gladly install it, but I don't throw up my hands in grief because of a camera change.

OReally? Try watching the constant changes in perspective while drunk and eating three day old, mildly warm pizza :)

Pinky_Powers
10th Nov 2010, 21:54
OReally? Try watching the constant changes in perspective while drunk and eating three day old, mildly warm pizza :)

Throw in a few Vicodin and I'm right there with you. :confused:

luminar
11th Nov 2010, 00:02
OReally? Try watching the constant changes in perspective while drunk and eating three day old, mildly warm pizza :)

I think anything would be disorienting at that point!

Deus_Ex_Machina
11th Nov 2010, 00:12
I like a lot of things about this prequel in the series but the third person perspective for cover and performing ingame actions is something i don't like. Will there be a way to turn third person off or at least play the game without using it. (I know take downs will be done in third person)

Nope.

subtlesnake
11th Nov 2010, 00:29
I'm just curious how easy it will be to play through the combat encounters, without using the cover system. Coming from PC FPS, I've never really liked the Gears of War style of automatically locking from one cover point to another. I much prefer taking cover myself in first person. Of course, there's no lean in HR, and enemies seem to swarm you pretty quickly, so I wonder if it will still be to possible play it like any other FPS, and not have to worry about the third person stuff.

mentalkase
11th Nov 2010, 00:59
Maybe i'm missing something. But why can't you just not press the button when you get up to a wall? Can't you still just crouch behind things without going into 3rd person? I don't see I wouldn't be able to play the stealth aspects exactly the same way I did in the first game if I wanted to.

OwlSolar
11th Nov 2010, 01:08
There's a cover button, don't worry. You can just crouch if you want.


I'm just curious how easy it will be to play through the combat encounters, without using the cover system. Coming from PC FPS, I've never really liked the Gears of War style of automatically locking from one cover point to another. I much prefer taking cover myself in first person. Of course, there's no lean in HR, and enemies seem to swarm you pretty quickly, so I wonder if it will still be to possible play it like any other FPS, and not have to worry about the third person stuff.
It's worth a shot, at least. Really though, enemies will swarm you if you're in cover or not. If it really bothers you, then just use stealth.

Jerion
11th Nov 2010, 01:15
Cover and crouch are independent from one another.

jtr7
11th Nov 2010, 01:24
I've seen it and a great deal more. It simply doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you. If a FPP mod is put out I'll gladly install it, but I don't throw up my hands in grief because of a camera change.

It's about lack of player control and not liking the game to change perspectives while looking at something, about to do something based on what is being looked at and decided about, and then waiting for the game to give the player control back. It's like playing with a backseat driver.

Play a game where the view is toggleable and have someone switch views for you according to their own rules, with no say in the matter.

OwlSolar
11th Nov 2010, 01:26
The way you describe it makes it sound like these perspective changes are completely random.


Cover and crouch are independent from one another.
Ah, but is there an option to go prone? http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-smug.gif

jtr7
11th Nov 2010, 01:30
Except for the part about "their own rules".

OwlSolar
11th Nov 2010, 01:30
Yes, I know. I meant every part of your post other than that.

Irate_Iguana
11th Nov 2010, 08:48
Maybe i'm missing something. But why can't you just not press the button when you get up to a wall? Can't you still just crouch behind things without going into 3rd person? I don't see I wouldn't be able to play the stealth aspects exactly the same way I did in the first game if I wanted to.

One thing that I've seen with the cover mechanics that I've had experience with is that as long as you are using the cover system you are invulnerable. If you disengage from cover, but are behind the same piece of level architecture, every enemy will be able to hit you with unerring accuracy. So sticky cover = bulletproof and crouch = dead meat. Don't know if this holds true for HR.

Donvermicelli
11th Nov 2010, 09:58
One thing that I've seen with the cover mechanics that I've had experience with is that as long as you are using the cover system you are invulnerable. If you disengage from cover, but are behind the same piece of level architecture, every enemy will be able to hit you with unerring accuracy. So sticky cover = bulletproof and crouch = dead meat. Don't know if this holds true for HR.

For the people who played mass effect a certain ingame cinematic comes to mind where they spawn a tank right in front of you. You either A: engage cover within one second and go from there or B: do not do that and die.

mentalkase
11th Nov 2010, 10:06
One thing that I've seen with the cover mechanics that I've had experience with is that as long as you are using the cover system you are invulnerable. If you disengage from cover, but are behind the same piece of level architecture, every enemy will be able to hit you with unerring accuracy. So sticky cover = bulletproof and crouch = dead meat. Don't know if this holds true for HR.

To quote Jerion from his preview thread "The biggest and smallest change here is the cover system, which I found to support stealth rather than define it." To me that suggests that you're able to use the regular method of crouching stealth along with the 3rd person stuff. I could be wrong but i'm hopeful.

Donvermicelli
11th Nov 2010, 10:19
Then let's hope they put in leaning too else crouching behind crates etc isn't going to get you very far with these 'smarter' AI

mentalkase
11th Nov 2010, 10:30
I can live without lean keys. Although I can't see why they couldn't implement them either .. doesn't seem like it would require all that much work.

Shralla
11th Nov 2010, 19:33
Not enough buttons on a controller.

Pinky_Powers
11th Nov 2010, 19:39
I rarely ever use the lean keys in Deus Ex. And I play stealth every time. Of course, we had a lot of shadows in Deus Ex...

Shralla
12th Nov 2010, 03:55
I'll be honest. I don't think that shadows were a part of stealth in the original Deus Ex. I don't remember any point at which being in darkness saved me from being seen by somebody who was looking straight at me. Not to mention when you begin the game, Alex says "stay out of their field of view, walk slowly to stay quiet, and crouch behind cover."

Nothing about shadows or darkness at all. And you know, those three things are EXACTLY what the stealth in Human Revolution is based on. Stealth is what I'm the least concerned with in the game, to be honest.

K^2
12th Nov 2010, 04:08
Well, it wasn't like Thief, where you could stand right in front of a guard in a good shadow, but they definitely helped. It was less likely that you'd be seen by a guard in a shade than in brightly lit area. I don't know if it affected range, odds of spotting, or what, but there was definitely a difference.

Pinky_Powers
12th Nov 2010, 04:58
You need to replay Deus Ex, Shralla. Shadows worked quite well. Not as ridiculous as Vampire Bloodines, but you could get away with quite a lot if you had just little shade. :)

Irate_Iguana
12th Nov 2010, 09:33
I don't remember any point at which being in darkness saved me from being seen by somebody who was looking straight at me.

Liberty Island has quite a few spots where the darkness will save you from prying eyes of the patrolling guards.



Not to mention when you begin the game, Alex says "stay out of their field of view, walk slowly to stay quiet, and crouch behind cover."

In the training Anna says this;

Always remember the four basic tactics to avoid detection: crouch behind
concealment, stay behind enemies, move slowly to avoid making noise, and use
shadows to conceal yourself. Be alert to every possibility.



Stealth is what I'm the least concerned with in the game, to be honest.

's Cool. We all want different things from our experience.

Jerion
12th Nov 2010, 09:48
I'm flashing back to a time outside the naval shipyard, between the entry gate and the warehouse nearest to it. I recall being easily detectable by one patrolling guard; No matter how deep the darkness, he could locate me almost instantly. However, if I hid underneath the platform at the loading dock, then he never detected me. That implies to me that LoS/FoV is more critical than shadows in DX. I think there ought to be some tests performed to isolate precisely what role shadows actually occupied.



Ah, but is there an option to go prone? http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-smug.gif

I like you.


To quote Jerion from his preview thread "The biggest and smallest change here is the cover system, which I found to support stealth rather than define it." To me that suggests that you're able to use the regular method of crouching stealth along with the 3rd person stuff. I could be wrong but i'm hopeful.

Mmhmm.

mentalkase
12th Nov 2010, 10:41
I'm just gonna go ahead and take that as a yes.

nakedhand
12th Nov 2010, 13:46
I like a lot of things about this prequel in the series but the third person perspective for cover and performing ingame actions is something i don't like. Will there be a way to turn third person off or at least play the game without using it. (I know take downs will be done in third person)

I would love to see this, but I very much doubt it.

Ritter
14th Nov 2010, 18:03
I won't use the cover system but can you lean in first person mode?

rokstrombo
15th Nov 2010, 06:10
I'm flashing back to a time outside the naval shipyard, between the entry gate and the warehouse nearest to it. I recall being easily detectable by one patrolling guard; No matter how deep the darkness, he could locate me almost instantly. However, if I hid underneath the platform at the loading dock, then he never detected me. That implies to me that LoS/FoV is more critical than shadows in DX. I think there ought to be some tests performed to isolate precisely what role shadows actually occupied.

I suspect that certain areas were simply flagged as "dark" or "very dark" in some way and these areas happened to correlate quite well with areas that appeared to be poorly lit to the player. Perhaps that area in the shipyard was overlooked by the mappers? The player character's Light Augmentation completely overrode any concealment that appeared to be provided by the darkness. I noted also that darkness was more salient than line of sight, though distance and movement speed affected the degree of concealment in the dark.

Regarding leaning in Deus Ex, I don't think the AI were able to distinguish leaning from simply strafing slightly past a corner. The lean key rotated the player's viewport and temporarily shifted the player character slightly to the left or right, but it didn't decrease concealment any more than strafing the same distance for the same time. There was no leaning animation either. This being the case I don't think the probably omission of lean keys in Human Revolution will disadvantage a player who chooses not to use the cover button during stealth and combat, relative to the original game at least. It could be a nice aesthetic option, however!

Tverdyj
15th Nov 2010, 06:43
Cover and crouch are independent from one another.

GREAT!


now,if PC version ships with lean keys, EM will be forgiven for most of the stuff we don't like about them

HellKittyDan
15th Nov 2010, 06:44
Not enough buttons on a controller.

Whatever button is used for the cover function, could instead be used for a lean function.

motsm
15th Nov 2010, 08:45
Regarding leaning in Deus Ex, I don't think the AI were able to distinguish leaning from simply strafing slightly past a corner. The lean key rotated the player's viewport and temporarily shifted the player character slightly to the left or right, but it didn't decrease concealment any more than strafing the same distance for the same time. There was no leaning animation either. This being the case I don't think the probably omission of lean keys in Human Revolution will disadvantage a player who chooses not to use the cover button during stealth and combat, relative to the original game at least. It could be a nice aesthetic option, however!That would be assuming the AI was programmed for it, which it likely won't be. The game is balanced for use with the third person cover system, in which you can see every single enemy in pretty much any and all situations while it will be impossible for them to see you. So with that said, I wouldn't expect the AI to have any lenience, or delay in detecting you, as it would be a needless difficulty buffer when the cover system already makes stealth nothing but a waiting game.

Pinky_Powers
15th Nov 2010, 09:54
That would be assuming the AI was programmed for it, which it likely won't be. The game is balanced for use with the third person cover system, in which you can see every single enemy in pretty much any and all situations while it will be impossible for them to see you. So with that said, I wouldn't expect the AI to have any lenience, or delay in detecting you, as it would be a needless difficulty buffer when the cover system already makes stealth nothing but a waiting game.

This post is a pile of bulls**t. :rolleyes:

IOOI
15th Nov 2010, 11:39
This being the case I don't think the probably omission of lean keys in Human Revolution will disadvantage a player who chooses not to use the cover button during stealth and combat, relative to the original game at least. It could be a nice aesthetic option, however!

You're forgetting the time and the actions needed to get into the starting position (behind the cover object) when just using standard movement keys. It's faster and more precise to release the lean button to retrieve to the original position behind cover than having to juggle with the strafe keys and movement speed key.
It's helpful when you want to shoot or observe from the same position without the hassle of changing between walk (to peak) and run (to get back behind cover) and it's even more important when you're behind a "thinner" piece of cover like a column or pillar.
Lean Keys are not just an *aesthetic* option.


GREAT!


now,if PC version ships with lean keys, EM will be forgiven for most of the stuff we don't like about them

Naaaa, not really! Just regarding TPV, there's still ladder climbing and Takedowns (plus the probable use of a high number of cutscenes - and I'm not even taking into account a proper Melee/HTH combat system) that would need to be "corrected". :)

rokstrombo
15th Nov 2010, 15:09
You're forgetting the time and the actions needed to get into the starting position (behind the cover object) when just using standard movement keys. It's faster and more precise to release the lean button to retrieve to the original position behind cover than having to juggle with the strafe keys and movement speed key.
It's helpful when you want to shoot or observe from the same position without the hassle of changing between walk (to peak) and run (to get back behind cover) and it's even more important when you're behind a "thinner" piece of cover like a column or pillar.
Lean Keys are not just an *aesthetic* option.

I found it difficult to position JC in order to gain the widest possible FOV during a lean. If JC was too far from the corner your vision is obscured by the wall, but if JC is too close to the corner he may be too easily spotted. While behind narrower cover objects such as pillars, this was even more problematic as the fixed distance of the lean would place JC's body entirely out of cover, unless his body was partially exposed on the other side to begin with. Strafing allowed much greater precision while peeking around corners because the player had full control during the movement, and each movement was of a lesser degree.

During combat, I found leaning was not always advantageous. The advantages were that it was slightly faster and the aiming reticule would not be disturbed while peeking around corners at this speed. The disadvantage was that it was extremely difficult to aim until the lean movement was complete, which required JC to spend longer leaning out of cover. The player also needed to compensate for the rotated viewport, which contributed to this delay.

I found the best tactic was to crouch and strafe because it was more precise and exposed considerably less of JC's body than standing and leaning. It also reduced recoil, did not disrupt the aiming reticule and did not rotate the viewport. IMHO, these factors more than compensated for the slightly reduced movement speed. The NPC's reaction time was almost always too slow for this reduction in movement speed to be a penalty, anyway.

I agree that the slightly increased speed of leaning when compared with crouching and strafing makes leaning more than an aesthetic option, but I still think that its probable removal is a very minimal disadvantage to the player.

Nyysjan
15th Nov 2010, 15:43
I almost never used lean, i relied mostly on sound, shadows, staying out of the Field of Vision (and FAR away from anything hostile) and crouching, with quick peaks around the corners with strafe when i felt is safe enough.

motsm
15th Nov 2010, 16:50
This post is a pile of bulls**t. :rolleyes:Why exactly is the post bulls**t? You did nothing but insult me, and backed up that insult with nothing.

Shralla
15th Nov 2010, 19:28
Whatever button is used for the cover function, could instead be used for a lean function.

The fact that it's one button is the problem. I imagine you propose that you hold that button and use your directional movement to actually lean? In which case you can't reposition while you're leaning (not sure if you could do that in DX, but you can in pretty much everything else with lean functionality), in addition to also removing the third-person cover system from the game.

Ashpolt
15th Nov 2010, 19:33
The fact that it's one button is the problem. I imagine you propose that you hold that button and use your directional movement to actually lean? In which case you can't reposition while you're leaning

On a console pad you could: assuming the cover system is one of the shoulder buttons (which it was in R6:V IIRC, so it probably will be here) the left analogue could allow you to reposition, and the right could let you lean.

On mouse and keyboard, you've obviously got enough buttons that this wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

Shralla
15th Nov 2010, 19:39
On a console pad you could: assuming the cover system is one of the shoulder buttons (which it was in R6:V IIRC, so it probably will be here) the left analogue could allow you to reposition, and the right could let you lean.

How do you aim?

Fluffis
15th Nov 2010, 20:14
How do you aim?

Veeeeeeerrrryyyyyy ssssslllllooooowwwwllllyyyyyy...

Vasarto
15th Nov 2010, 20:40
why would you want to avoid third person that badly?

Ashpolt
15th Nov 2010, 20:45
How do you aim?

With the right analogue stick still. Think of leaning as an extension of your aiming and it works.

Pinky_Powers
15th Nov 2010, 23:20
Why exactly is the post bulls**t? You did nothing but insult me, and backed up that insult with nothing.

Actually, you just described your post. My post merely pointed that out. You made imbecilic assertions and backed them up with nothing.

If you want elaborations, you must go first.

IOOI
15th Nov 2010, 23:44
I found it difficult to position JC in order to gain the widest possible FOV during a lean. If JC was too far from the corner your vision is obscured by the wall, but if JC is too close to the corner he may be too easily spotted. While behind narrower cover objects such as pillars, this was even more problematic as the fixed distance of the lean would place JC's body entirely out of cover, unless his body was partially exposed on the other side to begin with. Strafing allowed much greater precision while peeking around corners because the player had full control during the movement, and each movement was of a lesser degree.

During combat, I found leaning was not always advantageous. The advantages were that it was slightly faster and the aiming reticule would not be disturbed while peeking around corners at this speed. The disadvantage was that it was extremely difficult to aim until the lean movement was complete, which required JC to spend longer leaning out of cover. The player also needed to compensate for the rotated viewport, which contributed to this delay.

I found the best tactic was to crouch and strafe because it was more precise and exposed considerably less of JC's body than standing and leaning. It also reduced recoil, did not disrupt the aiming reticule and did not rotate the viewport. IMHO, these factors more than compensated for the slightly reduced movement speed. The NPC's reaction time was almost always too slow for this reduction in movement speed to be a penalty, anyway.

I agree that the slightly increased speed of leaning when compared with crouching and strafing makes leaning more than an aesthetic option, but I still think that its probable removal is a very minimal disadvantage to the player.

I'm talking from my experience, but In the case of DX I've learned to change the way on approaching the cover object depending on its wideness. If it was a wall, I had to approach it in an oblique way and slowly move as close to the corner as possible and then use the lean key; If it was a pillar, I had to face it and align myself with its center and then use the lean keys. Plus If I was unsure of being in the right position I would always lean first and then use the strafe keys to slowly get out of cover, that means even if I was spotted I'd be able to get back into cover quickly by releasing the lean key.

But I notice now that it's a case of tweaking. If crouch + strafe is like in DX - with a confortable movement speed between walk and run - then we might not need Lean keys, but it will also depend on how opponents position themselves behind cover (Do they fully expose themselves or do they lean, exposing only the upper part of their bodies?), their AI routines (How do they move from cover to cover?), and level design (How cover objects or conceallements are placed in the map and what are their respective shapes?). For instance, imagine that the player and the opponent are behind opposing corners in a long corridor, shooting each other: there could be something obstructing the player's LoS when crouching (like a table) that would be clear if the player stood up. In this case, leaning, while standing up, would be an advantage.

motsm
16th Nov 2010, 02:09
Actually, you just described your post. My post merely pointed that out. You made imbecilic assertions and backed them up with nothing.

If you want elaborations, you must go first.Wow, you are unbelievably disrespectful and condescending while being completely unprovoked in any way, yet you appear to think you are somehow being the bigger man. I shouldn't even dignify your crap with a response, but considering I can also be a condescending ass hole, I'll amuse you.

Have you played other third person stealth games with cover systems? As soon as you take cover, regardless if the AI should be able to see you, they never do, unless they are a good ways behind you. After watching the game play videos, Human Revolution appears no different. It even shows during the combat sections, where the AI won't take shots at the obviously exposed player until he presses the button to pop up from his supposed cover. Once more, the rolls and dives you perform from place to place seem to render you invisible to the AI, as a glaringly obvious move from one place to another almost directly in front of an aware AI left him continually shooting at the players previous location. None of this should need clarifying however, as pretty much anyone here discussing the game has seen the videos for themselves.

Dead-Eye
16th Nov 2010, 02:53
I'll be honest. I don't think that shadows were a part of stealth in the original Deus Ex. I don't remember any point at which being in darkness saved me from being seen by somebody who was looking straight at me. Not to mention when you begin the game, Alex says "stay out of their field of view, walk slowly to stay quiet, and crouch behind cover."

Nothing about shadows or darkness at all. And you know, those three things are EXACTLY what the stealth in Human Revolution is based on. Stealth is what I'm the least concerned with in the game, to be honest.

You use you're gun to indicate if you can be seen. If you're gun isn't pitch black then you can be seen. The thing I think that's a big difference is that unlike thief Deus Ex takes place in a time after electricity was invented.

Pinky_Powers
16th Nov 2010, 04:38
Wow, you are unbelievably disrespectful and condescending while being completely unprovoked in any way,

Hearing nonsensical lies is provocation for a person like me.


Have you played other third person stealth games with cover systems? As soon as you take cover, regardless if the AI should be able to see you, they never do, unless they are a good ways behind you.

Name one.

I've recently played Splinter Cell conviction, and even in low light situations, the NPCs spotted me with ease when they had line-of-sight... even when using the cover mechanic. And that wasn't even a very good game.

This issue has nothing to do with a cover system, and everything to do with the team making it, and the AI. And we haven't seen nearly enough of the game to discern its quality.


It even shows during the combat sections, where the AI won't take shots at the obviously exposed player until he presses the button to pop up from his supposed cover.

This is a matter of personal opinion, but I haven't seen Adam "obviously exposed" when taking cover. A hair here, an elbow there is not a thing I grind my teeth over.


Once more, the rolls and dives you perform from place to place seem to render you invisible to the AI, as a glaringly obvious move from one place to another almost directly in front of an aware AI left him continually shooting at the players previous location.

I'm also not ready to give this proper credence either. Every time I saw Adam roll to another cover location, the AI reacted realistically... if they had a reasonable view of him.

You're condemning Human Revolution based very little on what is actually there, and mostly on what you expect to be there. You don't like cover mechanics, I get it. That doesn't bother me. But when you make unproven comments that suggest the game is utterly broken due to it's use of the cover system, I am going to call bulls**t.

Tverdyj
16th Nov 2010, 05:20
why would you want to avoid third person that badly?

because we like our beer cold, our women scantily clad, our steak medium rare and our Deus Ex First Person.

oscarMike
16th Nov 2010, 15:14
because we like our beer cold, our women scantily clad, our steak medium rare and our Deus Ex First Person.

a million dollar answer:D

motsm
16th Nov 2010, 17:28
Hearing nonsensical lies is provocation for a person like me. I really can't believe you, your still trying to sound like some passive respecting poster. You should be banned for your insulting uncalled for crap. I'm done with this discussion.

CoDEllite
17th Nov 2010, 00:41
*Stunned* Yo people are crazy. Why would you want to turn it off?! Those 3rd person take-downs look so sick. Like something out of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. If fact maybe there should be more similar cinematic moments in this game. Cause as it looks right now the developers are probably playing it to safe and making this game too old school.

mentalkase
17th Nov 2010, 01:13
http://bp1.blogger.com/_i1ZjNkR4id4/RqD408vEZUI/AAAAAAAAAF8/iCH7NIKeCkA/s320/Troll_Restless72119.jpg

KSingh77
17th Nov 2010, 03:01
I like my fps first person thank you.

IdiotInAJeep
17th Nov 2010, 08:59
*Stunned* Yo people are crazy. Why would you want to turn it off?! Those 3rd person take-downs look so sick. Like something out of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. If fact maybe there should be more similar cinematic moments in this game. Cause as it looks right now the developers are probably playing it to safe and making this game too old school.

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/obvious_troll.jpg

Brockxz
17th Nov 2010, 11:20
*Stunned* Yo people are crazy. Why would you want to turn it off?! Those 3rd person take-downs look so sick. Like something out of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. If fact maybe there should be more similar cinematic moments in this game. Cause as it looks right now the developers are probably playing it to safe and making this game too old school.

You can go and play AC but please leave us now.

puzl
17th Nov 2010, 11:47
*Stunned* Yo people are crazy. Why would you want to turn it off?! Those 3rd person take-downs look so sick. Like something out of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. If fact maybe there should be more similar cinematic moments in this game. Cause as it looks right now the developers are probably playing it to safe and making this game too old school.

haha, subtle

Ninjerk
17th Nov 2010, 11:52
haha, subtle

Not with that name

CoDEllite
17th Nov 2010, 16:56
Wish Ubisoft were developing this game. Those guys really know how to make an awesome game.

Ashpolt
17th Nov 2010, 17:14
Wish Ubisoft were developing this game. Those guys really know how to make an awesome game.

:rolleyes:

Come on dude, you can do better than that. 1/10.

Irate_Iguana
17th Nov 2010, 17:47
:rolleyes:

Come on dude, you can do better than that. 1/10.

We should start a troll school. Get some quality trolling going instead of this lame crap.

Fluffis
17th Nov 2010, 21:42
We should start a troll school. Get some quality trolling going instead of this lame crap.

True. That one was just embarrassing.

IdiotInAJeep
17th Nov 2010, 22:30
The name was a dead giveaway.

K^2
17th Nov 2010, 23:52
We should start a troll school. Get some quality trolling going instead of this lame crap.
But who's going to teach them? We already banned all the real trolls. I suppose, Ashpolt can teach the subtlety element, but he's not nearly as good at causing outrage and rage as some of these who are no longer with us. We can't have Navare without Gunther. It wouldn't be right.

Ashpolt
18th Nov 2010, 00:09
^^ TBH, I wouldn't know much about real trolling. I'm afraid to say that except for when I'm being blatantly obvious (hint: it'll usually be in the form on an image,) everything I say on here is genuine. No trolling here, boss.

Anasumtj
18th Nov 2010, 01:54
Trolls are often more convincing when they don't devolve into JeffK.

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 03:30
^^ TBH, I wouldn't know much about real trolling. I'm afraid to say that except for when I'm being blatantly obvious (hint: it'll usually be in the form on an image,) everything I say on here is genuine. No trolling here, boss.
But that exactly is the key to being a successful troll. Part of it at any rate. I'm not saying you troll. I'm saying the way you push your point across would make any trolling attack far more successful.

ArcR
18th Nov 2010, 04:17
We could produce the finest trolls in the world (http://www.geek.com/articles/news/nicaragua-refuses-to-leave-invaded-costa-rican-territory-after-google-maps-prompted-invasion-20101116/).

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 04:32
This is really what it comes down to. Not only does the switching not disorient me, but it doesn't even jar me... in the least. But here it is: If you cannot stand third-person, or the switching between perspectives, you're doomed. And you'll miss out on a game I'd bet good coin will be truly great.

I don't have many problems with perspective switching if I (the player) am in control of those changes. For instance, I generally don't have any problems with tactical games that allow me to change between PC's PoV, map or other NPC members PoV of my unit/party. The real problem is when it's done automatically, making me go out of character disrupting the "flow" and changing the "spatial awareness" within the set I had been experiencing till the moment of change.
In full fledge action games I don't have many problems with the camera shifting positions around the PC or with some Quick time events - if they are well done.

Now lets talk about Deus Ex. When I hear or read that name I automatically expect a First-Person game (where the action is taken up-close and personal) with high levels of interactivity (I expect a good physics engine and to be able to interact with almost everything in the gameworld in different ways - NPCs, objects, etc...) and variety (different types of doors, NPCs - cats, dogs, birds, humans,... - and objects - fire extinguishers, etc...) - akin to a First-Person Simulator. So when I hear that someone is introducing Third-Person (and Third-Person cover) I immediately think that it's there just as a "training wheel" for newcomers, not as a *substantial* part of the combat and stealth systems.
There's no need to turn it into Metal Gear or something alike. Deus Ex has its own "flavour": *First-Person Immersive Simulator*. What's alting this evolution, IMO, is consolization - imagine how DX2 could have been if it was a PC exclusive.
You don't cut down features in a First-Person Immersive Simulator - like Melee combat or locational damage. You add new ones or improve upon them - this is what makes it shine. If you're cutting down features you're turning it into something ordinary.

I'll probably play HR, but I'll wait for the price to go down.

I said it already, If I had to buy a game at launch day, that is somewhat true to its roots, and that gives a great First-Person experience, right now, I'd go with Crysis 2.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 04:38
I don't have many problems with perspective switching if I (the player) am in control of those changes. For instance, I generally don't have any problems with tactical games that allow me to change between PC's PoV, map or other NPC members PoV of my unit/party. The real problem is when it's done automatically, making me go out of character disrupting the "flow" and changing the "spatial awareness" within the set I had been experiencing till the moment of change.
In full fledge action games I don't have many problems with the camera shifting positions around the PC or with some Quick time events - if they are well done.

Now lets talk about Deus Ex. When I hear or read that name I automatically expect a First-Person game (where the action is taken up-close and personal) with high levels of interactivity (I expect a good physics engine and to be able to interact with almost everything in the gameworld in different ways - NPCs, objects, etc...) and variety (different types of doors, NPCs - cats, dogs, birds, humans,... - and objects - fire extinguishers, etc...) - akin to a First-Person Simulator. So when I hear that someone is introducing Third-Person (and Third-Person cover) I immediately think that it's there just as a "training wheel" for newcomers, not as a *substantial* part of the combat and stealth systems.
There's no need to turn it into Metal Gear or something alike. Deus Ex has its own "flavour": *First-Person Immersive Simmulator*. What's alting this evolution, IMO, is consolization - imagine how DX2 could have been if it was a PC exclusive.

I'll probably will play HR, but I'll wait for the price to go down.

I said it already, If I had to buy a game at launch day, that is somewhat true to its roots, and that gives a great First-Person experience, right now, I'd go with Crysis 2.

So the fact that in most aspects HR promises to have considerably more depth and much more rpg aspects to it than Crysis 2 doesn't influence that decision at all, because it allows you to do takedowns? That one aspect of the game has ruined it for you enough that you'd prefer to play a game in a completely different genre because it's more faithful to its roots? I ... see...

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 05:05
So the fact that in most aspects HR promises to have considerably more depth and much more rpg aspects to it than Crysis 2 doesn't influence that decision at all, because it allows you to do takedowns? That one aspect of the game has ruined it for you enough that you'd prefer to play a game in a completely different genre because it's more faithful to its roots? I ... see...
It's called voting with your wallet. Crysis 2 and HR are going to be two completely different games with different play styles, obviously. Crysis devs, however, chose to try and make the game to appeal to existing fan base. EM decided to throw out a bunch of aspects of DX to try and get new fans at expense of the old ones. The later isn't a nice thing to do, and decision not to buy at release is pretty much the only way a consumer has to act against it.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 05:17
It's called voting with your wallet. Crysis 2 and HR are going to be two completely different games with different play styles, obviously. Crysis devs, however, chose to try and make the game to appeal to existing fan base. EM decided to throw out a bunch of aspects of DX to try and get new fans at expense of the old ones. The later isn't a nice thing to do, and decision not to buy at release is pretty much the only way a consumer has to act against it.

I understand that. All I know is my desire to play a Deus Ex game over a Crysis game is so strong that changing a few mechanics to appeal to a wider audience isn't going to sway me, if otherwise I feel it's still quite loyal to the spirit of the original. Basically, i'd still rather eat a delicious kebab with chicken instead of beef, rather than a dog turd.

Analogies aren't my strongpoint but you get the idea.

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 05:22
Right, but it doesn't mean IOOI feels the same way. You can like the game, and still refuse to buy it for other reasons.

I have no doubt that EM will produce a highly competitive game. It just isn't going to be a DX game. And for some people, that's enough reason not to go buy it, at least right away, simply for them putting a DX logo on it.

I have a feeling, EM might have actually gotten more DX fans to buy the game if they never used DX IP.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 05:30
Right, but it doesn't mean IOOI feels the same way. You can like the game, and still refuse to buy it for other reasons.

I have no doubt that EM will produce a highly competitive game. It just isn't going to be a DX game. And for some people, that's enough reason not to go buy it, at least right away, simply for them putting a DX logo on it.

I have a feeling, EM might have actually gotten more DX fans to buy the game if they never used DX IP.

This i'm going to disagree with vehemently. It's 100% a matter of opinion that a change of viewpoint for stealth and adding takedowns and a few other changes make it not a Deus Ex game. There're so many other elements that made DX what it was that to dismiss HR because of what it changes if it gets 90% of the other elements right is in my mind ludicrous.

motsm
18th Nov 2010, 05:53
This i'm going to disagree with vehemently. It's 100% a matter of opinion that a change of viewpoint for stealth and adding takedowns and a few other changes make it not a Deus Ex game. There're so many other elements that made DX what it was that to dismiss HR because of what it changes if it gets 90% of the other elements right is in my mind ludicrous.Yeah it's matter of opinion, and to plenty of people they messed up enough to consider it sacrilege. To be honest however, I don't really care if it's Deus Ex, Hitman, Doom, or pretty much any other IP; I don't like health regeneration, automatic cameras, overly cinematic in game events like take downs, third person cover systems, overly informative HUD's, and likely plenty of other thing's I don't yet know about in the game. So there's a small part of me that dislikes the changes because it's a Deus Ex game, but a much larger part of me that dislikes the changes because in my opinion, they are all elements of atrociously disgusting game design in almost any game.

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 06:19
This i'm going to disagree with vehemently. It's 100% a matter of opinion that a change of viewpoint for stealth and adding takedowns and a few other changes make it not a Deus Ex game. There're so many other elements that made DX what it was that to dismiss HR because of what it changes if it gets 90% of the other elements right is in my mind ludicrous.
Yet, it's a fairly popular opinion. You can disagree with it, but it doesn't make it less popular. And I also highly doubt that HR would receive fewer sales if it didn't use DX IP. It can be a good, solid game all on its own. Augmentations are mechanical, so there is no conflict, and story is almost completely unrelated anyways.

So yeah, it'd still be a good game without any direct references to DX, and it wouldn't annoy as many people. Win-win in my books.

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 06:24
I don't have many problems with perspective switching if I (the player) am in control of those changes. For instance, I generally don't have any problems with tactical games that allow me to change between PC's PoV, map or other NPC members PoV of my unit/party. The real problem is when it's done automatically, making me go out of character disrupting the "flow" and changing the "spatial awareness" within the set I had been experiencing till the moment of change.
In full fledge action games I don't have many problems with the camera shifting positions around the PC or with some Quick time events - if they are well done.

I have a thought for you, which may put your mind at a bit more ease about the perspective switching:
In a very real way, you will have control over when it happens. Psychologically, you will be prepared for the Switch as you are initiating the actions that you know cause these events. You decide when to perform a takedown, or take cover, or climb a ladder...
It's not always optional, not in the least. But it won't be unexpected. Your actions, your mental timing drive these events. They're not random, and you are in control of them... at least enough that it shouldn't disrupt you on a psychological immersion level.

Well, food for though. :)

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 06:51
I have an additional psychological concern that won't be rectified by me expecting a switch. Every time it happens, my brain is going to be derailed into thoughts along the lines of, "What kind of *** *** *** thought this *** would be a good *** idea?" And that ruins immersion for me.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 06:54
Yet, it's a fairly popular opinion. You can disagree with it, but it doesn't make it less popular. And I also highly doubt that HR would receive fewer sales if it didn't use DX IP. It can be a good, solid game all on its own. Augmentations are mechanical, so there is no conflict, and story is almost completely unrelated anyways.

So yeah, it'd still be a good game without any direct references to DX, and it wouldn't annoy as many people. Win-win in my books.

When I look at that list that Jerion has created that shows how it's similar to the first DX, then I look at the new list that shows how it differs, the latter list simply doesn't cancel out the first list for me.

When I think about the amount of time i'll be absorbed in a DX-like world, doing DX-like actions, and following a DX-like plot, as opposed to climbing ladders or using stealth in 3rd person, it seriously sways in favour of being a DX game for me. Sure they could change the name, but that wouldn't stop it being a whole hell of a lot like DX.

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 06:56
I'll tell you what. Wait and see. But a lot of us are not convinced, and will not be convinced until we play the game. And that is still a lot of lost day-one sales any way you twist it.

Edit: Maybe not a lot, but I would still judge it to be more than sales gained by using DX name. I mean, can you give me a good reason why it should be called Deus Ex: Human Revolution and not just Human Revolution, or using a completely different first-title?

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 07:11
I'll tell you what. Wait and see. But a lot of us are not convinced, and will not be convinced until we play the game. And that is still a lot of lost day-one sales any way you twist it.

Edit: Maybe not a lot, but I would still judge it to be more than sales gained by using DX name. I mean, can you give me a good reason why it should be called Deus Ex: Human Revolution and not just Human Revolution, or using a completely different first-title?

Because it makes references to other DX games, almost completely plays like a DX game and the devs are to their mind, making a DX game. Also because I see no reason to change its name because it uses a bit of 3rd person.

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 07:19
I have an additional psychological concern that won't be rectified by me expecting a switch. Every time it happens, my brain is going to be derailed into thoughts along the lines of, "What kind of *** *** *** thought this *** would be a good *** idea?" And that ruins immersion for me.

Well, I have no mental exercise to help you sidestep that. ;)

It goes back to my much earlier quote that if you just don't like third-person on principle, you're doomed. This game cannot give you what you want. :(

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 07:28
It can with some surgery. Mwahahahaha.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 08:34
So the fact that in most aspects HR promises to have considerably more depth and much more rpg aspects to it than Crysis 2 doesn't influence that decision at all, because it allows you to do takedowns? That one aspect of the game has ruined it for you enough that you'd prefer to play a game in a completely different genre because it's more faithful to its roots? I ... see...

I think I'm not alone, but when I see something I don't like or don't expect I just don't buy it or ,if I'm partially interested, I let the prices drop.
Even if HR becomes a great (RPG) game on its own, I can't see it right now as this true successor to DX. EM can brag the "four pillars", multi-path, choice & consequences and show awesome trailers as they want, but that's not what I'm looking for.
Like I said before (in other threads as well) I was expecting this to be a FPIS (First-Person Immersive Simulator) with great improvements over DX (a real successor in terms of Design philosophy, gameplay and experience).
I just don't see HR that way anymore - It's lacking that shine or spark that made DX special -, but I'm still curious. :hmm:

Crysis 2 on the other hand looks like a solid FPS. And I like what it's trying to do for the FPS genre - even if for some people they look like minor improvements. :thumb:

You appear to be new here, but if you had been here long enough you'd know that takedowns are not the only problem there are with HR. When dealing with an established game series I have a problem when features are cut down to convey to the eye of the new Lead Designer (DX2 anyone?) and, as of now with DX, when the developer completly ignores it's fanbase - like I said before, they should replace the word "fans" with "consumers", there would be no mistake. I shouldn't have broken my principle of "never be a fan of anything", and now I'm somewhat regretted (I still like the community here, even newcomers). :)


I have a thought for you, which may put your mind at a bit more ease about the perspective switching:
In a very real way, you will have control over when it happens. Psychologically, you will be prepared for the Switch as you are initiating the actions that you know cause these events. You decide when to perform a takedown, or take cover, or climb a ladder...
It's not always optional, not in the least. But it won't be unexpected. Your actions, your mental timing drive these events. They're not random, and you are in control of them... at least enough that it shouldn't disrupt you on a psychological immersion level.

Well, food for though. :)

It won't work. I tried that with Riddick and still remained frustrated.*
It's not just a problem of timing, it's what you feel and how you perceive the world when "in-character" - up-close and personal. But in this case is even worse because of my expectations for a DX game.

I'll get the game, but probably cheaper.

EDIT:
* - I'll give you an example: In Riddick, it was frustrating to see the perspective change everytime you wanted to get over a box - in order to get behind cover - when you were in this rush to flee from your opponents shooting behind you - what happens here is that you lose focus in the action. A way to correct this would be introducing somekind of movement in FP to make the PC slide on top of the box (like we now see in games like Mirror's Edge and Brink) to allow the player to get behind cover.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 09:16
This i'm going to disagree with vehemently. It's 100% a matter of opinion that a change of viewpoint for stealth and adding takedowns and a few other changes make it not a Deus Ex game. There're so many other elements that made DX what it was that to dismiss HR because of what it changes if it gets 90% of the other elements right is in my mind ludicrous.

What I want from DX is the "experience" I felt in the first one: some will say it's lessened; some will say it's lost. I know, from personal gaming experience, just because of the perspective switch and looking at the gameplay mechanics announced so far, that it's the later.
For newcomers it won't make a dent. And if you're not looking at it from a Design philosophy perspective, I believe, it won't matter either.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 09:37
What I want from DX is the "experience" I felt in the first one: some will say it's lessened; some will say it's lost. I know, from personal gaming experience, just because of the perspective switch and looking at the gameplay mechanics announced so far, that it's the later.
For newcomers it won't make a dent. And if you're not looking at it from a Design philosophy perspective, I believe, it won't matter either.

I'm looking for the basically same thing, the experience I got with the first game. I think my definition of what comprised that experience maybe just isn't quite as narrow as yours.

I would've preferred they kept it strictly first person and that they'd retained melee weapons, skills etc, no doubt (I know exactly what they've changed about the game, and i'm not really new to the forum .. just posting in it) but I just don't necessarily believe that those aspects will alter the experience in any meaningful way for me, it remains to be seen as far as i'm concerned.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 09:44
Because it makes references to other DX games, almost completely plays like a DX game and the devs are to their mind, making a DX game. Also because I see no reason to change its name because it uses a bit of 3rd person.

Let me see if I can put this briefly.
There is this drink in my country called Sangria - in english it translates to "bloodletting" - because of its redish colour, given by the red wine. Now, there are some people that use white wine instead of red, giving it a yellowish colour. And now I ask you: Why would I still continue to call that drink Sangria (bloodletting) - even if the rest of the ingredients are the same -, when it clearly isn't red/bloodlike coloured anymore? (I'm not even talking about the different taste given by the white wine.)

Do you understand where I'm getting at? :hmm:

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 09:59
Let me see if I can put this briefly.
There is this drink in my country called Sangria - in english it translates to "bloodletting" - because of its redish colour, given by the red wine. Now, there are some people that use white wine instead of red, giving it a yellowish colour. And now I ask you: Why would I still continue to call that drink Sangria (bloodletting) - even if the rest of the ingredients are the same -, when it clearly isn't red/bloodlike coloured anymore? (I'm not even talking about the different taste given by the white wine.)

Do you understand where I'm getting at? :hmm:

Yeah I get what you're saying. You're saying you wanted orange and they gave you lemon-lime. I'm still disagreeing that the elements that they've changed in DX are that pervasive and game altering. If the gameplay in the whole remains intact I fail to see how it won't feel like a DX game. Not the exact same DX game, but if you want the first DX game .. play that one.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 10:08
I'm looking for the basically same thing, the experience I got with the first game. I think my definition of what comprised that experience maybe just isn't quite as narrow as yours.

I would've preferred they kept it strictly first person and that they'd retained melee weapons, skills etc, no doubt (I know exactly what they've changed about the game, and i'm not really new to the forum .. just posting in it) but I just don't necessarily believe that those aspects will alter the experience in any meaningful way for me, it remains to be seen as far as i'm concerned.

I think that not even some of the original developers got the idea. But that's why there are fans - IMO they can convey what worked and what not worked well in a series.
And after some itinerations, I believe that even them, will want some changes - that's why I also believe in the trilogy system (as long they are three good sequels) or niches.

The problem is when fans are gradually kicked off of the dev.'s surroundings - you can get new players, but you are dissapointing old fans. It works from a bussiness perspective, but if you are calling your consumers by "fans", then you should expect somekind of emotional attachement involved.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 10:21
Yeah I get what you're saying. You're saying you wanted orange and they gave you lemon-lime. I'm still disagreeing that the elements that they've changed in DX are that pervasive and game altering. If the gameplay in the whole remains intact I fail to see how it won't feel like a DX game.

No, I asked for orange juice and they gave me orange soda.
The mechanics, the way you achieve your goals, what you feel, what you see...: it's all important my friend. ;)


Not the exact same DX game, but if you want the first DX game .. play that one.

... At least once, every year. :D

TheWoodsieLord
18th Nov 2010, 10:31
I don't think that the third person is a good idea. The executions don't look like something that belongs in Deus Ex, they are pure showoff kills (what's the POINT of stabbing two people with a blade coming out of your ELBOWS). After the way Invisible War was dumbed down for the consoles, I'm afraid that we'll be getting the same stuff from Human revolution.

And I heard the developers talking something like "we wanted to add a tactical element so we made a cover system." What's tactical in a cover system? If one was really necessary, it should have been more like the one from Call of Juarez bound in blood, rather than the gears of war-style "getting stuck to the wall".

Irate_Iguana
18th Nov 2010, 10:35
I'm still disagreeing that the elements that they've changed in DX are that pervasive and game altering. If the gameplay in the whole remains intact I fail to see how it won't feel like a DX game. Not the exact same DX game, but if you want the first DX game .. play that one.

As Ashpolt is wont to say, this was also true for IW. There is a lot more going on with making a sequel in a series than just ticking off certain boxes of stuff that has to be included. You can have all the elements and still make a sub par installment.

As has been said before all the changes we have seen so far aren't that on their own. Nor are they particularly worrying. Taking them all together they do alter the way the game plays. Even fundamentally. They also point to a change in design philosophy. A change that might not be good for a further installment in the DX series. Indeed we won't know this until they'll actually show us how this game plays. There is a huge difference between PR statements made by devs and the actual game as played by the fans.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 10:49
As Ashpolt is wont to say, this was also true for IW. There is a lot more going on with making a sequel in a series than just ticking off certain boxes of stuff that has to be included. You can have all the elements and still make a sub par installment.

As has been said before all the changes we have seen so far aren't that on their own. Nor are they particularly worrying. Taking them all together they do alter the way the game plays. Even fundamentally. They also point to a change in design philosophy. A change that might not be good for a further installment in the DX series. Indeed we won't know this until they'll actually show us how this game plays. There is a huge difference between PR statements made by devs and the actual game as played by the fans.

There's nothing that you say here that I actually disagree with. They do change the way the game plays, what is unknown is how much and whether it's necessarily for the worse. A lot of people want to assume that it is .. i'm not one of those people.

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 11:01
If the gameplay in the whole remains intact I fail to see how it won't feel like a DX game.


There's nothing that you say here that I actually disagree with. They do change the way the game plays, what is unknown is how much and whether it's necessarily for the worse.
So they change the way the game plays, but the gameplay stays the same? You'll have to run that one by me again.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 11:23
So they change the way the game plays, but the gameplay stays the same? You'll have to run that one by me again.

The composition of elements that make up this game are slightly altered from the first game. The basics of how it will play are the same but those alterations can adjust things like the speed at which you do those things, and the viewpoint in which you do them obviously, things like that. That is a change to the way the game 'plays', but it doesn't affect the fundamental 'gameplay' mechanics in any major way, necessarily. That's the best way I can explain it ... i'm not an eloquent guy. lol

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 11:37
Then how do you say that you do not disagree with anything Irate Iguana posted? "Alter the game plays. Even fundamentally," and "The basics of how it will play are the same," seem to clash to me pretty badly.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 11:59
Ok I do disagree that they change the gameplay fundamentally,or more specifically I disagree that we can know they change the gameplay fundamentally based on what we've seen of the game. At the moment we just don't know that.

As far as i'm concerned the basics of the gameplay, more or less, are the 'pillars' that the devs keep going on about, and from what we know thus far .. they remain intact.

"Indeed we won't know this until they'll actually show us how this game plays. There is a huge difference between PR statements made by devs and the actual game as played by the fans" - is what I was basically agreeing to

And this - "There is a lot more going on with making a sequel in a series than just ticking off certain boxes of stuff that has to be included. You can have all the elements and still make a sub par installment".

It's easy to critisise a list of features and say that they'll make a game rubbish. It isn't until you get to really see how they're implemented and how they mesh with the rest of the game that you can judge properly.

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 12:25
I think they have changed the gameplay fundamentally... but only slightly. Messing with a thing like perspectives is tinkering around at the DNA level.
There is a lot more to a game than perspective, and much of it is even more important. But don't kid yourself, all the third-person is a fundamental deviation of the classic form.

Personally, the removal of melee hurts me more than the perspective switching. And if they removed stealth, or a world full of NPCs to talk to... yeah. There are characteristics of much greater potency in the DNA of my Deus Ex experience.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 12:38
I think they have changed the gameplay fundamentally... but only slightly. Messing with a thing like perspectives is tinkering around at the DNA level.
There is a lot more to a game than perspective, and much of it is even more important. But don't kid yourself, all the third-person is a fundamental deviation of the classic form.

Personally, the removal of melee hurts me more than the perspective switching. And if they removed stealth, or a world full of NPCs to talk to... yeah. There are characteristics of much greater potency in the DNA of my Deus Ex experience.

I'll miss my riot prod no doubt. I don't use many melee weapons but I do like that one a lot, stunning people is satisfying.

Kodaemon
18th Nov 2010, 12:40
Messing with a thing like perspectives is tinkering around at the DNA level.

So the question is whether DX and HR can produce fertile offspring :nut:

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 12:41
I'll miss my riot prod no doubt. I don't use many melee weapons but I do like that one a lot, stunning people is satisfying.

Paul's Baton, for me. That thing is brilliant. And it doesn't take any batteries. :)

K^2
18th Nov 2010, 12:44
Pinky, anyone ever called you a pedant?


Ok I do disagree that they change the gameplay fundamentally,or more specifically I disagree that we can know they change the gameplay fundamentally based on what we've seen of the game. At the moment we just don't know that.
An argument can be made that we won't even know after the game is released. That it might be needing the test of time, or some deeper, existential reason can be given.

But that's not the point. The point is that there are serious reasons to be concerned. If you change something, it's easier to disrupt the balance than to maintain it. We know that serious changes have been made. We don't know if they changed the balance in a significant way. Based on information that exists, it's a safer bet that the change was too dramatic, and balance was lost.

So people who want a Deus Ex game have every reason not to buy on launch. If they wait to see all the responses in the weeks following release, and these suggest the game is good, they can still buy it. Most likely, for less. If not, they didn't waste their money.

Keep in mind that all IOOI said is that he's not going to buy at release, but rather wait for a price drop. Nobody says that the HR will be a good game, or that it can't turn out to be a lot more like DX than we expect. It's just not a safe assumption at this time that it will be a true sequel to DX.

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 12:46
So the question is whether DX and HR can produce fertile offspring :nut:

It'd probably look a good bit like this...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_anQnlU5D4sM/R5oXdXkF-7I/AAAAAAAABaY/zsp49axeJDM/s400/worlds-ugliest-cat.jpg

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 12:49
Pinky, anyone ever called you a pedant?

Good god no. I've never had the education to flaunt in a pedantic enough way. :D

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 12:56
Pinky, anyone ever called you a pedant?


An argument can be made that we won't even know after the game is released. That it might be needing the test of time, or some deeper, existential reason can be given.

But that's not the point. The point is that there are serious reasons to be concerned. If you change something, it's easier to disrupt the balance than to maintain it. We know that serious changes have been made. We don't know if they changed the balance in a significant way. Based on information that exists, it's a safer bet that the change was too dramatic, and balance was lost.

So people who want a Deus Ex game have every reason not to buy on launch. If they wait to see all the responses in the weeks following release, and these suggest the game is good, they can still buy it. Most likely, for less. If not, they didn't waste their money.

Keep in mind that all IOOI said is that he's not going to buy at release, but rather wait for a price drop. Nobody says that the HR will be a good game, or that it can't turn out to be a lot more like DX than we expect. It's just not a safe assumption at this time that it will be a true sequel to DX.

It wasn't him saying that he wouldn't buy it immediately that bothered me. It was that he indicated that Crysis 2 was looking like a safer bet because it is more like it's predecessor than HR is to DX. I don't think that the value of a game should necessarily be measured by how much it apes what came before it. HR may not equal DX, but the very attempt to be a DX game means that i'd rather play it than Crysis 2 any day personally.

Pinky_Powers
18th Nov 2010, 13:03
I know for myself, the worlds created in Human Revolution seem to be a lot more interesting, with a lot more depth, and I'd much rather explore them than the destroyed New York City of Crysis 2.

And I'm a passionate lover of the Crysis franchise. :)

Also, I'm a storyman, and Deus Ex is story driven, while Crysis is mostly all about shooting everything that moves.

mentalkase
18th Nov 2010, 13:07
I know for myself, the worlds created in Human Revolution seem to be a lot more interesting, with a lot more depth, and I'd much rather explore them than the destroyed New York City of Crysis 2.

And I'm a passionate lover of the Crysis franchise. :)

Also, I'm a storyman, and Deus Ex is story driven, while Crysis is mostly all about shooting everything that moves.

I liked Farcry a lot which I guess is quite similar to Crysis, but nowhere near as much as I love DX.

IOOI
18th Nov 2010, 22:16
It wasn't him saying that he wouldn't buy it immediately that bothered me. It was that he indicated that Crysis 2 was looking like a safer bet because it is more like it's predecessor than HR is to DX. I don't think that the value of a game should necessarily be measured by how much it apes what came before it. HR may not equal DX, but the very attempt to be a DX game means that i'd rather play it than Crysis 2 any day personally.

Don't worry so much. I have a strong FPS background so I generally tend to get interested in games that expand or improve FP experience in anyway. Right now, at least on this point, HR doesn't seem like a good bet - and I have explained why, so no need to repeat myself. In that regard Crysis 2 is definetly a safe bet.

I'm looking for something specific, If I don't find it in my first choice I target the next thing I would enjoy to play (I want to enjoy a game, right? I don't want to get frustrated thinking about the things that are wrong with it.). It's that simple! :)


I know for myself, the worlds created in Human Revolution seem to be a lot more interesting, with a lot more depth, and I'd much rather explore them than the destroyed New York City of Crysis 2.

And I'm a passionate lover of the Crysis franchise. :)

Also, I'm a storyman, and Deus Ex is story driven, while Crysis is mostly all about shooting everything that moves.

There you go! You're more interested in the story, so it works for you. On the other hand, I am more interested in the mechanics and even more interested in reviving some of the "experience" from DX, so it isn't working for me. But - I'll repeat this - I'm still curious (See, my love for DX didn't vanish, it's still here! For this one time, of course. Once it's out, jamais! :D)